The Deconstructed (or Distributed) Journal - an emerging model?

Reviews the development of the Deconstructed Journal academic publishing model. The model was first proposed in something like its present form in 1997 and further developed in 1999. Although not actively promoted elements of the model appear to be emerging spontaneously from the general developments in online academic publishing

Scientific journals, overlays and repositories: a case study of costs and sustainability issues

Publishing scientific research is an area of study that attracts interest from various stakeholders such as publishers, academic and research staff, libraries and funders. In the past decade increased journal subscription fees prompted calls for cheaper and more efficient means of accessing the scientific literature. Factors such as the expansion of digital repositories, the introduction of open source journal management software, an increasing awareness within the scholarly community at large of the issues around open access, and an increasing readiness within the publishing community to experiment with new models, suggest that the circumstances may now be right for new models of scientific publishing to be explored, as well as potential business models and sustainable solutions around them. This paper explores some of the issues around the costs and sustainability of a prospective journal model known as the overlay journal. We present estimates of initial start up costs for such a model, discuss the factors that would influence scientists in deciding whether to publish in a journal overlaid onto a public repository; and report their views on the relative importance of different features and functions of a journal in terms of funding priorities

Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives: costs estimates and sustainability issues

The RIOJA project (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja) investigated the feasibility of an overlay journal model in collaboration with the arXiv and in the scientific domain of astrophysics and cosmology. Scientists in this community are active users of e-prints repositories such as the arXiv. Furthermore, they have the support of Professional Associations and Learned Societies that have been pioneers in adapting to new publishing models and in particular electronic journals. Long term access to information as well as maintaining provision to sustainable systems/services is important to various parties in the scholarly communication system: the creators of information, developers and managers of services, libraries, publishers, funders and also users. Although scientific journals have been in existence since the 18th century (Lawal, 2001), factors such as increased journal subscription prices in the last decades and the emergence of new technologies have triggered discussions on the potential of new business models for publishing research. Furthermore, the advent of the open access movement also contributed to exploration of the issues around free access to information and provision of sustainable services. Exploring aspects of sustainability is something that should be seen over a period of time and whether launching, converting or simply maintaining a new or existing system/service the needs of the community it serves should be taken into account. Scientific journal publishing is a complex process. Besides disseminating scientific knowledge, registration of a claim for new discovery and a quality “stamp” it also facilitates social factors. Besides making research findings available and contributing to the advancement of knowledge, publishing is also a means for measuring quality of the work of scientists, allocating funding, and acknowledging contributions to knowledge. In this report, we will try to provide an overview of a new publishing model, that of the overlay journal. We will discuss the use of the arXiv by scientists in astrophysics and cosmology as well as the role of professional associations and learned societies in the publishing process for this community. We will briefly explain the methods employed to compile this report. We will also briefly present the RIOJA toolkit before we try and identify costs in the publishing process associated with the functions of registration, certification, and awareness and archiving. This report does not aim to provide a comprehensive report of actual journal publishing costings. Despite the fact that there are studies in existence that tried to document costs associated with journal publishing, the information presented there rarely corresponds to the actual costs of individual journal functions. In addition, the interviews with publishers and editors did not reveal any substantial information about costings that have not already been reported in the literature or are available on some publishers' websites. Where appropriate, this report aims to acknowledge studies conducted previously as pointers to further reading and, where applicable, to compare reported findings to observations made during the development and implementation of the RIOJA toolkit (described below). We will conclude this report with some of the issues reported in the literature around sustainability of services and some brief suggestions for further work

Exploring aspects of scientific publishing in astrophysics and cosmology: the views of scientists

Scientists in astrophysics and cosmology make much use of the arXiv repository. Concerns raised by scientists in those fields about publication costs and delays, and the transparency and validity of the peer review process, raised questions about levels of satisfaction with existing publishing models. This paper discusses the results from a community survey in the fields of astrophysics and cosmology, conducted as part of an investigation into the feasibility of an "overlay journal" model in these disciplines. Six hundred and eighty three (683) researchers provided information about their academic/research background, their research practices, and their attitudes, both as producers and consumers of information, to the traditional journal publishing system, and gave their reaction to the overlay publication model. The survey results indicate that scientists in these disciplines are, in general, favourably disposed towards new publishing models, although some important caveats and concerns, particularly regarding quality, were highlighted

Publishing scientific research: is there ground for new ventures?

This paper highlights some of the issues that have been reported in surveys carried out by the RIOJA (Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives) project (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja). Six hundred and eighty three scientists (17% of 4012 contacted), and representatives from publishing houses and members of editorial boards from peer-reviewed journals in astrophysics and cosmology provided their views regarding the overlay journal model. In general the scientists were disposed favourably towards the overlay journal model. However, they raised several implementation issues that they would consider important, primarily relating to the quality of the editorial board and of the published papers, the speed and quality of the peer review process, and the long-term archiving of the accepted research material. The traditional copy-editing function remains important to researchers in these disciplines, as is the visibility of research in indexing services. The printed volume is of little interest

An introduction to overlay journals

An overlay journal performs all the activities of a scholarly journal and relies on structural links with one or more archives or repositories to perform its activities. This paper offers a briefing on the contribution overlay journals can make to scholarly communication. It explains what ‘overlay’ services are, how overlay journals have evolved and what makes their contribution to scholarly communication so valuable

The Future of Scholarly Communication in the Humanities: Adaptation or Transformation?

The paper suggests that the disaggregation of the core functions of scholarly publication will inevitably change communication in the humanities

The Immediate Practical Implication of the Houghton Report: Provide Green Open Access Now

Among the many important implications of Houghton et al’s (2009) timely and illuminating JISC analysis of the costs and benefits of providing free online access (“Open Access,” OA) to peer-reviewed scholarly and scientific journal articles one stands out as particularly compelling: It would yield a forty-fold benefit/cost ratio if the world’s peer-reviewed research were all self-archived by its authors so as to make it OA. There are many assumptions and estimates underlying Houghton et al’s modelling and analyses, but they are for the most part very reasonable and even conservative. This makes their strongest practical implication particularly striking: The 40-fold benefit/cost ratio of providing Green OA is an order of magnitude greater than all the other potential combinations of alternatives to the status quo analyzed and compared by Houghton et al. This outcome is all the more significant in light of the fact that self-archiving already rests entirely in the hands of the research community (researchers, their institutions and their funders), whereas OA publishing depends on the publishing community. Perhaps most remarkable is the fact that this outcome emerged from studies that approached the problem primarily from the standpoint of the economics of publication rather than the economics of research

Liquid Journals: Knowledge Dissemination in the Web Era

In this paper we redefine the notion of "scientific journal" to update it to the age of the Web. We explore the historical reasons behind the current journal model, and we show that this model is essentially the same today, even if the Web has made dissemination essentially free. We propose a notion of liquid and personal journals that evolve continuously in time and that are targeted to serve individuals or communities of arbitrarily small or large scales. The liquid journals provide "interesting" content, in the form of "scientific contributions" that are "related" to a certain paper, topic, or area, and that are posted (on their web site, repositories, traditional journals) by "inspiring" researchers. As such, the liquid journal separates the notion of "publishing" (which can be achieved by submitting to traditional peer review journals or just by posting content on the Web) from the appearance of contributions into the journals, which are essentially collections of content. In this paper we introduce the liquid journal model, and demonstrate through some examples its value to individuals and communities. Finally, we describe an architecture and a working prototype that implements the proposed model