DOAJ as a Gatekeeper for Quality Open Access Journals Presentation at NEICON/ASEP Conference May 17, 2016, Moscow tom@doaj.org Editor-in-Chief DOAJ

And has been developing into: DOAJ was founded at Lund University – launched May 2003 with 300 journals Basic demand then: A list of Open Access Journals And has been developing into: The authoritative go-to point for finding peer-reviewed scholarly journals not based on the subscription model

THE MISSION… Changing an unsustainable scholarly communication system in ways that it can serve science, our societies and the people on a global scale In this talk I will focus on open access journals

In this talk I will focus on open access journals

Actual Status of DOAJ DOAJ currently lists 8,820 journals 6,113 journals are searchable at article level 3,300 journals have been removed after having failed to reapply for inclusion 4,400 journals have submitted a reapplication About 50 % of new applications get rejected

Journals removed from DOAJ

Actual Status of DOAJ The situation in the Russian Federation DOAJ currently lists 177 journals from the Russian Federation 42 journals have failed to reapply before the deadline 42 have reapplications submitted More than half of reapplications employ non-CC licenses often they are contradictory in terms of copyright and usage conditions

Given reasons for being listed in DOAJ! Increased visibility : 97% Increased traffic : 85% Prestige : 86% Certification : 87% Eligibility for support from OA-publication funds: 64% Better promotion : 80% Increased submissions : 72%

Are open access journals more linked to bad publishing than supscription journals Not all subscription journals are in Scopus only 10- 20,000 of 100.000 Not all open access journals are in DOAJ only 8 - 10,000 of 35,000 No scientific evidence for the thesis But open access has more exposure Elsevier, Wiley and others are publishing new OA journals every week

We need Quality control . October 2013 February 2014 THE STING

Ways of Quality Control Impact assessment ImpactStory Article quality peer-review Journal Quality DOAJ User Feedback Beall’s List

More and tighter criteria for… Openness Scientific quality The Delivery of Technical Quality In this talk I will focus on open access journals

The Basics! COPE, OASPA, WAME & DOAJ:

Basic DOAJ Criteria Basic Journal Information Quality and Transparency of the Editorial Process Openness of the journal Content Licensing Copyright issues

The Principles 1. Peer review process 2. Governing Body 3. Editorial team/contact 4. Author fees 5. Copyright 6. Identification of and dealing with allegations of research misconduct 7. Ownership and management 8. Web site. 9. Name of journal 10. Conflicts of interest 11. Access 12. Revenue sources 13. Advertising 14. Publishing schedule 15. Archiving 16. Direct marketing

The must haves! Journals must have: An Open Access statement Comply with the BOAI definition A peer-review process, and tell us what kind of process An editor/editorial board with clearly identifiable members Licensing and copyright information Aims and scope Published a least 5 articles to qualify

The copyright and Licensing Journals are advised to have Unrestricted copyright for the author No exclusive publishing rights No transfer of commercial rights Clear licensing conditions Preferably use of Creative commons licensing Embedded licensing information with articles Link to underlying data

The DOAJ SEAL The best you can get! To qualify for the Seal the journal must: 1. have an archival arrangement in place with an external party (Question 25). 'No policy in place' does not qualify for the Seal. 2. provide permanent identifiers in the papers published (Question 28). 'None' does not qualify for the Seal. 3.provide article level metadata to DOAJ (Question 29). 'No' or failure to provide metadata within 3 months do not qualify for the Seal. 4. embed machine-readable CC licensing information in article level metadata (Question 45). 'No' does not qualify for the Seal. 5. allow reuse and remixing of content in accordance with a CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC BY-NC license (Question 47). If CC BY-ND, CC BY-NC-ND, 'No' or 'Other' is selected the journal will not qualify for the Seal. 6. have a deposit policy registered in a deposit policy directory. (Question 51) 'No' does not qualify for the Seal. 7. allow the author to hold the copyright without restrictions. (Question 52) 'No' does not qualify for the Seal. One cannot apply for the Seal. The Seal is awarded based on the information provided in the application. If you have any questions about any of the qualifiers, contact us.

The Main Problem... In current scholarly publishing there are no market mechanisms, no competition This allows publishers to steadily increase prices way above inflation The high profits attract questionable publishers It prevents reseachers access to knowledge It leaves major parts of the world out of the loop

To change the publishing landscape we need to … Foster competition in scholarly publishing Develop new publishing channels And make those attractive by offering excellent infrastructure services Have a change in scientist mentality with regards to open access and open science Have better ways to pinpoint questionable publishers

This can only happen when… Researchers will be rewarded based on What they publish the actual content Researchers will be evaluated based on How they publish whether it is open and reuseable or not Researchers will be credited for societal impact of their work as measured by new metrics

In Summary we need … More and much stronger funder and institutional mandates Radical changes in the research evaluation system and incentives for researchers to publish in the open! Professional infrastructure services for Open Access Criteria for discovery of questionable publishers

Infrastructure Needs Authors (and their advisors): want tools to choose reputable (open access) publishing channels Funders and institutions: determine which publishing channels comply with their requirements Managers of OA-publication funds: wants guidance for selecting eligible publishing channels for supporting APC- payments Scholarly Communication Researchers want access to data to support their research

Infrastructure Needs Publishers want (and appreciate) Certification / Prestige Eligibility for support from OA-publication funds Increased visibility Increased traffic More submissions Better promotion

Overview of services for Open Access (Knowledge Exchange Report jan 2016)  http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/6269/10/final-KE-Report-V5.1-20JAN2016.pdf .

Examples of Services Journal Indexing services: PMC, DOAJ Policy indexing: SHERPA, ROARMAP Archiving services: LOCKSS Repository indexing: OpenDOAR,ROAR Identification: ISSN, DOI, ORCID License conditions: OAS, HowOpenIsIt, QOAM APC information:OpenAPC-de Implementation OpenAccess: EIFL Publishing Platforms: OJS, OLH, AJOL, SCIELO User curated Services: Beall’s List Open Access Button Think Check Submit Open Access Spectrum

Support services offered by DOAJ For Authors’/ Funders DOAJ offers support for choosing journals with approved and checked open access policies DOAJ only lists journals with good publishing practices DOAJ offers insight in publishing licenses used DOAJ offers data on copyright conditions DOAJ offers data on APC use in journals

Support services offered by DOAJ For Readers/ publishers Access to full text articles in many disciplines Web search interface API search API search widget DOAJ offers API for metadata uploading to publishers

Ideas from the conference Problems with Services addressed by Dutch Presidency Conference on open science Amsterdam april 4-5, 2016 Different organizations Little coordination Funding depending on charity Lack of integration Ideas from the conference Need for sustainable funding for essential services (DOAJ,SHERPA Proposal to install coordinating body: Organizing funding, integration of services,quality monitoring

Future possible services by DOAJ Integration of Open Access Spectrum tool How Open Is It detailed insight in open access licensing and copyright conditions Online Help for funders in checking which journals comply with Funder policies Meta data harvester will allow access to more full text articles from a larger number of journals Active help for authors to choose where to publish Help for authors on how to avoid questionable publishers Access to more journals from the global south

Thank you for your attention! tom@doaj.org lars lars@doaj.org

We have vacancies here! tom@doaj.org Thanks to all the Library Consortia, Universities and Publishers and our Sponsors for the financial support to DOAJ! We have vacancies here! tom@doaj.org

EXTRAS Application form Explanation

Promoting Best Practice (anno 2014) – Qualifiers for the DOAJ SEAL: Archiving arrangement with an archiving organisation Provision of permanent identifiers e.g. DOI Provision of article level metadata to DOAJ CC-BY (embedded machine readable in article metadata) CC-BY or CC-BY-NC Deposit policy registered in a deposit policy directory

New criteria (>50) The new application form: http://doaj.org/application/new

Openness Openness, Reuse& Remixing rights, Licensing, Copyrights and Permissions!

Reuse/remix

Licensing

Copyright and permissions

Editorial ”quality” QUALITY AND TRANSPARENCY OF THE EDITORIAL PROCESS The journal must have two editors (Arts & Humanities) or an editorial board of 5 members, all members must be easily identified and have a good reputation Specification of the review process Editorial review, Peer review., Blind peer review, Double blind peer review, Open Peer Review, Other Statements about aims & scope clearly visible Instructions to authors shall be available and easily located Screening for plagiarism? Time from submission to publication

Editorial issues Specify what kind of reveiw process is applied: Editorial review, Peer Review, Blind Peer Review, Double Blind Peer Review, Open Peer Review

Archiving/Preservation Archiving is important – too many OA-journals do not have an archiving arrangement

Permanent Identifiers (DOIs) Has your journal(s) implemented DOIs: Yes: 35% No: 55% Don´t know: 10%

Plagiarism

Deposit policy

Submission Charges