Auto -update has arrived! ORCID records move to the next level

Originally posted by Laure Haak on October 25, 2015. Found here:  https://orcid.org/blog/2015/10/26/auto-update-has-arrived-orcid-records-move-next-level

Since ORCID’s inception, our key goal has been to unambiguously identify researchers and provide tools to automate the connection between researchers and their creative works.  We are taking a big step towards achieving this goal today, with the launch of Auto-Update functionality in collaboration with Crossref and DataCite.

There’s already been a lot of excitement about Auto-Update: Crossref’s recent announcement about the imminent launch generated a flurry of discussion and celebration on social media. Our own tweet on the topic was viewed over 10,500 times and retweeted by 60 other accounts.

So why all the fuss? We think Auto-Update will transform the way researchers manage their scholarly record.  Until now, researchers have had to manually maintain their record, connecting new activities as they are made public.  In ORCID, that meant using Search & Link tools developed by our member organizations to claim works manually.  Researchers frequently ask,  “Why, if I include my ORCID iD when I submit a manuscript or dataset, isn’t my ORCID record “automagically” updated when the work is published?”

With the launch of Auto-Update, that is just what will happen.

It might seem like magic but there are a few steps to make it work:   

  • Researchers. You need to do two things:  (1) use your ORCID iD when submitting a paper or dataset, and (2) authorize Crossref and DataCite to update your ORCID record.   In keeping with our commitment to ensuring that researchers maintain full control of their ORCID record, you may revoke this permission at any time, and may also choose privacy settings for the information posted on your record.
  • Publishers and data centers. These organizations also have two things to do: (1) collect ORCID identifiers during the submission workflow, using a process that involves authentication (not a type-in field!), and (2) embed the iD in the published paper and include the iD when submitting information to Crossref or DataCite.
  • Crossref and DataCite. Upon receipt of data from a publisher or data center with a valid identifier, Crossref or DataCite can automatically push that information to the researcher’s ORCID record.

More information about how to opt out of this service can be found here: the ORCID Inbox.

Why is this so revolutionary?

A bit of background, first. Crossref and DataCite, both non-profit organizations, are leaders in minting DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers) for research publications and datasets.  A DOI is a unique alphanumeric string assigned to a digital object – in this case, an electronic journal article, book chapter, or a dataset. Each DOI is associated with a set of basic metadata and a URL pointer to the full text, so that it uniquely identifies the content item and provides a persistent link to its location on the internet.

Crossref, working with over a thousand scholarly publishers, has generated well over 75 million DOIs for journal articles and book chapters.  DataCite works with nearly 600 data centers worldwide and has generated over 6.5 million DOIs to date. Between them, Crossref and DataCite have already received almost a half a million works from publishers and data centers that include an ORCID iD validated by the author/contributor.  With Auto-Update functionality in place, information about these articles can transit (with the author’s permission) to the author’s ORCID record.

Auto-Update doesn’t stop at a researcher’s ORCID record.  Systems that have integrated ORCID APIs and have a researcher’s ORCID record connected to that system — their faculty profile system, library repository, webpage, funder reporting system — can receive alerts from ORCID.  Information can move easily and unambiguously across systems.

This is the beginning of the end for the endless rekeying of information that plagues researchers — and anyone involved in research reporting.  Surely something to celebrate!

Questions you may have:

Q. What do I need to do to sign up for auto-update?

You need to grant permission to Crossref and DataCite to post information to your ORCID record.  You can do this today by using the Search and Link wizard for DataCite available through the ORCID Registry or the DataCite Metadata Search page.  We also have added a new ORCID Inbox, so that you can receive a message from Crossref or DataCite if they receive a datafile with your iD, and you can grant permission directly. See more on the ORCID Inbox.

Q. Will Crossref and DataCite be able to update my ORCID record with already published works for which I did not use my ORCID iD?

No.  The auto-update process only applies to those works that these organizations receive that include your ORCID iD. For previous works that did not include your ORCID iD, you will need to use the DataCite and Crossref Search and Link wizards to connect information with your iD.

Q. What information will be posted to my record?

With your permission, basic information about the article (such as title, list of contributors, journal or publisher) or dataset (such as data center name and date of publication) will be posted, along with a DOI that allows users to navigate to the source paper or dataset landing page.

Q. What if my journal or data center doesn’t collect ORCID iDs?

Ask them to!  This simple step can be accomplished using either the Public or Member ORCID APIs. Information about integrating ORCID iDs in publishing and repository workflows is publicly available.

What impact does open access have on healthcare?

Kim West, from Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), discusses open access and its benefits for global health research.

Source: What impact does open access have on healthcare?

Access to research evidence is essential for Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) health staff to be able to make the best-informed decisions in field programmes. MSF has a central library service, but emailing requests for articles across timezones does not provide quick answers when these are needed. Open access publishing is the best solution to this predicament.

Likewise, the research that MSF conducts should be accessible by the populations where MSF works – the vast majority of which are in low or middle income countries affected by conflict, natural disaster or lack of access to health care.

Access to research evidence is essential for Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) health staff to be able to make the best-informed decisions in field programmes.

A popular choice

MSF recognises this need and an analysis of MSF research publications showed that open access journals are the most popular choice for our organisation. In addition, we have an open repository that contains over 1800 MSF-authored studies, protocols and research resources.

With publishers’ permission, all MSF authored articles are deposited here either at publication or after an embargo period.  We have also received many requests and comments from people who have accessed our study protocols online.

To help keep MSF field staff (and anyone interested in global health research) up to date, we produce a weekly roundup of relevant global health articles by MSF and non-MSF authors. We also highlight these on our Twitter account @MSFsci.  We use the global reach of Twitter to help engage our field teams in other ways, most notably by our monthly Twitter journal clubs.

Sharing experiences

Our teams on the ground can share experiences with authors and experts around the world.

Removing the confines of a traditional classroom environment means our teams on the ground can share experiences with authors and experts around the world.  This model is mutually beneficial to everyone. The discussions could have implications on practice in our programmes and authors can understand challenges in real-world implementation of their findings from our staff.

Continuing with this theme of access to research we run an annual ‘conference without borders’. The MSF Scientific Days are a platform to present the best medical and innovation evidence from across MSF.

We have streamed the event online for the past four years and in 2015 over 5000 people participated from 115 countries; a huge increase from the 300 person audience who previously attended, most of whom were based in the UK. The event is free to access and all the presentations and talks are archived open access.

The digital revolution means our field teams can ask questions to the presenters directly, and this perspective is invaluable. Next year we will have events in London, Johannesburg and New Delhi that will link regional and international audiences – we hope you can join us!

Google’s Court Victory Is Good for Scholarly Authors. Here’s Why.

This is an excerpt from The Chronicle of Higher Education. Originally published on October 27, 2015 by Pamela Samuelson. You can find the article posted here: 

http://chronicle.com/article/Google-s-Court-Victory-Is/233940

The Authors Guild has lost the latest round of the copyright battle that it brought against Google more than a decade ago. And though the guild has decried the appellate court’s ruling as “damaging” to authors, it is nothing of the sort. […]

Scholars and nonprofit institutions that service scholarly communities have mounds of materials they would like to digitize and make more accessible. Risks of copyright-infringement lawsuits have sometimes deterred socially valuable digitization efforts. Google’s win in the Authors Guild case reduces this risk significantly (especially since the court held that the guild cannot bring claims of copyright infringement against anyone except with regard to works whose copyrights it owns).

-Samuelson

White House Commits to Open Access, Open Education and Open Data in New Open

Originally posted on SPARC’s blog by Nicole Allen. Found here: 

http://www.sparc.arl.org/blog/white-house-commits-open-access-open-education-and-open-data-new-open-government-plan 

OCTOBER 27, 2015

Today the White House released its 2016-2017 Open Government National Action Plan, which includes commitments to expand access to open educational resources and the results of federally funded research. This exciting development shows continued support from the Obama administration for these issues, and sets the stage for continued progress beyond the 2016 elections.

The commitment to Open Education has been highly anticipated by the community since this summer, after more than 100 U.S. civil society organizations — including SPARC — sent a letter to the White House calling for strong executive action to make federally funded educational resources openly licensed. While the OER commitment released today stops short of the broad policy changes that civil society called for, it lays out several meaningful steps in the right direction.

The OER commitment begins with a strong statement in support of the benefits of open educational resources:

Open educational resources are an investment in sustainable human development; they have the potential to increase access to high-quality education and reduce the cost of educational opportunities around the world. Open educational resources can expand access to key educational materials, enabling the domestic and international communities to attain skills and more easily access meaningful learning opportunities.

It also specifies three activities the U.S. will take to advance open education:

  • Openly license more Federal grant-supported education materials and resources, making them widely and freely available.
  • Publish best practices and tools for agencies interested in developing grant-supported open licensing projects.
  • Convene stakeholders to encourage further open education efforts.

The OER commitment builds on momentum that has grown since the U.S. became the first Open Government Partnership (OGP) member country to introduce open education into its National Action Plan last fall. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), State Department and Education Department recently held a workshop in New York City to fulfill one of the commitments in this plan, which was recently featured in a White House blog post.

On the Open Access and Open Data fronts, the plan released today reiterates U.S.’s firm commitment to opening access to articles resulting from publicly-funded research, citing the language from the 2013 OSTP Directive on this subject. Additionally, the plan calls for robust attention ensuring that data — including code, applications and technologies — generated from publicly-funded research be made openly accessible as well. This is a strong nod to an eventual full U.S. Open Science Agenda.

The plan’s release also coincides with the Open Government Partnership Summit in Mexico City, where for the first time ever, a workshop on open education is featured in the program. SPARC’s Nicole Allen is on the ground helping to organize the session, along with the U.S. and Slovak Governments and Creative Commons United States. We are hopeful that this session can begin laying the groundwork for collaboration between the government and civil societies to implement the U.S. commitment announced today and open education overall.

SPARC stands with our coalition partners ready to continue the conversation with the White House and federal agencies to help implement the commitment announced today, and to reinforce our call for a federal government-wide policy to ensure that taxpayer funded educational and research materials are openly licensed.

Minnesota and Open Education

minntrib

David Ernst (University of Minnesota), creator of Open Textbook Library, continues to make huge gains for Open Education through open textbooks.

Originally posted on the Star Tribune. http://www.startribune.com/university-of-minnesota-takes-lead-in-promoting-free-college-textbooks/336972931/

The biggest hurdle, Ernst said, is persuading classroom instructors to try the free texts. Most “don’t know where to find them, and they don’t know if they’re any good,” he said.

That’s one reason he created the Open Textbook Library. “We put them in one place, easy to find, and started collecting reviews,” he said. Ernst received a grant to pay instructors $200 to $500 apiece to write a review. He discovered that once they reviewed an open text, they were more likely to use it in class.

Groundbreaking University of California policy extends free access to all scholarly articles written by UC employees

View original announcement here:
http://osc.universityofcalifornia.edu/2015/10/groundbreaking-presidential-oa-policy-covers-all-employees/ 

Today the University of California expands the reach of its research publications by issuing a Presidential Open Access Policy, allowing future scholarly articles authored by all UC employees to be freely shared with readers worldwide.

Building on UC’s previously-adopted Academic Senate open access (OA) policies, this new policy enables the university system and associated national labs to provide unprecedented access to scholarly research authored by clinical faculty, lecturers, staff researchers, postdoctoral scholars, graduate students and librarians – just to name a few. Comprising ten campuses, five medical centers, three national laboratories and nearly 200,000 employees, the UC system is responsible for over 2% of the world’s total research publications. UC’s collective OA policies now cover more authors than any other institutional OA policy to date.

Checking Our Library Privilege

This blog post was originally posted on Inside Higher Ed. It is part of a continuing column, Library Babel Fish, by Barbara Fister. Fister is a professor and librarian at Gustavus Adolphus College. Originally posted on October 20, 2015. 

Checking Our Library Privilege 

So, let’s say I’m doing research on issues related to privilege and inequality. Google Scholar tells me there’s a an article on stratification in higher education that’s looks interesting. Here’ another one on how postcolonial theory can inform resistance to neoliberalism in universities. And ooh, this looks really interesting: digital inequality and participation in the political process. How great that academics turn their methods and theories to solving the problem of inequality. Too bad most people won’t be able to read these articles.

The first one, from a Taylor and Francis journal, would cost me $40 if I weren’t affiliated at an institution that will spend a lot of money, much of it from student tuition, to get it for me. Shame those students will graduate in so much debt. Hey, somebody could write a good article about that. The second, from a journal published by Oxford University Press: $39.00. The third, from a Sage journal: $30. But hey, the abstracts are free and these publishers offer information about the journals’ impact factors, a variety of alternative metrics for each article, and a handy link so I can tell Twitter all about research that most people can’t read.

Like most forms of privilege, those who have it often don’t recognize it. It’s sneaky that way. As Jason Baird Jackson pointed out back in 2012, scholars with access to the record of research are the academic one percent. The first challenge is to recognize our privilege. The second is to examine what we do in our everyday lives that makes things unequal and work on fixing it.

There’s good news on that front. A number of the articles that I found in my search had versions available for anyone to read thanks to authors taking the trouble to self-archive them. And there are more and more creative ways to create a new infrastructure for funding the sharing of research more equitably than by depending on institutional affiliation. Open access publishing is gaining ground, and the humanities and social sciences are finally catching up to the sciences on developing new models. Here is a sampling of recent developments.

The Library of Humanities just launched after a period of smart, thorough planning. This platform is host to a number of established journals that wanted to become more equitably available as well as new ones. In time books will hosted, too. This project is adapted to the context of the humanities, where authors aren’t assumed to have funding for their research to cover the costs of publishing it, as is more common in the sciences. The financial support required to run the platform is coming from library partners and funders such as Mellon, which has been pouring resources into ways of rethinking scholarly publishing. The mission of the Library of Humanities is “to support and extend open access to scholarship in the humanities – for free, for everyone, for ever.”

Luminos, an open access imprint of the University of California, has launched its list with ten free-to-download books with more to come. These publications are funded by a combination of author-side support raised through grants or other funding and library memberships. It hasn’t been unheard of for institutions to pay subventions to support the publication of books by their faculty. Now we can do this and ensure that the book isn’t only available to a small, select, privileged audience.

The Open Access Network has looked at ways to develop a large-scale equitable way for institutions of all sizes and missions to share the cost of creating and sustaining the infrastructure for scholarly societies and university presses to make their works open access. This vision is a big-picture effort that is complementary to other open access projects rather than a stand-alone competitor for funds.

A recently-released survey suggests that scholars in the humanities and social sciences are increasingly open to open access publishing. Ironically, the survey was done by Nature and Palgrave, publishers of expensive books and journals. Or maybe it’s not ironic – it’s an indicator that open access is the future, and even for-profit publishers know it. Fittingly, the survey data has been released on Figshare under a Creative Commons license so you can do your own analysis.

My wish this Open Access Week is that we all examine our privilege and think about what it is we want to do in the world as scholars and librarians – and commit to changing the systems we’re implicated in that makes knowledge available at high cost for the few for only as long as subscriptions are paid. We don’t have to do it that way anymore.

Barbara Fister, October 20, 2015. 

Using Open as a Selling Point for an Academic Career

Back in June, the Right to Research Coalition welcomed Dr. Meredith Niles has host for the month’s OpenCon Community call. Dr. Meredith Niles discussed how you can use being Open as an asset for your career.

You can watch Dr. Niles’ entire presentation below:

Here are her main points as summarized by Edward Baker:

Applying for a position

  • Open is becoming the norm, make sure to sell yourself as ahead of the curve
  • Use open as an example of your commitment to research and science outside of academia
  • Promote open as a tool for collaboration

Interviewing for a position

  • Ask interviewers the questions: does the school have an Open Access policy, how is openness viewed on campus, how much are students spending on textbooks? This will make you memorable.

The job

  • Act as a local champion: provide resources, dispel myths, send out news, and even give presentations. This makes you valuable and unique
  • Lead by example: share publications and presentations, establish open early in grant writing processes

Dr. Meredith Niles is an Assistant Professor at the University of Vermont. She received her PhD in Ecology from the University of California, Davis and her BA in Political Science in Environmental Studies from The Catholic University of America. She serves on the Board of Directors of PLoS (Public Library of Science).  

This webcast was part of OpenCon’s webcast series on using open as part of your career. If you’re interested in this topic, OpenCon also produced another short video with tips for being open as an early career researcher which may also be of interest.

SPARC Launches Open Access Evaluation Tool

Originally posted by Heather Joseph on SPARC.al.org 

OASE

Washington, DC – SPARC (The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition) today announced the launch of the Open Access Spectrum (OAS) Evaluation Tool, which provides a concrete, quantifiable mechanism to independently analyze publications’ policies.

The OAS Evaluation Tool generates an “Openness” score that is straightforward, easy to understand, and free. The program provides critical information to authors, libraries, research funders, government agencies, and other interested parties. It can be used to help determine compliance with funder policies, institutional mandates, and researchers’ individual values. It also offers a unique opportunity for publishers to independently validate their journals’ degree of openness and compliance with funder and campus policies.

“The rapid growth of Open Access has seen a tremendous growth in the availability of scholarly articles, but it has also generated confusion,” said Heather Joseph, Executive Director, SPARC. “Many journals claim to be ‘open’ while actually placing moderate or severe restrictions on what an author or reader can do with an article, for example. The OAS Evaluation Tool will eliminate confusion by providing independent, unbiased evaluation of journal OA policies.”

The OAS Evaluation Tool uses the HowOpenIsIt? Guide as the basis for a 100-point scale. In addition to providing independent, expert evaluation of journal OA policies it:

  • Includes distinct evaluations for a journal’s policies regarding reader rights, reuse rights, copyrights, author posting rights, automatic posting, and machine readability.
  • Can be used to help determine compliance with funder policies, institutional mandates, and researchers’ individual values.
  • Offers a unique opportunity for publishers to independently validate their journals’ degree of openness and compliance with funder/campus policies.
  • Pulls together— in one single, accurate web resource— information that is otherwise buried across scores of publisher websites.

An initial batch of 500 journals has been included at launch, with another 500 to follow by the end of the year. These journals encompass a range of disciplines, countries of origin, and business models. The set of 1,000 journals was created from the freely available Scimago dataset, which was divided into open access and non-open access journals on the basis of a lookup of their ISSN in Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The top 600 journals from the non-OA set and the top 200 from the OA set based on ranking by Scimago Journal Rank were selected. Additionally, 200 journals were selected from across the Scielo, Redalyc, Bioline, AJOL, and DOAJ databases to ensure geographic and subject diversity.

More information can be found at www.oaspectrum.org.

Open Access Week 2015

OA-2014-web-banner-1000x400p

October 19-25th is International Open Access Week and we celebrating here at Iowa State University! Open Access Week provides an opportunity for the research and academic community to learn about the benefits of Open Access. To start of the week, let’s cover a few Open Access basics:

What is Open Access?
Open Access is the free, immediate, online availability of research articles, coupled with the rights to use these articles fully in the digital environment.
Open Access challenges the current research landscape, which requires readers (and libraries) to pay large, and increasing, subscription fees to access research.

Although many researchers can access the journals they need via their institution and think that their access is free, in reality it is not. The institution has often been involved in lengthy negotiations around the price of their site license and re-use of this content is limited.
-PLOS “Open Access”

What can you do to promote Open Access? 
Participate. 
Do you publish research? There are a variety of ways to publish Open Access. You can find a publisher that produces Open Access journals OR you can self-archive versions of your work in a repository. For ways to publish Openly, see the Open Access Research Guide: http://instr.iastate.libguides.com/openaccess

Learn more.
There are plenty of great resources out there on Open Access, here are a few of our favorites:
Open Access Without Tears by Barbara Fister
SPARC Open Access
A Very Brief Introduction to Open Access by Peter Suber

Examples of Open Access at Work
PLOS ONE
PLOS ONE is a multidisciplinary, peer reviewed Open Access journal. PLOS (Public Library of Science) applies the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) to all works published. Works are published through Open Access publication fees and are made available to all readers, no matter their institution or lack thereof.

Digital Repository @ Iowa State University
Iowa State’s repository provides free, public access to the research and scholarship of Iowa State’s faculty, students and staff. This includes: journal articles, conference proceedings, theses & dissertations, and much more.

Resources for the Digital Repository @ Iowa State University:
FAQs about Digital Repository @ Iowa State University
Resources for Authors
Resources for Departments
Email DR@ISU with your questions.

Open Access is just one aspect of scholarly communication that libraries are invested in promoting. It is our hope that through investigating new modes of publishing, altmetrics, open peer review, open data, author rights, fair use, and Creative Commons licensing we can unlock research, support researchers, and empower the public.

Check out this blog every day this week with more updates and further information on Open Access.