[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
Listening to authors, the main purpose of a traditional journal seems to be serving as a (very expensive) career advancement device (‘cad’, for short, if you permit me). This is exemplified by the phenomenon that many authors of articles made openly available to anyone via so-called ‘preprint servers’ (such as arXiv), often in multiple versions, up until a ‘final’ one (and so fulfil the need to communicate their results), nonetheless submit their articles to journals for what can only be described as obtaining ‘public approbation’ (often expressed in terms of the journal’s impact factor), which they hope will increase their promotion and funding chances. It is academia itself, specifically in its reward and award systems, that maintains this situation. It needs to change and the habit of resources made available for research being wasted to prop up the publishing system needs to stop. Jan Velterop On 1 May 2015, at 13:47, Jacinto Dávila jacinto.dav...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Éric. Very nice examples. However, I still wonder if there is some intrinsic value in the concept of journal that one may miss. A journal is not just a collection of papers. Maybe when we count journals we somehow measure their review processes. El 30/4/2015 1:07, Éric Archambault eric.archamba...@science-metrix.com mailto:eric.archamba...@science-metrix.com escribió: If one wants to see how excluding foreign references can have adverse effects on citation analysis, here the list of references for a randomly picked up Japanese paper. Most, if not all, Japanese language references are currently ignored in citation analysis, this science is considered non-existent. The paper, and the references. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jssp/30/1/30_30.1/_article/references https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jssp/30/1/30_30.1/_article/references Gibb, R., Ercoline, B., Scharff, L. (2011). Spatial disorientation: Decades of pilot fatalities. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 82, 717–724. https://jlc.jst.go.jp/DN/JALC/10007449771?type=listlang=enfrom=J-STAGEdispptn=1 Howard, I. P. (1982). Human visual orientation. John Wiley Sons. 乾 敏郎・小川健二（2010）．認知発達の神経基盤―生後8ヶ月まで― 心理学評論，52, 576–608. 石井正則（1998）．神経・前庭系・空間識について 宇宙開発事業団（編） 宇宙医学・生理学（III-A） 社会保険出版社 pp. 29–41. Kanas, N. Manzey, D. (2008). Space psychology and psychiatry (2nd ed.). Springer. 木下冨雄（1993）．相対判断の理論―意味、基準系、動き― 京都大学定年退官記念講演録 木下冨雄（2009）．宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構（編） 国際高等研究所 古賀一男（2011）．知覚の正体 河出書房新社 Leonov, A. Scott, D. (2006). Two sides of the moon. St. Marti's Griffin. 中川久定（2009）．第3回インタビュー（対話） 木下冨雄（編著） 宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構 pp. 376–378. 牧野達郎・下條信輔・古賀一男（1998）．知覚の可塑性と行動適応 ブレーン出版 宮辻和貴・田辺 智・金子公宥（2005）．宇宙船内「体操」のエネルギー消費量に関する研究 体育学研究，50, 201–206. Oman, C. M. (2003). Human visual orientation in weightlessness. In L. Harris M. Jenkin, (Eds.), Levels of Perception. New York, Springer Verlag. pp. 375–398. Ross, H. E. (1974). Behaviour and perception in strange environments. Allen and Unwin. Small, R. L., Oman, C. M., Jones, T. D. (2012). Space shuttle flight crew spatial orientation survey results. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 83, 383–387. https://jlc.jst.go.jp/DN/JALC/10011723096?type=listlang=enfrom=J-STAGEdispptn=1 立花正一（2009）．人類が宇宙に居住するための医学・精神心理の課題 木下冨雄（編著）宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構 pp. 258–259. 立花 隆（1983）．宇宙からの帰還 中央公論社 Vakoch, D. A. (Ed.) (2011). Psychology of space exploration, contemporary research in historical perspective. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. pp. 85–86. From: goal-boun...@eprints.org mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Éric Archambault Sent: April-29-15 5:40 PM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Paul I think librarians are still highly concerned about journals, as opposed to papers. The reason is that this is how their invoices are structured – they buy journals and now bunches of journals. But this is changing because end-users increasingly do not see journals, they see results in the Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and universities’ discovery systems. These results are usually smaller, more atomistic units - they are papers, conference papers, book chapters, etc. Thus, the use of search engines, as opposed to browsing on the shelves of libraries is progressively shifting the relevant unit towards papers as opposed to journals. Still, journals will continue to play a very important role as they confer prestige to papers, and guide authors’ and readers’ decisions. From: goal-boun...@eprints.org mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org
[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
Thank you Éric. Very nice examples. However, I still wonder if there is some intrinsic value in the concept of journal that one may miss. A journal is not just a collection of papers. Maybe when we count journals we somehow measure their review processes. El 30/4/2015 1:07, Éric Archambault eric.archamba...@science-metrix.com escribió: If one wants to see how excluding foreign references can have adverse effects on citation analysis, here the list of references for a randomly picked up Japanese paper. Most, if not all, Japanese language references are currently ignored in citation analysis, this science is considered non-existent. The paper, and the references. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jssp/30/1/30_30.1/_article/references - Gibb, R., Ercoline, B., Scharff, L. (2011). Spatial disorientation: Decades of pilot fatalities. *Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine*, *82*, 717–724. https://jlc.jst.go.jp/DN/JALC/10007449771?type=listlang=enfrom=J-STAGEdispptn=1 - Howard, I. P. (1982). *Human visual orientation*. John Wiley Sons. - 乾 敏郎・小川健二（2010）．認知発達の神経基盤―生後8ヶ月まで― 心理学評論，*52*, 576–608. - 石井正則（1998）．神経・前庭系・空間識について 宇宙開発事業団（編） 宇宙医学・生理学（III-A） 社会保険出版社 pp. 29–41. - Kanas, N. Manzey, D. (2008). *Space psychology and psychiatry (2nd ed.)*. Springer. - 木下冨雄（1993）．相対判断の理論―意味、基準系、動き― 京都大学定年退官記念講演録 - 木下冨雄（2009）．宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構（編） 国際高等研究所 - 古賀一男（2011）．知覚の正体 河出書房新社 - Leonov, A. Scott, D. (2006). *Two sides of the moon*. St. Marti's Griffin. - 中川久定（2009）．第3回インタビュー（対話） 木下冨雄（編著） 宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構 pp. 376–378. - 牧野達郎・下條信輔・古賀一男（1998）．知覚の可塑性と行動適応 ブレーン出版 - 宮辻和貴・田辺 智・金子公宥（2005）．宇宙船内「体操」のエネルギー消費量に関する研究 体育学研究，*50*, 201–206. - Oman, C. M. (2003). Human visual orientation in weightlessness. In L. Harris M. Jenkin, (Eds.), *Levels of Perception*. New York, Springer Verlag. pp. 375–398. - Ross, H. E. (1974). *Behaviour and perception in strange environments*. Allen and Unwin. - Small, R. L., Oman, C. M., Jones, T. D. (2012). Space shuttle flight crew spatial orientation survey results. *Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine*, *83*, 383–387. https://jlc.jst.go.jp/DN/JALC/10011723096?type=listlang=enfrom=J-STAGEdispptn=1 - 立花正一（2009）．人類が宇宙に居住するための医学・精神心理の課題 木下冨雄（編著）宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ― 高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構 pp. 258–259. - 立花 隆（1983）．宇宙からの帰還 中央公論社 - Vakoch, D. A. (Ed.) (2011). *Psychology of space exploration, contemporary research in historical perspective*. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. pp. 85–86. *From:* goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] *On Behalf Of *Éric Archambault *Sent:* April-29-15 5:40 PM *To:* Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) *Subject:* [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Paul I think librarians are still highly concerned about journals, as opposed to papers. The reason is that this is how their invoices are structured – they buy journals and now bunches of journals. But this is changing because end-users increasingly do not see journals, they see results in the Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and universities’ discovery systems. These results are usually smaller, more atomistic units - they are papers, conference papers, book chapters, etc. Thus, the use of search engines, as opposed to browsing on the shelves of libraries is progressively shifting the relevant unit towards papers as opposed to journals. Still, journals will continue to play a very important role as they confer prestige to papers, and guide authors’ and readers’ decisions. *From:* goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] *On Behalf Of *Uhlir, Paul *Sent:* April-29-15 4:09 PM *To:* Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) *Subject:* [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Good question. And while we're at it, why after 20 years do we still use a stovepiped, disaggregated, print model construct as the primary vehicle for digitally networked scholarly communication? Paul F. Uhlir, J.D. Scholar, National Academy of Sciences, and Consultant, Data Policy and Management 4643 Aspen Hill Court Annandale, VA 22003 USA Tel. 703 941 0817; Cell +1 703 217 5143 Skype: pfuhlir; Email: pfuh...@gmail.com Web: http://www.paulfuhlir.com; Twitter: @paulfuhlir -- *From:* goal-boun...@eprints.org [goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Jacinto Dávila [jacinto.dav...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, April 29, 2015 12:54 PM *To:* Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) *Subject:* [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals May I ask a couple of naïve questions? Why do we count journals? If we are all looking forward to a global, hopefully distributed archive of knowledge, shouldn't we counting papers or some
[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
I've always been amazed how Thomson/ISI categorized English language journals (mostly published in de US/UK) as international journals and all other journals as regional journals. Should ask them. BTW Eric could you elaborate on what you say in your last sentence? Will Science Metrix launch a bibliometrics service based on GS data or do I have to interpret your words in another way? Jeroen [101-innovations-icon-very-small] 101 innovations in scholarly communicationhttp://innoscholcomm.silk.co/ Jeroen Bosman, faculty liaison for the Faculty of Geosciences Utrecht University Libraryhttp://www.uu.nl/library email: j.bos...@uu.nlmailto:j.bos...@uu.nl telephone: +31.30.2536613 mail: Postbus 80124, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands visiting address: room 2.50, Heidelberglaan 3, Utrecht web: Jeroen Bosmanhttp://www.uu.nl/university/library/en/disciplines/geo/Pages/ContactBosman.aspx twitter @jeroenbosman/ @geolibrarianUBU profiles: : Academiahttp://uu.academia.edu/JeroenBosman / Google Scholarhttp://scholar.google.com/citations?user=-IfPy3IJhl=en / ISNIhttp://www.isni.org/28810209 / Mendeleyhttp://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jeroen-bosman/ / MicrosoftAcademichttp://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/51538592/jeroen-bosman / ORCIDhttp://orcid.org/-0001-5796-2727 / ResearcherIDhttp://www.researcherid.com/ProfileView.action?queryString=KG0UuZjN5WmCiHc%252FMC4oLVEKrQQu%252BpzQ8%252F9yrRrmi8Y%253DInit=YesSrcApp=CRreturnCode=ROUTER.SuccessSID=N27lOD6EgipnADLnAbK / ResearchGatehttp://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeroen_Bosman/ / Scopushttp://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?authorId=7003519484 / Slidesharehttp://www.slideshare.net/hierohiero / VIAFhttp://viaf.org/viaf/36099266/ / Worldcathttp://www.worldcat.org/wcidentities/lccn-n91-100619 blogging at: IM 2.0http://im2punt0.wordpress.com/ / Ref4UUhttp://ref4uu.blogspot.com/ - Trees say printing is a thing of the past From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Éric Archambault Sent: woensdag 29 april 2015 0:08 To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Jean-Claude has an excellent point. Our current outlook is extremely Western-centric. When I was in SPRU, professors (can't remember if it was Pavitt or Ben Martin) used to joke that bibliometric measurement was highly influenced by the linguistic capacity of housewives in Philadelphia. Though today there might have been a shift towards Manila for data entry, it remains that bibliographic databases present a truncated view of the world, and bibliometrics a distorted, pro-Western/Northern Hemisphere biased view of science. If one can potentially advance the idea that all ground breaking science eventually makes it to Western journals, and that this is what current databases are reflecting, it would still remain that normal science follows similar rules in Russia, Japan, and China and yet a huge part of that content still goes unaccounted for. A normal US or UK paper is not any better than a normal Brazilian, Chinese, or Russian paper yet the former are frequently counted, the latter more frequently not. The low impact of non-Western countries is in part a reflection of the exclusion of journals published in non-English speaking countries, and Jean-Claude is right to say there are thousands of them. The effect on measurement is poisonous because national level self-citations are frequently excluded when journals are not published in English-language journal. If one wants to see the effect of removing national self-citation, try removing them altogether and you'll see how badly clobbered the US ends-up in terms of relate impact. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting to measure that way as it would be unwise (I always advocate the inclusion of self-citations at all levels even though everyone knows some authors and journals are narcissistic and playing the number game - self citations are an essential part of the knowledge-building edifice and excluding them potentially create more problems than it solves), but it is a valid experiment to show how bad the situation currently is because we count only publications from half of the journals published, and that half is anything but randomly selected. For those who want to see the effect, I can send you a table - among countries with 45,000 papers or more, and adjusted for scale, the US ranked 22nd (after Japan, the Czech Republic and Mexico) if only citations from other countries were included. We never published that paper as we thought it was brain damaged to exclude national self-citation. Yet, by excluding many many locally published journals from citation counts, this is what the advanced analytics that come out of dominant bibliographic
[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
May I ask a couple of naïve questions? Why do we count journals? If we are all looking forward to a global, hopefully distributed archive of knowledge, shouldn't we counting papers or some other way of displaying solutions? El 29/4/2015 11:13, Bosman, J.M. (Jeroen) j.bos...@uu.nl escribió: I’ve always been amazed how Thomson/ISI categorized English language journals (mostly published in de US/UK) as “international journals” and all other journals as “regional journals”. Should ask them. BTW Eric could you elaborate on what you say in your last sentence? Will Science Metrix launch a bibliometrics service based on GS data or do I have to interpret your words in another way? Jeroen [image: 101-innovations-icon-very-small] 101 innovations in scholarly communication http://innoscholcomm.silk.co/ -- *--* Jeroen Bosman, faculty liaison for the Faculty of Geosciences Utrecht University Library http://www.uu.nl/library email: j.bos...@uu.nl telephone: +31.30.2536613 mail: Postbus 80124, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands visiting address: room 2.50, Heidelberglaan 3, Utrecht web: Jeroen Bosman http://www.uu.nl/university/library/en/disciplines/geo/Pages/ContactBosman.aspx twitter @jeroenbosman/ @geolibrarianUBU profiles: : Academia http://uu.academia.edu/JeroenBosman / Google Scholar http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=-IfPy3IJhl=en / ISNI http://www.isni.org/28810209 / Mendeley http://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jeroen-bosman/ / MicrosoftAcademic http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/51538592/jeroen-bosman / ORCID http://orcid.org/-0001-5796-2727 / ResearcherID http://www.researcherid.com/ProfileView.action?queryString=KG0UuZjN5WmCiHc%252FMC4oLVEKrQQu%252BpzQ8%252F9yrRrmi8Y%253DInit=YesSrcApp=CRreturnCode=ROUTER.SuccessSID=N27lOD6EgipnADLnAbK / ResearchGate http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeroen_Bosman/ / Scopus http://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?authorId=7003519484 / Slideshare http://www.slideshare.net/hierohiero / VIAF http://viaf.org/viaf/36099266/ / Worldcat http://www.worldcat.org/wcidentities/lccn-n91-100619 blogging at: IM 2.0 http://im2punt0.wordpress.com/ / Ref4UU http://ref4uu.blogspot.com/ - *Trees say printing is a thing of the past* *From:* goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] *On Behalf Of *Éric Archambault *Sent:* woensdag 29 april 2015 0:08 *To:* Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) *Subject:* [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Jean-Claude has an excellent point. Our current outlook is extremely Western-centric. When I was in SPRU, professors (can’t remember if it was Pavitt or Ben Martin) used to joke that bibliometric measurement was highly influenced by the linguistic capacity of housewives in Philadelphia. Though today there might have been a shift towards Manila for data entry, it remains that bibliographic databases present a truncated view of the world, and bibliometrics a distorted, pro-Western/Northern Hemisphere biased view of science. If one can potentially advance the idea that all ground breaking science eventually makes it to Western journals, and that this is what current databases are reflecting, it would still remain that normal science follows similar rules in Russia, Japan, and China and yet a huge part of that content still goes unaccounted for. A normal US or UK paper is not any better than a normal Brazilian, Chinese, or Russian paper yet the former are frequently counted, the latter more frequently not. The low impact of non-Western countries is in part a reflection of the exclusion of journals published in non-English speaking countries, and Jean-Claude is right to say there are thousands of them. The effect on measurement is poisonous because national level self-citations are frequently excluded when journals are not published in English-language journal. If one wants to see the effect of removing national self-citation, try removing them altogether and you’ll see how badly clobbered the US ends-up in terms of relate impact. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting to measure that way as it would be unwise (I always advocate the inclusion of self-citations at all levels even though everyone knows some authors and journals are narcissistic and playing the number game – self citations are an essential part of the knowledge-building edifice and excluding them potentially create more problems than it solves), but it is a valid experiment to show how bad the situation currently is because we count only publications from half of the journals published, and that half is anything but randomly selected. For those who want to see the effect, I can send you a table – among countries with 45,000 papers or more, and adjusted for scale
[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
Good question. And while we're at it, why after 20 years do we still use a stovepiped, disaggregated, print model construct as the primary vehicle for digitally networked scholarly communication? Paul F. Uhlir, J.D. Scholar, National Academy of Sciences, and Consultant, Data Policy and Management 4643 Aspen Hill Court Annandale, VA 22003 USA Tel. 703 941 0817; Cell +1 703 217 5143 Skype: pfuhlir; Email: pfuh...@gmail.commailto:pfuh...@gmail.com Web: http://www.paulfuhlir.comhttp://www.paulfuhlir.com/; Twitter: @paulfuhlir From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Jacinto Dávila [jacinto.dav...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 12:54 PM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals May I ask a couple of naïve questions? Why do we count journals? If we are all looking forward to a global, hopefully distributed archive of knowledge, shouldn't we counting papers or some other way of displaying solutions? El 29/4/2015 11:13, Bosman, J.M. (Jeroen) j.bos...@uu.nlmailto:j.bos...@uu.nl escribió: I’ve always been amazed how Thomson/ISI categorized English language journals (mostly published in de US/UK) as “international journals” and all other journals as “regional journals”. Should ask them. BTW Eric could you elaborate on what you say in your last sentence? Will Science Metrix launch a bibliometrics service based on GS data or do I have to interpret your words in another way? Jeroen [cid:image003.jpg@01D082A3.08BAE2D0] 101 innovations in scholarly communicationhttp://innoscholcomm.silk.co/ Jeroen Bosman, faculty liaison for the Faculty of Geosciences Utrecht University Libraryhttp://www.uu.nl/library email: j.bos...@uu.nlmailto:j.bos...@uu.nl telephone: +31.30.2536613tel:%2B31.30.2536613 mail: Postbus 80124, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands visiting address: room 2.50, Heidelberglaan 3, Utrecht web: Jeroen Bosmanhttp://www.uu.nl/university/library/en/disciplines/geo/Pages/ContactBosman.aspx twitter @jeroenbosman/ @geolibrarianUBU profiles: : Academiahttp://uu.academia.edu/JeroenBosman / Google Scholarhttp://scholar.google.com/citations?user=-IfPy3IJhl=en / ISNIhttp://www.isni.org/28810209 / Mendeleyhttp://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jeroen-bosman/ / MicrosoftAcademichttp://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/51538592/jeroen-bosman / ORCIDhttp://orcid.org/-0001-5796-2727 / ResearcherIDhttp://www.researcherid.com/ProfileView.action?queryString=KG0UuZjN5WmCiHc%252FMC4oLVEKrQQu%252BpzQ8%252F9yrRrmi8Y%253DInit=YesSrcApp=CRreturnCode=ROUTER.SuccessSID=N27lOD6EgipnADLnAbK / ResearchGatehttp://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeroen_Bosman/ / Scopushttp://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?authorId=7003519484 / Slidesharehttp://www.slideshare.net/hierohiero / VIAFhttp://viaf.org/viaf/36099266/ / Worldcathttp://www.worldcat.org/wcidentities/lccn-n91-100619 blogging at: IM 2.0http://im2punt0.wordpress.com/ / Ref4UUhttp://ref4uu.blogspot.com/ - Trees say printing is a thing of the past From: goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Éric Archambault Sent: woensdag 29 april 2015 0:08 To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Jean-Claude has an excellent point. Our current outlook is extremely Western-centric. When I was in SPRU, professors (can’t remember if it was Pavitt or Ben Martin) used to joke that bibliometric measurement was highly influenced by the linguistic capacity of housewives in Philadelphia. Though today there might have been a shift towards Manila for data entry, it remains that bibliographic databases present a truncated view of the world, and bibliometrics a distorted, pro-Western/Northern Hemisphere biased view of science. If one can potentially advance the idea that all ground breaking science eventually makes it to Western journals, and that this is what current databases are reflecting, it would still remain that normal science follows similar rules in Russia, Japan, and China and yet a huge part of that content still goes unaccounted for. A normal US or UK paper is not any better than a normal Brazilian, Chinese, or Russian paper yet the former are frequently counted, the latter more frequently not. The low impact of non-Western countries is in part a reflection of the exclusion of journals published in non-English speaking countries, and Jean-Claude is right to say there are thousands of them. The effect on measurement is poisonous because national level self-citations are frequently excluded when journals are not published in English-language journal. If one wants to see the effect of removing
[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
Jeroen You are right on the dot, but Thomson is certainly not the only one to do this, many practitioners in the bibliometrics community also have this habit, albeit somewhat unconsciously. This is why we haven't had a much needed debate a proper debate on linguistic and national representatively and how current tools end up playing a performative function and having a normative role that affect publication behaviour to a much larger extent that is recognized, let alone discussed intelligently. Science-Metrix has created a spin-off to offer specific a solution to increase OA literature accessibility based on what we learned performing our large scale measurement of OA availability for the European Commission in the last three years. Because it aims to cover the whole world, we named the company 1science, though Peter Suber told me the name wasn't so inclusive as the humanities may not felt represented. Being from Quebec, I thought first of having a name that fitted both the English and French landscapes, and also told science was probably widely recognized around the world and again inclusivity is an important goal. Though measurement is not an end into itself for this platform, it will certainly bring interesting perspectives on this and hopefully feed some much needed debates on accurate measurement of scientific production and scientific impact as traditionally measured with bibliometric methods. For the time being, we're still at the development stage so I prefer to remain a tad quiet on exactly how that is going to have a bearing on impact measures, sorry to have been a bit cheeky here. Best Éric From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Bosman, J.M. (Jeroen) Sent: April-29-15 11:37 AM To: 'Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)' Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals I've always been amazed how Thomson/ISI categorized English language journals (mostly published in de US/UK) as international journals and all other journals as regional journals. Should ask them. BTW Eric could you elaborate on what you say in your last sentence? Will Science Metrix launch a bibliometrics service based on GS data or do I have to interpret your words in another way? Jeroen [101-innovations-icon-very-small] 101 innovations in scholarly communicationhttp://innoscholcomm.silk.co/ Jeroen Bosman, faculty liaison for the Faculty of Geosciences Utrecht University Libraryhttp://www.uu.nl/library email: j.bos...@uu.nlmailto:j.bos...@uu.nl telephone: +31.30.2536613 mail: Postbus 80124, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands visiting address: room 2.50, Heidelberglaan 3, Utrecht web: Jeroen Bosmanhttp://www.uu.nl/university/library/en/disciplines/geo/Pages/ContactBosman.aspx twitter @jeroenbosman/ @geolibrarianUBU profiles: : Academiahttp://uu.academia.edu/JeroenBosman / Google Scholarhttp://scholar.google.com/citations?user=-IfPy3IJhl=en / ISNIhttp://www.isni.org/28810209 / Mendeleyhttp://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jeroen-bosman/ / MicrosoftAcademichttp://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/51538592/jeroen-bosman / ORCIDhttp://orcid.org/-0001-5796-2727 / ResearcherIDhttp://www.researcherid.com/ProfileView.action?queryString=KG0UuZjN5WmCiHc%252FMC4oLVEKrQQu%252BpzQ8%252F9yrRrmi8Y%253DInit=YesSrcApp=CRreturnCode=ROUTER.SuccessSID=N27lOD6EgipnADLnAbK / ResearchGatehttp://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeroen_Bosman/ / Scopushttp://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?authorId=7003519484 / Slidesharehttp://www.slideshare.net/hierohiero / VIAFhttp://viaf.org/viaf/36099266/ / Worldcathttp://www.worldcat.org/wcidentities/lccn-n91-100619 blogging at: IM 2.0http://im2punt0.wordpress.com/ / Ref4UUhttp://ref4uu.blogspot.com/ - Trees say printing is a thing of the past From: goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Éric Archambault Sent: woensdag 29 april 2015 0:08 To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Jean-Claude has an excellent point. Our current outlook is extremely Western-centric. When I was in SPRU, professors (can't remember if it was Pavitt or Ben Martin) used to joke that bibliometric measurement was highly influenced by the linguistic capacity of housewives in Philadelphia. Though today there might have been a shift towards Manila for data entry, it remains that bibliographic databases present a truncated view of the world, and bibliometrics a distorted, pro-Western/Northern Hemisphere biased view of science. If one can potentially advance the idea that all ground breaking science eventually makes it to Western journals, and that this is what current databases are reflecting, it would still remain that normal science
[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
Jacinto The question is not naïve, it is important. The reason there should be a conversation on journals, and their numbers, is to establish the population. And we need to determine this to speak about representativeness of current sources of data, of sampling biases, and generally of accuracy of measures. As we mentioned in the paper on the history of the Journal Impact Factor, the choice of data not only shapes measures, it ultimately ends up have a self-fulfilling effect as the behaviour of scientists is certainly influenced by how we measured their performance. You are totally right to say that what counts are papers, but as whole journals are excluded just because they were difficult to handle commercially (ASCII rules!), whole bunch of papers are considered as non-existent. This is a big problem. The good news, and this is a positive, perhaps unintended consequence of OA and the availability of digital metadata, is that the hidden part of the iceberg is rapidly emerging, and it isn’t as white as the rest of the iceberg. Éric From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Jacinto Dávila Sent: April-29-15 12:54 PM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals May I ask a couple of naïve questions? Why do we count journals? If we are all looking forward to a global, hopefully distributed archive of knowledge, shouldn't we counting papers or some other way of displaying solutions? El 29/4/2015 11:13, Bosman, J.M. (Jeroen) j.bos...@uu.nlmailto:j.bos...@uu.nl escribió: I’ve always been amazed how Thomson/ISI categorized English language journals (mostly published in de US/UK) as “international journals” and all other journals as “regional journals”. Should ask them. BTW Eric could you elaborate on what you say in your last sentence? Will Science Metrix launch a bibliometrics service based on GS data or do I have to interpret your words in another way? Jeroen [101-innovations-icon-very-small] 101 innovations in scholarly communicationhttp://innoscholcomm.silk.co/ Jeroen Bosman, faculty liaison for the Faculty of Geosciences Utrecht University Libraryhttp://www.uu.nl/library email: j.bos...@uu.nlmailto:j.bos...@uu.nl telephone: +31.30.2536613tel:%2B31.30.2536613 mail: Postbus 80124, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands visiting address: room 2.50, Heidelberglaan 3, Utrecht web: Jeroen Bosmanhttp://www.uu.nl/university/library/en/disciplines/geo/Pages/ContactBosman.aspx twitter @jeroenbosman/ @geolibrarianUBU profiles: : Academiahttp://uu.academia.edu/JeroenBosman / Google Scholarhttp://scholar.google.com/citations?user=-IfPy3IJhl=en / ISNIhttp://www.isni.org/28810209 / Mendeleyhttp://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jeroen-bosman/ / MicrosoftAcademichttp://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/51538592/jeroen-bosman / ORCIDhttp://orcid.org/-0001-5796-2727 / ResearcherIDhttp://www.researcherid.com/ProfileView.action?queryString=KG0UuZjN5WmCiHc%252FMC4oLVEKrQQu%252BpzQ8%252F9yrRrmi8Y%253DInit=YesSrcApp=CRreturnCode=ROUTER.SuccessSID=N27lOD6EgipnADLnAbK / ResearchGatehttp://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeroen_Bosman/ / Scopushttp://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?authorId=7003519484 / Slidesharehttp://www.slideshare.net/hierohiero / VIAFhttp://viaf.org/viaf/36099266/ / Worldcathttp://www.worldcat.org/wcidentities/lccn-n91-100619 blogging at: IM 2.0http://im2punt0.wordpress.com/ / Ref4UUhttp://ref4uu.blogspot.com/ - Trees say printing is a thing of the past From: goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Éric Archambault Sent: woensdag 29 april 2015 0:08 To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Jean-Claude has an excellent point. Our current outlook is extremely Western-centric. When I was in SPRU, professors (can’t remember if it was Pavitt or Ben Martin) used to joke that bibliometric measurement was highly influenced by the linguistic capacity of housewives in Philadelphia. Though today there might have been a shift towards Manila for data entry, it remains that bibliographic databases present a truncated view of the world, and bibliometrics a distorted, pro-Western/Northern Hemisphere biased view of science. If one can potentially advance the idea that all ground breaking science eventually makes it to Western journals, and that this is what current databases are reflecting, it would still remain that normal science follows similar rules in Russia, Japan, and China and yet a huge part of that content still goes unaccounted for. A normal US or UK paper is not any better than a normal Brazilian, Chinese, or Russian paper yet the former
[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
Paul I think librarians are still highly concerned about journals, as opposed to papers. The reason is that this is how their invoices are structured - they buy journals and now bunches of journals. But this is changing because end-users increasingly do not see journals, they see results in the Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and universities' discovery systems. These results are usually smaller, more atomistic units - they are papers, conference papers, book chapters, etc. Thus, the use of search engines, as opposed to browsing on the shelves of libraries is progressively shifting the relevant unit towards papers as opposed to journals. Still, journals will continue to play a very important role as they confer prestige to papers, and guide authors' and readers' decisions. From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Uhlir, Paul Sent: April-29-15 4:09 PM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Good question. And while we're at it, why after 20 years do we still use a stovepiped, disaggregated, print model construct as the primary vehicle for digitally networked scholarly communication? Paul F. Uhlir, J.D. Scholar, National Academy of Sciences, and Consultant, Data Policy and Management 4643 Aspen Hill Court Annandale, VA 22003 USA Tel. 703 941 0817; Cell +1 703 217 5143 Skype: pfuhlir; Email: pfuh...@gmail.commailto:pfuh...@gmail.com Web: http://www.paulfuhlir.comhttp://www.paulfuhlir.com/; Twitter: @paulfuhlir From: goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org [goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Jacinto Dávila [jacinto.dav...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 12:54 PM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals May I ask a couple of naïve questions? Why do we count journals? If we are all looking forward to a global, hopefully distributed archive of knowledge, shouldn't we counting papers or some other way of displaying solutions? El 29/4/2015 11:13, Bosman, J.M. (Jeroen) j.bos...@uu.nlmailto:j.bos...@uu.nl escribió: I've always been amazed how Thomson/ISI categorized English language journals (mostly published in de US/UK) as international journals and all other journals as regional journals. Should ask them. BTW Eric could you elaborate on what you say in your last sentence? Will Science Metrix launch a bibliometrics service based on GS data or do I have to interpret your words in another way? Jeroen [101-innovations-icon-very-small] 101 innovations in scholarly communicationhttp://innoscholcomm.silk.co/ Jeroen Bosman, faculty liaison for the Faculty of Geosciences Utrecht University Libraryhttp://www.uu.nl/library email: j.bos...@uu.nlmailto:j.bos...@uu.nl telephone: +31.30.2536613tel:%2B31.30.2536613 mail: Postbus 80124, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands visiting address: room 2.50, Heidelberglaan 3, Utrecht web: Jeroen Bosmanhttp://www.uu.nl/university/library/en/disciplines/geo/Pages/ContactBosman.aspx twitter @jeroenbosman/ @geolibrarianUBU profiles: : Academiahttp://uu.academia.edu/JeroenBosman / Google Scholarhttp://scholar.google.com/citations?user=-IfPy3IJhl=en / ISNIhttp://www.isni.org/28810209 / Mendeleyhttp://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jeroen-bosman/ / MicrosoftAcademichttp://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/51538592/jeroen-bosman / ORCIDhttp://orcid.org/-0001-5796-2727 / ResearcherIDhttp://www.researcherid.com/ProfileView.action?queryString=KG0UuZjN5WmCiHc%252FMC4oLVEKrQQu%252BpzQ8%252F9yrRrmi8Y%253DInit=YesSrcApp=CRreturnCode=ROUTER.SuccessSID=N27lOD6EgipnADLnAbK / ResearchGatehttp://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeroen_Bosman/ / Scopushttp://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?authorId=7003519484 / Slidesharehttp://www.slideshare.net/hierohiero / VIAFhttp://viaf.org/viaf/36099266/ / Worldcathttp://www.worldcat.org/wcidentities/lccn-n91-100619 blogging at: IM 2.0http://im2punt0.wordpress.com/ / Ref4UUhttp://ref4uu.blogspot.com/ - Trees say printing is a thing of the past From: goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Éric Archambault Sent: woensdag 29 april 2015 0:08 To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Jean-Claude has an excellent point. Our current outlook is extremely Western-centric. When I was in SPRU, professors (can't remember if it was Pavitt or Ben Martin) used to joke that bibliometric measurement was highly influenced by the linguistic capacity of housewives in Philadelphia. Though today there might have been a shift towards Manila for data entry, it remains
[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
If one wants to see how excluding foreign references can have adverse effects on citation analysis, here the list of references for a randomly picked up Japanese paper. Most, if not all, Japanese language references are currently ignored in citation analysis, this science is considered non-existent. The paper, and the references. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jssp/30/1/30_30.1/_article/references * Gibb, R., Ercoline, B., Scharff, L. (2011). Spatial disorientation: Decades of pilot fatalities. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 82, 717–724.https://jlc.jst.go.jp/DN/JALC/10007449771?type=listlang=enfrom=J-STAGEdispptn=1 * Howard, I. P. (1982). Human visual orientation. John Wiley Sons. * 乾 敏郎・小川健二（2010）．認知発達の神経基盤―生後8ヶ月まで― 心理学評論，52, 576–608. * 石井正則（1998）．神経・前庭系・空間識について 宇宙開発事業団（編） 宇宙医学・生理学（III-A） 社会保険出版社 pp. 29–41. * Kanas, N. Manzey, D. (2008). Space psychology and psychiatry (2nd ed.). Springer. * 木下冨雄（1993）．相対判断の理論―意味、基準系、動き― 京都大学定年退官記念講演録 * 木下冨雄（2009）．宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構（編） 国際高等研究所 * 古賀一男（2011）．知覚の正体 河出書房新社 * Leonov, A. Scott, D. (2006). Two sides of the moon. St. Marti's Griffin. * 中川久定（2009）．第3回インタビュー（対話） 木下冨雄（編著） 宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構 pp. 376–378. * 牧野達郎・下條信輔・古賀一男（1998）．知覚の可塑性と行動適応 ブレーン出版 * 宮辻和貴・田辺 智・金子公宥（2005）．宇宙船内「体操」のエネルギー消費量に関する研究 体育学研究，50, 201–206. * Oman, C. M. (2003). Human visual orientation in weightlessness. In L. Harris M. Jenkin, (Eds.), Levels of Perception. New York, Springer Verlag. pp. 375–398. * Ross, H. E. (1974). Behaviour and perception in strange environments. Allen and Unwin. * Small, R. L., Oman, C. M., Jones, T. D. (2012). Space shuttle flight crew spatial orientation survey results. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 83, 383–387.https://jlc.jst.go.jp/DN/JALC/10011723096?type=listlang=enfrom=J-STAGEdispptn=1 * 立花正一（2009）．人類が宇宙に居住するための医学・精神心理の課題 木下冨雄（編著）宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構 pp. 258–259. * 立花 隆（1983）．宇宙からの帰還 中央公論社 * Vakoch, D. A. (Ed.) (2011). Psychology of space exploration, contemporary research in historical perspective. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. pp. 85–86. From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Éric Archambault Sent: April-29-15 5:40 PM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Paul I think librarians are still highly concerned about journals, as opposed to papers. The reason is that this is how their invoices are structured – they buy journals and now bunches of journals. But this is changing because end-users increasingly do not see journals, they see results in the Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and universities’ discovery systems. These results are usually smaller, more atomistic units - they are papers, conference papers, book chapters, etc. Thus, the use of search engines, as opposed to browsing on the shelves of libraries is progressively shifting the relevant unit towards papers as opposed to journals. Still, journals will continue to play a very important role as they confer prestige to papers, and guide authors’ and readers’ decisions. From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Uhlir, Paul Sent: April-29-15 4:09 PM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals Good question. And while we're at it, why after 20 years do we still use a stovepiped, disaggregated, print model construct as the primary vehicle for digitally networked scholarly communication? Paul F. Uhlir, J.D. Scholar, National Academy of Sciences, and Consultant, Data Policy and Management 4643 Aspen Hill Court Annandale, VA 22003 USA Tel. 703 941 0817; Cell +1 703 217 5143 Skype: pfuhlir; Email: pfuh...@gmail.commailto:pfuh...@gmail.com Web: http://www.paulfuhlir.comhttp://www.paulfuhlir.com/; Twitter: @paulfuhlir From: goal-boun...@eprints.orgmailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org [goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Jacinto Dávila [jacinto.dav...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 12:54 PM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals May I ask a couple of naïve questions? Why do we count journals? If we are all looking forward to a global, hopefully distributed archive of knowledge, shouldn't we counting papers or some other way of displaying solutions? El 29/4/2015 11:13, Bosman, J.M. (Jeroen) j.bos...@uu.nlmailto:j.bos...@uu.nl escribió: I’ve always been amazed how Thomson/ISI categorized English language journals (mostly published in de US/UK) as “international journals” and all other journals as “regional journals”. Should ask them. BTW Eric could you elaborate on what you say in your last sentence? Will Science Metrix launch
[GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals
Jean-Claude has an excellent point. Our current outlook is extremely Western-centric. When I was in SPRU, professors (can't remember if it was Pavitt or Ben Martin) used to joke that bibliometric measurement was highly influenced by the linguistic capacity of housewives in Philadelphia. Though today there might have been a shift towards Manila for data entry, it remains that bibliographic databases present a truncated view of the world, and bibliometrics a distorted, pro-Western/Northern Hemisphere biased view of science. If one can potentially advance the idea that all ground breaking science eventually makes it to Western journals, and that this is what current databases are reflecting, it would still remain that normal science follows similar rules in Russia, Japan, and China and yet a huge part of that content still goes unaccounted for. A normal US or UK paper is not any better than a normal Brazilian, Chinese, or Russian paper yet the former are frequently counted, the latter more frequently not. The low impact of non-Western countries is in part a reflection of the exclusion of journals published in non-English speaking countries, and Jean-Claude is right to say there are thousands of them. The effect on measurement is poisonous because national level self-citations are frequently excluded when journals are not published in English-language journal. If one wants to see the effect of removing national self-citation, try removing them altogether and you'll see how badly clobbered the US ends-up in terms of relate impact. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting to measure that way as it would be unwise (I always advocate the inclusion of self-citations at all levels even though everyone knows some authors and journals are narcissistic and playing the number game - self citations are an essential part of the knowledge-building edifice and excluding them potentially create more problems than it solves), but it is a valid experiment to show how bad the situation currently is because we count only publications from half of the journals published, and that half is anything but randomly selected. For those who want to see the effect, I can send you a table - among countries with 45,000 papers or more, and adjusted for scale, the US ranked 22nd (after Japan, the Czech Republic and Mexico) if only citations from other countries were included. We never published that paper as we thought it was brain damaged to exclude national self-citation. Yet, by excluding many many locally published journals from citation counts, this is what the advanced analytics that come out of dominant bibliographic databases do, and this is a sin that we, bibliometricians, commit every day. Hopefully open access will play a huge role in reducing the distortion field. I can confirm there is more than 50,000 scholarly and scientific journals the world over, not by any measure all open access, but all peer or quality reviewed according to the norms of scholarly and scientific communication in all fields of academia. Stay tuned, more neutral metrics are going to be available in the near future. Eric Archambault From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Claude Guédon Sent: April-28-15 9:07 AM To: goal@eprints.org Subject: [GOAL] Number of Open Access journals I have repeatedly criticized the numbers of journals used to describe scientific and scholarly publishing in the world. I have also regularly criticized the use of lists such as the Web of Science, Scopus and Ulrich's as being largely centred on the North Atlantic and/or OECD countries.As a counter to such numbers, I have pointed out that Latin America alone, as indicated by the Latindex vetted list, can sport over 6,000 titles. Presumably, if Asia and Africa did the same kind of work, numbers of 25-27,000 titles for the whole world would look funny. Another way to look at this is through disciplines or study areas. No one, I suspect, would argue that Classics (Latin and Greek) is a large speciality in the world of learning. Typically, classics departments are small and tend to disappear. Nonetheless, one can find a list of 1498 journal in this field, and that list is limited to open access journals. http://ancientworldonline.blogspot.ca/2012/07/alphabetical-list-of-open-access.html The list dates from the summer of 2012. There may be a few more or a few less since, but the least one may add is that such a number reveals a publishing activity that reaches well beyond expectations (at least mine). Conclusion: scholarly journal publishing is a lot more complex than what is provided by most scientometric studies. And a final question: who is advantaged by the illusory simplicity of the publishing landscape? -- Jean-Claude Guédon Professeur titulaire Littérature comparée Université de Montréal ___ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org
