Poster Open Access

Journal practices (other than OA) promoting Open Science goals

Bosman, Jeroen; Kramer, Bianca


Dublin Core Export

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:creator>Bosman, Jeroen</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Kramer, Bianca</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2019-10-25</dc:date>
  <dc:description>Poster presented at meeting "Editorial boards and the transition to full open access" - Utrecht University, October 25 2019

shared in various formats (png, pdf, pptx, odp) for (re)use and modification

Journal practices (other than OA) promoting Open Science goals (relevance, reproducibility, efficiency, transparency)


	Early, full and reproducible content
	
		preregistration – use preregistrations in the review process
		registered reports – apply peer review to preregistration prior to the study and publish results regardless of outcomes
		preprint policy – liberally allow preprinting in any archive without license restrictions
		data/code availability – foster or require open availability of data and code for reviewers and readers
		TDM allowance – allow unrestricted TDM of full text and metadata for any use
		null/negative results – publish regardless of outcome
		 
	
	
	Machine readable ecosystem
	
		data/code citation – promote citation and use standards
		persistent IDs – e.g. DOI, ORCID, ROR, Open Funder Registry, grant IDs
		licenses (in Crossref) – register (open) licenses in Crossref
		contributorship roles – credit all contributors for their part in the work
		open citations – make citation information openly available via Crossref
		 
	
	
	Peer review
	
		open peer review – e.g. open reports and open identities
		peer review criteria – evaluate methodological rigour and reporting quality only or also judge expected relevance or impact?
		rejection rates – publish rejection rates and reconsider high selectivity
		post-publication peer review – publish immediately after sanity check and let peer review follow that?
		 
	
	
	Diversity
	
		author diversity – age, position, gender, geography, ethnicity, colour
		reviewer diversity – age, position, gender, geography, ethnicity, colour
		editor diversity – age, position, gender, geography, ethnicity, colour
	
	
	
	Metrics and DORA

	
		DORA: journal metrics – refrain from promoting
		DORA: article metrics – provide a range and use responsibly
	
	
</dc:description>
  <dc:identifier>https://zenodo.org/record/3518896</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>10.5281/zenodo.3518896</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>oai:zenodo.org:3518896</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:relation>doi:10.5281/zenodo.3518895</dc:relation>
  <dc:relation>url:https://zenodo.org/communities/osr</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights>
  <dc:rights>https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode</dc:rights>
  <dc:subject>journal policies</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>journal editors</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>editorial boards</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>open science</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>publishing</dc:subject>
  <dc:title>Journal practices (other than OA) promoting Open Science goals</dc:title>
  <dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/conferencePoster</dc:type>
  <dc:type>poster</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>
1,127
217
views
downloads
All versions This version
Views 1,1271,126
Downloads 217217
Data volume 44.9 MB44.9 MB
Unique views 1,0611,060
Unique downloads 183183

Share

Cite as