What do the University of Helsinki researchers think about article-processing charges, self-archiving, or open access (OA) publishing? Six researchers answered a short questionnaire and shared their views on open science, both at a general level and by answering several specific questions. In principle, open access (OA) is thought of as important and useful; however, from a practical perspective, there are still some challenges relating to expensive APCs (article processing charges), OA platform statistics, and the complex regulations in publishers’ policies.
Open access fees (or article processing charges, APCs) are part of a diverse set of options in open access publishing, a sector that aims to make open access to research publications the leading approach. This strategy in scholarly publishing is supported by the different methods that deliver open content. However, in the transition phase, research-intensive universities are particularly affected by open access fees.
The background work included in open access fees (APCs) ranges from negotiating contracts to processing and advising researchers on funding requests and monitoring fees. In a large research-intensive university like the University of Helsinki, the workload associated with APCs is not insignificant. The goal of the library is to streamline administrative practices and free up researcher time from the payment process.
Open access author fee or article processing charge (APC) is the price paid for open access publication and it varies depending on the publisher and journal. The APCs finance open access publishing. However, most open access journals do not charge an APC. Open access fees are the subject of a new five-part series on the Think Open blog, and the opening article explains the basic concepts.
The article processing charges (APC) of open access publishing lure in suspicious publishers as well. Therefore it is a good skill for a researcher to recognize the typical characteristics of these so-called predatory publications.
Many reasons are given for self-archiving, and self-archivers follow many different practices. We asked four researchers from different disciplines how and why they self-archive their research results. We also asked the researchers about their views on the promotion of self-archiving. This is the seventh part of the Think Open blog’s article series on self-archiving.
Self-archiving has many kinds of advantages, such as being free of charge and increasing visibility and effectiveness. This article briefly describes the most important advantages of self-archiving. This is the fourth part of Think Open blog’s article series on self-archiving. [This article was updated in December 8, 2021.]
Uusi kirjoitussarja pureutuu rinnakkaistallennukseen eli ”vihreän tien avoimuuteen” (green open access) – sen perusasioihin, hyötyihin ja erityiskysymyksiin. Sarjan avauspostauksessa kerrotaan avoimen julkaisemisen eri muodoista ja siitä, mikä on rinnakkaistallentamisen paikka avoimen julkaisemisen eri vaihtoehtojen kokonaisuudessa.
The new article series brings self-archiving to its basics, discussing its advantages and presenting special questions. This first post of the series reviews different forms of open access publication and establishes the place of self-archiving among the different alternatives for open access.
Plan S ja muut avoimen julkaisemisen syksyn puheenaiheet olivat kattavasti esillä avoimen tieteen teemaviikon päätapahtumassa Tiedekulmassa. Avoimen tieteen iltapäivän puheenvuoroissa kantavaksi ajatukseksi nousi yhteistyön välttämättömyys tieteellisen julkaisukulttuurin muuttamisessa kestävämpään suuntaan.