Research questions - Revision history

Petersuber at 18:31, 28 May 2018

2018-05-28T18:31:34Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:31, 28 May 2018
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:oad2.jpeg\|60px]] This list is part of the [http://oad.simmons.edu Open Access Directory].		[[File:oad2.jpeg\|60px]] This list is part of the [http://oad.simmons.edu Open Access Directory].

	* This is a list of research questions in need of researchers. It started as an [~~http~~://~~www~~.~~earlham~~.edu/~~~peters~~/~~fos~~/~~newsletter~~/~~05-02-08~~.~~htm~~#questions article] in ''SOAN'' for May 2008.		* This is a list of research questions in need of researchers. It started as an [https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3716781/suber_news121.html?sequence=5#questions article] in ''SOAN'' for May 2008.

	* Related lists on OAD: (1) [[Calls for papers]], (2) [[Research in progress]], and (3) [[Volunteer opportunities]].		* Related lists on OAD: (1) [[Calls for papers]], (2) [[Research in progress]], and (3) [[Volunteer opportunities]].

Petersuber at 21:26, 3 June 2015

2015-06-03T21:26:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:26, 3 June 2015
Line 160:		Line 160:
	** The effect of an OA edition on sales will probably vary by type of book (e.g. monograph v. encyclopedia), but exactly how?		** The effect of an OA edition on sales will probably vary by type of book (e.g. monograph v. encyclopedia), but exactly how?
	** If the OA edition comes out after the non-OA edition, how does the delay affect the impact on sales? If the OA edition comes out simultaneously with the non-OA edition, but is discontinued after a time, how does that affect the impact on sales?		** If the OA edition comes out after the non-OA edition, how does the delay affect the impact on sales? If the OA edition comes out simultaneously with the non-OA edition, but is discontinued after a time, how does that affect the impact on sales?
	** For evidence and anecdotes on this question, see the [http://~~www~~.~~connotea~~.~~org~~/tag/oa.books.sales oa.books.sales] tag library for the [~~[OA tracking project\|OATP]~~].		** For evidence and anecdotes on this question, see the [http://tagteam.harvard.edu/hubs/oatp/tag/oa.books.sales oa.books.sales] tag library for the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/hoap/Open_Access_Tracking_Project Open Access Tracking Project].

	* How will improvements in ebook readers affect the economics of dual-edition books? If OA editions ''currently'' increase the sales of print editions, how much of that effect is due to the fact that few people ''currently'' want to read a whole book on a screen?		* How will improvements in ebook readers affect the economics of dual-edition books? If OA editions ''currently'' increase the sales of print editions, how much of that effect is due to the fact that few people ''currently'' want to read a whole book on a screen?

Hgmorrison at 00:06, 18 May 2015

2015-05-18T00:06:32Z

@@ Line 45: / Line 45: @@
 * There is an emerging consensus to allow (or even require) self-archiving for the final version of the author's peer-reviewed manuscript, and to give the publisher exclusivity for the published edition.  Can we sample widely in different fields and come up with any useful generalizations on how widely these two versions differ from one another?
 * Why does the OA impact advantage differ by field?  What are the key variables?
@@ Line 304: / Line 301: @@
 :* Do this exercise for many different sets of important papers.  For example, all the papers by a given year's Nobel prize winners; the consensus set of the 100 papers most important for understanding HIV/AIDS or climate change; etc.

Petersuber: /* Libraries */

2015-05-17T20:28:09Z

Libraries

Petersuber at 20:26, 17 May 2015

2015-05-17T20:26:39Z

Hgmorrison at 20:26, 12 May 2015

2015-05-12T20:26:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:26, 12 May 2015
Line 304:		Line 304:

	:* There are many theoretical and empirical questions in the areas of what is public / open and what is private. A few thoughts posted [http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/2015/05/12/wanting-to-be-open-does-not-mean-we-want-to-be-open-about-everything/ here].		:* There are many theoretical and empirical questions in the areas of what is public / open and what is private. A few thoughts posted [http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/2015/05/12/wanting-to-be-open-does-not-mean-we-want-to-be-open-about-everything/ here].

			==Open access in the context of scholarly communication and community==

			:* Has the open access movement over-reacted to challenges on peer review, and would be better off with a more holistic perspective on OA in the context of scholarly communication and community? Many potentially interesting questions here for historians, anthropologists and other social sciences. One example of a peer-reviewed OA journal that emerged from an initial conference and early newsletter phase posted [http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/2015/05/12/from-conference-to-newsletter-to-journal-a-challenge-to-the-emphasis-on-peer-review/ here].

Hgmorrison at 20:19, 12 May 2015

2015-05-12T20:19:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:19, 12 May 2015
Line 300:		Line 300:

	:* Do this exercise for many different sets of important papers. For example, all the papers by a given year's Nobel prize winners; the consensus set of the 100 papers most important for understanding HIV/AIDS or climate change; etc.		:* Do this exercise for many different sets of important papers. For example, all the papers by a given year's Nobel prize winners; the consensus set of the 100 papers most important for understanding HIV/AIDS or climate change; etc.

			==Open versus private==

			:* There are many theoretical and empirical questions in the areas of what is public / open and what is private. A few thoughts posted [http://sustainingknowledgecommons.org/2015/05/12/wanting-to-be-open-does-not-mean-we-want-to-be-open-about-everything/ here].

Pontika at 10:38, 3 February 2012

2012-02-03T10:38:49Z

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:28, 17 May 2015
Line 257:		Line 257:
	<!-- commented out because not questions		<!-- commented out because not questions
	* Library support for open access. (Can be by nature of support, type / size of library and region / location). Types of support:		* Library support for open access. (Can be by nature of support, type / size of library and region / location). Types of support:
	:* Journal hosting (see Karla Hahn's recent ARL study on library publishing activities) [date? link?]		** Journal hosting (see Karla Hahn's recent ARL study on library publishing activities) [date? link?]
	:* Payment of article processing fees		** Payment of article processing fees
	:* Economic support (and/or commitments) for open access initiatives, e.g. SCOAP3, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy		** Economic support (and/or commitments) for open access initiatives, e.g. SCOAP3, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
	:* Institutional and disciplinary repositories (note: the Canadian Association of Research Libraries does an annual survey). # of repositories, type, contents, staffing by type and FTE.		** Institutional and disciplinary repositories (note: the Canadian Association of Research Libraries does an annual survey). # of repositories, type, contents, staffing by type and FTE.
	:* Educational - # and type of workshops. See recent SPEC kit on scholarly communications activities.		** Educational - # and type of workshops. See recent SPEC kit on scholarly communications activities.
	-->		-->
	<!-- commented out because not questions		<!-- commented out because not questions
	* Library use of open access resources. (Can be by nature of use, type / size of library and region / location).		* Library use of open access resources. (Can be by nature of use, type / size of library and region / location).
	:* Inclusion of DOAJ and other open access lists in link resolving services. (Statistics on hits / downloads?).		** Inclusion of DOAJ and other open access lists in link resolving services. (Statistics on hits / downloads?).
	:* Local open access collection development.		** Local open access collection development.
	:* Interlibrary loan searching for open access resources.		** Interlibrary loan searching for open access resources.
	-->		-->

	* Library support for open access as measured by library website design.		* Library support for open access as measured by library website design:
	** Is there a link to information about open access and scholarly communication? If so, where - the library home page, placed prominently or not-so-prominently, several clicks in, etc.?		** Is there a link to information about open access and scholarly communication? If so, where - the library home page, placed prominently or not-so-prominently, several clicks in, etc.?
	** Does this differ by library type, size, region or country?		** Does this differ by library type, size, region or country?
Line 276:		Line 276:

	* How accurately can a university measure the "ullage" of its library?		* How accurately can a university measure the "ullage" of its library?
	:*In 2004, Peter Suber introduced the term [http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/01-02-04.htm#ullage "ullage"] --after the word for the empty space at the top of a wine bottle-- for the gap between what a university directly offers through its library and the totality of literature to which faculty and students might need access.		** In 2004, Peter Suber introduced the term [http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/01-02-04.htm#ullage "ullage"] --after the word for the empty space at the top of a wine bottle-- for the gap between what a university directly offers through its library and the totality of literature to which faculty and students might need access.
	:*Can a university measure its ullage in absolute numbers (of journals or journal articles) and percentages (of the journal literature in certain fields)? Can we agree on the total number of journal articles (for a given year and perhaps for a given field) so that different universities could use the same denominators when making their calculations and comparing their results?		** Can a university measure its ullage in absolute numbers (of journals or journal articles) and percentages (of the journal literature in certain fields)? Can we agree on the total number of journal articles (for a given year and perhaps for a given field) so that different universities could use the same denominators when making their calculations and comparing their results?
	:*Perhaps it would be most beneficial to first illustrate ullage at the world's largest research libraries.		** Perhaps it would be most beneficial to first illustrate ullage at the world's largest research libraries.
	:*Can researchers outside a university compute its ullage using public information? Can we do this for a wide range of institutions and map where ullage is higher and where it is lower?		** Can researchers outside a university compute its ullage using public information? Can we do this for a wide range of institutions and map where ullage is higher and where it is lower?

	==Funding agencies==		==Funding agencies==

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:26, 17 May 2015
Line 86:		Line 86:

	* Hypothesis: author submissions will decrease at toll-access journals that do not allow author self-archiving, resulting in a decline in quantity of articles published, or quality, or both. Rationale: authors who are educated about open access, aware of the OA impact advantage, or impacted by open access policies, are likely to seek open access friendly venues for publishers. The rate of submission decline will vary, depending on the discipline, relevant open access policies, and the availability and credibility of open access alternatives (open access journals and self-archiving friendly journals). [Poetic version of hypothesis: [http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/2008/02/whither-white-fair-romeo.html Whither White, Fair RoMEO?]		* Hypothesis: author submissions will decrease at toll-access journals that do not allow author self-archiving, resulting in a decline in quantity of articles published, or quality, or both. Rationale: authors who are educated about open access, aware of the OA impact advantage, or impacted by open access policies, are likely to seek open access friendly venues for publishers. The rate of submission decline will vary, depending on the discipline, relevant open access policies, and the availability and credibility of open access alternatives (open access journals and self-archiving friendly journals). [Poetic version of hypothesis: [http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.com/2008/02/whither-white-fair-romeo.html Whither White, Fair RoMEO?]
			** Is there evidence for or against this hypothesis?

	* We know roughly what percentage of peer-reviewed journals are OA: ((number listed in the [http://www.doaj.org/ DOAJ] / 25,000) * 100). But what percentage of ''newly launched'' peer-reviewed journals are OA? Have we reached the cross-over point when the majority of new launches are OA?		* We know roughly what percentage of peer-reviewed journals are OA: ((number listed in the [http://www.doaj.org/ DOAJ] / 25,000) * 100). But what percentage of ''newly launched'' peer-reviewed journals are OA? Have we reached the cross-over point when the majority of new launches are OA?
Line 242:		Line 243:

	* How many universities mandate OA for electronic theses and dissertations? Can we break this down by university size and country?		* How many universities mandate OA for electronic theses and dissertations? Can we break this down by university size and country?
	:* Can we put together some "best practices" for policy exemptions and embargoes?		** Can we put together some "best practices" for policy exemptions and embargoes?

	* For a given university and its actual serials budget and research output: If we assume that all journals convert to OA and charge a given publication fee per paper (say, $500), then will the total budget needed to cover faculty publication fees be larger or smaller than the budget now devoted to TA journals? This calculation has been done before, at least three times, and in each case the authors assumed that all OA journals would charge publication fees and that all fees would be paid by universities. The purpose of redoing the calculation is to make the assumptions more realistic. First do the baseline calculation, above. Then: how does the number change when 10% (then 20%, then 30% etc.) of OA journals charge no publication fee at all? How does the number change when 10% (then 20%, then 30% etc.) of those fees are paid by funding agencies rather than universities?		* For a given university and its actual serials budget and research output: If we assume that all journals convert to OA and charge a given publication fee per paper (say, $500), then will the total budget needed to cover faculty publication fees be larger or smaller than the budget now devoted to TA journals? This calculation has been done before, at least three times, and in each case the authors assumed that all OA journals would charge publication fees and that all fees would be paid by universities. The purpose of redoing the calculation is to make the assumptions more realistic. First do the baseline calculation, above. Then: how does the number change when 10% (then 20%, then 30% etc.) of OA journals charge no publication fee at all? How does the number change when 10% (then 20%, then 30% etc.) of those fees are paid by funding agencies rather than universities?
	:* For more detail on the previous calculations and recommended refinements, see Peter Suber's article from [http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/06-02-06.htm#facts SOAN for June 2006].		** For more detail on the previous calculations and recommended refinements, see Peter Suber's article from [http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/06-02-06.htm#facts SOAN for June 2006].

	* What percentage of university libraries have negotiated full access privileges for walk-in patrons? Is the trajectory up or down?		* What percentage of university libraries have negotiated full access privileges for walk-in patrons? Is the trajectory up or down?

	* How successful have libraries been in negotiating licensing terms that benefit authors (e.g. providing permission for self-archiving), not just terms that benefit readers? What tactics are likely to increase that success rate?		* How successful have libraries been in negotiating licensing terms that benefit authors (e.g. providing permission for self-archiving), not just terms that benefit readers? What tactics are likely to increase that success rate?
	:* A handful of universities are trying to negotiate better terms for their authors (not just their readers), but most of them are not yet ready to discuss their experience in public. How many universities are already trying these negotiations? How would their prospects improve if more universities joined the effort?		** A handful of universities are trying to negotiate better terms for their authors (not just their readers), but most of them are not yet ready to discuss their experience in public. How many universities are already trying these negotiations? How would their prospects improve if more universities joined the effort?

	== Libraries ==		== Libraries ==

			<!-- commented out because not questions
	* Library support for open access. (Can be by nature of support, type / size of library and region / location). Types of support:		* Library support for open access. (Can be by nature of support, type / size of library and region / location). Types of support:
	:* Journal hosting (see Karla Hahn's recent ARL study on library publishing activities) [date? link?]		:* Journal hosting (see Karla Hahn's recent ARL study on library publishing activities) [date? link?]
Line 260:		Line 262:
	:* Institutional and disciplinary repositories (note: the Canadian Association of Research Libraries does an annual survey). # of repositories, type, contents, staffing by type and FTE.		:* Institutional and disciplinary repositories (note: the Canadian Association of Research Libraries does an annual survey). # of repositories, type, contents, staffing by type and FTE.
	:* Educational - # and type of workshops. See recent SPEC kit on scholarly communications activities.		:* Educational - # and type of workshops. See recent SPEC kit on scholarly communications activities.
			-->
			<!-- commented out because not questions
	* Library use of open access resources. (Can be by nature of use, type / size of library and region / location).		* Library use of open access resources. (Can be by nature of use, type / size of library and region / location).
	:* Inclusion of DOAJ and other open access lists in link resolving services. (Statistics on hits / downloads?).		:* Inclusion of DOAJ and other open access lists in link resolving services. (Statistics on hits / downloads?).
	:* Local open access collection development.		:* Local open access collection development.
	:* Interlibrary loan searching for open access resources.		:* Interlibrary loan searching for open access resources.
			-->

	* Library support for open access as measured by library website design.		* Library support for open access as measured by library website design.
	:* Is there a link to information about open access and scholarly communication? If so, where - the library home page, placed prominently or not-so-prominently, several clicks in, etc.?		** Is there a link to information about open access and scholarly communication? If so, where - the library home page, placed prominently or not-so-prominently, several clicks in, etc.?
	:* Does this differ by library type, size, region or country?		** Does this differ by library type, size, region or country?
	:* Is there a correlation between library OA support and OA success at the organization?		** Is there a correlation between library OA support and OA success at the organization?

	* How accurately can a university measure the "ullage" of its library?		* How accurately can a university measure the "ullage" of its library?