ORCiD Open Researcher and Contributor ID: Wiley, Royal Society of Chemistry and American Chemical Society now require authors to provide their ORCiD when they submit articles. They join many other publishers which have signed the ORCiD Open Letter. More info in press releases: Wiley and Royal Society of Chemistry/ American Chemical Society. Having ORCiD part of the workflow associates ORCiD with DOI at creation, so automatic updates in scholars’ ORCiD records become possible. There are other advantages too. I’m happy to answer questions about ORCiD or you can look at the ORCiD website or libguides.wustl.edu/orcid.
Open Peer Review: Keeping Up With… Open Peer Review, good overview of this issue, part of the ACRL Keeping up with… column. There’s more about ongoing experiments with peer review at libguides.wustl.edu/impact/peerreview.
Open Educational Resources: Washington University in St. Louis syllabi are included in the Open Syllabus Explorer. Of course, most readings are NOT open but the syllabus itself can be a useful educational resource. See also article about the project in Nature: Mining the secrets of college syllabuses: The creators of the Open Syllabus Project hope that sharing data can both improve and reward teaching, by Anna Nowogrodzki. Nature 539, 125–126 (03 November 2016) doi:10.1038/539125a.
- Two press releases detail another step in preserving preprints and locating them in the publishing workflow: Preprints are go at Crossref! | Crossref now accepts preprints.
- The NIH has a Request for information (RFI): Including Preprints and Interim Research Products in NIH Applications and Reports; the deadline for comments in Dec. 9, 2016. ASAPbio shared their response; there are 2 other public responses at that site also. “ASAPbio is a scientist-driven initiative to promote the productive use of preprints in the life sciences.”
- Over the years, publishers, journals and conferences with deceptive, even predatory, practices have been in the news. This month I saw a new twist, a scam preprint site called Chemarxiv which is trying to lure files that authors probably want to submit to the real ChemRxiv, not yet available from American Chemical Society. We track some of this information at libguides.wustl.edu/impact/authorbeware. I also recommend Think, Check, Submit.
What should you do if a paper you’ve cited is later retracted?, by by Alison McCook, from Retraction Watch; several editors and scholars were interviewed.
Interesting opinion: Why science news embargoes are bad for the public, by Ivan Oransky, a co-founder of Retraction Watch. “In short, whatever benefits embargoes may have, they’re just not worth it.”