A genealogy of open access: negotiations between openness and access to research

Moore, Samuel

doi:10.4000/rfsic.3220

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fundamental in the origins of OA were the unconditional free public availability for reading, as well as unconstrained re-use so long as original sources were attributed; often equated with the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (Suber 2007b;Tennant et al 2016 research practices, and more efficient or rigorous research workflows (Watson 2015;Levin et al 2016;Crick, Hall, and Ishtiaq 2017;Masuzzo and Martens 2017;McKiernan 2017;Bowman and Keene 2018;Fraser et al 2018). This includes a diverse range of practices such as pre-registration and registered reports (Nosek and Lakens 2014;Nosek et al 2018), sharing of code and data (Barnes 2010;Levin 2015;Mons 2018), and opening up the peer review process in different ways (Morey et al 2016;Ross-Hellauer 2017;Tennant et al 2017). As research has become progressively computational, demands for FOSS have simultaneously increased as part of the complete scholarship environment.…”

Section: Systems Of Valuation In Openness 31mentioning

confidence: 99%

A tale of two 'opens': intersections between Free and Open Source Software and Open Scholarship

Agrawal¹,

Baždarić²,

Brassard³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is no clear-cut boundary between Free and Open Source Software and Open Scholarship, and the histories, practices, and fundamental principles between the two remain complex. In this study, we critically appraise the intersections and differences between the two movements. Based on our thematic comparison here, we conclude several key things. First, there is substantial scope for new communities of practice to form within scholarly communities that place sharing and collaboration/open participation at their focus. Second, Both the principles and practices of FOSS can be more deeply ingrained within scholarship, asserting a balance between pragmatism and social ideology. Third, at the present, Open Scholarship risks being subverted and compromised by commercial players. Fourth, the shift and acceleration towards a system of Open Scholarship will be greatly enhanced by a concurrent shift in recognising a broader range of practices and outputs beyond traditional peer review and research articles. In order to achieve this, we propose the formulation of a new type of institutional mandate. We believe that there is substantial need for research funders to invest in sustainable open scholarly infrastructure, and the communities that support them, to avoid the capture and enclosure of key research services that would prevent optimal researcher behaviours. Such a shift could ultimately lead to a healthier scientific culture, and a system where competition is replaced by collaboration, resources (including time and people) are shared and acknowledged more efficiently, and the research becomes inherently more rigorous, verified, and reproducible.

show abstract

Section: Systems Of Valuation In Openness 31mentioning

confidence: 99%

A tale of two 'opens': intersections between Free and Open Source Software and Open Scholarship

Agrawal¹,

Baždarić²,

Brassard³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recognising the genealogies and multiple lineages of openness [2] helps us to understand the tensions that exist across open praxis. Neoliberalism's appropriation of scholarly communication [35] and research output management serves to curtail the radical potential of openness to challenge existing political norms.…”

Section: Alternate Modes Of Openness For Radical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Open or Ajar? Openness within the Neoliberal Academy

Bowie¹,

Sanders²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The terms 'open' and 'openness' are widely used across the current higher education environment particularly in the areas of repository services and scholarly communications. Open-access licensing and open-source licensing are two prevalent manifestations of open culture within higher education research environments. As theoretical ideals, open-licensing models aim at openness and academic freedom. But operating as they do within the context of global neoliberalism, to what extent are these models constructed by, sustained by, and co-opted by neoliberalism? In this paper, we interrogate the use of open-licensing within scholarly communications and within the larger societal context of neoliberalism. Through synthesis of various sources, we will examine how open access licensing models have been constrained by neoliberal or otherwise corporate agendas, how open access and open scholarship have been reframed within discourses of compliance, how open-source software models and software are co-opted by politico-economic forces, and how the language of 'openness' is widely misused in higher education and repository services circles to drive agendas that run counter to actually increasing openness. We will finish by suggesting ways to resist this trend and use open-licensing models to resist neoliberal agendas in open scholarship.

show abstract

“…Open access is one of the hot topics found in both the sciences and the humanities. But as opposed to issues such as peer review, preprints, or licences, open access in the humanities is well-established as a discourse, or: within the discourse on open access, distinctions are made between the sciences and the humanities [30][31][32][33][34][35]. Though the early uptake of open access took place in non-humanities disciplines, already the early declarations on open access include the humanities, with the Berlin 2 As the authors state in the article, the choice of topics arose by means of a somewhat democratic process through a discussion on social media.…”

Section: Open Access Open Humanities and Digital Humanitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reasoning here is that reducing the limitations issued by the creative commons licence (by means of NC, ND, SA) 6 to BY, means limiting the limitation of reuse of the publication simply to attribution of authorship. In other words: "anything less introduces a barrier to the open progress of science" [30] ( §19).…”

Section: Liberal Copyright Licences In the Humanitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open Science in the Humanities, or: Open Humanities?

Knöchelmann

2019

Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open science refers to both the practices and norms of more open and transparent communication and research in scientific disciplines and the discourse on these practices and norms. There is no such discourse dedicated to the humanities. Though the humanities appear to be less coherent as a cluster of scholarship than the sciences are, they do share unique characteristics which lead to distinct scholarly communication and research practices. A discourse on making these practices more open and transparent needs to take account of these characteristics. The prevalent scientific perspective in the discourse on more open practices does not do so, which confirms that the discourse’s name, open science, indeed excludes the humanities so that talking about open science in the humanities is incoherent. In this paper, I argue that there needs to be a dedicated discourse for more open research and communication practices in the humanities, one that integrates several elements currently fragmented into smaller, unconnected discourses (such as on open access, preprints, or peer review). I discuss three essential elements of open science—preprints, open peer review practices, and liberal open licences—in the realm of the humanities to demonstrate why a dedicated open humanities discourse is required.

show abstract

A genealogy of open access: negotiations between openness and access to research

Cited by 26 publications

References 17 publications

A tale of two 'opens': intersections between Free and Open Source Software and Open Scholarship

A tale of two 'opens': intersections between Free and Open Source Software and Open Scholarship

Open or Ajar? Openness within the Neoliberal Academy

Open Science in the Humanities, or: Open Humanities?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About