Return to Elsevier.com

Tagged:  Access

EU43_EdChoice_Hero

Mobile-friendly Editors’ Choice website allows you to share ‘Top 5’ articles

No one is more familiar with a journal’s content than the editor – you have often curated each manuscript from arrival to acceptance. On the new Editors’ Choice website, you can now highlight the five most interesting, novel or important papers that have featured in your journal over the past 12 months, alongside an explanation […]

Read more >


No one is more familiar with a journal's content than the editor – you have often curated each manuscript from arrival to acceptance.

On the new Editors' Choice website, you can now highlight the five most interesting, novel or important papers that have featured in your journal over the past 12 months, alongside an explanation about why you have recommended them.

The website marks a new direction for Editors' Choice, which began as an app for conference attendees in 2012. Editors whose journals were being exhibited at an upcoming event were invited to choose five articles they wanted to share with the researchers attending. They were also asked to provide a short explanation about why they had chosen those particular papers. Each selection was accompanied by a photo and bio of the editor in question. Conference attendees could download the app to access the information.

The Editors’ Choice website

What's changing?

Because of the app's popularity, the program is now evolving. The information will no longer be delivered via an app but via a mobile website. Also, it won't only be journals exhibited at upcoming events that will be featured; editors of all Elsevier journals will be given the opportunity to showcase five of their journal's articles per year. Not only will the articles be highlighted on the mobile website, they will also appear on the journal homepage on Elsevier.com, subject webpages on Elsevier.com, and relevant Elsevier social media channels. They will also be promoted at exhibitions relevant for that journal.

The articles will be freely accessible to all readers.

ElsevierConnectLogo_smallThis article first appeared in Elsevier Connect, an online magazine and resource center for the science and health communities with a broad and active social media community. It features daily articles written by experts in the field as well as Elsevier colleagues.

 How Editors' Choice started

Liz Holmes

Liz Holmes

Liz Holmes, Global Project Manager in Elsevier's Marketing Communications and Researcher Engagement department, is behind the project.

Several years ago, as a marketing communications manager, she was responsible for shipping boxes of sample copies of her journals to events. However, her editors wanted the opportunity to highlight particular articles, so she created ring binders containing the relevant article PDFs with the words 'Editors' Choice' printed clearly on the front cover.

"I noticed people were choosing to take the ring binder away with them, even though it was a lot heavier than the sample copies," Holmes said. "Knowing that the articles had been personally chosen by the editor was clearly important to them."

With the publishing industry increasingly favoring digital delivery of information over the traditional print format, she realized there may be an opportunity for 'Editors' Choice' to follow suit.

Holmes said the new set-up will be user friendly while helping editors share important articles.

“The mobile website and the dedicated pods on each journal homepage will make the articles clearly visible to visitors. The website has been crafted to provide an optimal viewing experience – easy reading and navigation with a minimum of resizing, panning, and scrolling – across a wide range of devices, from mobile phones to desktop computer monitors.

“Equally importantly, authors will be notified that their article has been chosen and they will be encouraged to spread the news through their social media channels.”

What's next?

One of the next steps will be to show the impact that social media promotion by Elsevier – and the article author – has had on the Editors' Choice article.

At the point editors submit their chosen articles, they are asked for their feedback on the process. Of those who have responded so far, nearly 70 percent have said they feel “very positive” about the initiative.

If you have any suggestions for improvements, please email editorschoice@elsevier.com. You are also welcome to post a comment below.

Liz Holmes was interviewed by Linda Willems, Editor-in-Chief, Editors' Update

OpenAccessWebinar

PeterGriffiths

Why I dedicated my journal editorial to open access

UK-based editor, Professor Peter Griffiths, on why it’s so important editors understand open access.

Read more >


The May issue of International Journal of Nursing Studies (IJNS) features an editorial written by Executive Editor, Professor Peter Griffiths, PhD, BA, RN, outlining the open access options available on his journal. In the article, he highlights the difference between an OA journal and journals offering OA options (also known as the hybrid model). He also touches on IJNS’s liberal self-archiving policies. Here he explains why establishing clarity around these points is so important.

SeparatorFINAL

As an active academic researcher in a leading research department, I have views and preferences around publishing and research strategy. While I always do my best to ensure that anything I publish is available OA (whether gold or green), I admit my major concern is whether it is the best journal for my work. However, if I’m wearing my journal editor hat, then my first thought is protecting my journal, my ‘turf’.  Luckily, these two positions rarely clash.

In my academic day job there is currently a huge push towards open access, for example, the next REF* demands it. Broadly speaking, I think that is great, but it is becoming increasingly apparent that many people misunderstand open access - they think the only route is a paid model and that in order for a paper to be OA, it must be published in an OA journal. If we don’t help people understand that is not the case, we will all be in trouble.

For example, some people don’t perceive IJNS to be an OA journal, but we are – we follow a hybrid model which means we not only publish subscription articles, but authors can choose to pay to make their article open access. A lot of people don’t really understand this concept yet.

PeterGriffiths_coverGoing further forward, one of the big challenges, particularly for individual research groups, will be sourcing payment for articles but there are other approaches to OA. Many journals, including my own, are quite generous in the way they enable research to be shared without payment.

I wrote this editorial in an attempt to clarify the territory for colleagues who are operating under these misapprehensions and, if I’m honest, to make it clear that our journal is a good venue in the world of OA!

During the process of writing, there were several things I found very interesting. One was the extent to which we on IJNS have not really been engaged in setting our OA policy. I’m actually pretty comfortable with where our journal is now. What would cause me concern are blanket changes implemented by Elsevier that don’t take into account individual journal’s needs. For example, I would like to keep green open access, i.e. the ability for authors to post the post-print (the accepted manuscript sent to the publisher) version of their paper on their own personal websites immediately, and in institutional repositories after a short embargo period. In our field, it’s the published paper that really counts so green open access doesn’t affect our subscriptions if done in this way, in fact, it makes us very competitive.

It was also an interesting exercise to nail down what our OA policies are - it was surprising how much work we had to put into understanding all the nuances. I did eventually find my way to information where the policies were fairly clearly outlined but it was difficult. If I put myself in the shoes of an author, who already has all sorts of detailed guidelines to follow and information to read, I can imagine tracking down OA policies is a step too far. Is that the fault of the publisher, in this case, Elsevier? Not really. In the world of the internet it is extremely easy to make information available and that often means there is too much information to sort through. I think the only option is to make information available in a broad number of ways until it becomes zeitgeist and begins to shape the way people think. It’s not just the publisher’s responsibility, but a collective recognition that this information should be shared through many, many channels. With this editorial, I wanted to help to tell that story.

If there are other editors out there uncertain how to communicate about open access to their readers, I would certainly recommend writing a small editorial – the process might provoke their own learning on this subject. It’s going to be a huge issue for authors and readers, if not today then tomorrow and if not tomorrow then the day after. I think those who understand OA and inform readers about what is possible will certainly reap the rewards.

* Research Excellence Framework (REF) - the new system for assessing the quality of research in UK higher education institutions

Author biography

Professor Peter Griffiths, PhD, BA, RN, is Chair of Health Services Research at University of Southampton in the UK and Executive Editor of International Journal of Nursing Studies - a forum for original research and scholarship about health care delivery, organization, management, workforce, policy and research methods relevant to nursing, midwifery and other health related professions. Before taking up the Chair of Health Services Research, he was, from 2006 to 2010, Director of England's National Nursing Research Unit.

MarionBroome

The road to open access – an editor’s story

US-based editor, Professor Marion Broome, has written an editorial about open access and what it means for her journal.

Read more >


Marion E Broome, PhD, RN, FAAN, is Editor-in-Chief of Nursing Outlook, the official journal of the American Academy of Nursing and the Council for the Advancement of Nursing Science. Here she recalls the chain of events that led her to write Open access publishing: A disruptive innovation, an editorial which appears in the journal’s March/April issue.

SeparatorFINAL

I distinctly remember sitting in the audience of a conference for INANE (International Academy of Nurse Editors) in 2009, listening to a speaker talk about the new publishing vistas we could expect to see within the next five years. Open access publishing was one of those ‘new vistas’. My first thought after his presentation was “I guess this editor gig (which I love) will only last another two years or so.” My second thought was to listen closely, do more reading about these various ‘vistas’ and try to stay ahead of some of the changes, just in case….

NursingOutlookCover

The open access movement, and most of all people’s opinions about it, had always fascinated me. It seemed to me that the extremes of opinions on either side were not based entirely in facts or reality. And, as an editor, it also seemed to me that the world of big publishing (i.e. Elsevier) was increasingly taking this movement seriously and becoming more author-focused – which, of course, makes my job as editor much easier! For instance, moving accepted papers to ‘in press’ status featured on the journal’s website and available to readers prior to print publication (and very soon after acceptance) has been one especially popular author-centric change.

Like many editors, thinking about an editorial topic that will be of interest to readers is always a challenge. Yet, in this case, two weeks before I decided to write Open access publishing: A disruptive innovation, a faculty member approached me about paying her publication fee. What I heard was a very biased presentation for open access and against big publishing. I spoke with another individual who, while getting a dossier ready for promotion, submitted a paper to one of the predatory online journals which had promised him ‘rapid and free dissemination of his important ideas that would reach all the key people in his field’. These convergent experiences provided the stimulation for my editorial!

As I developed the text, it occurred to me that given how fast the field of open access is changing, I needed someone who is closer to it in terms of what is new, accurate, etc., so I asked my publisher, Nina Milton, to read it over and see if I was missing or misinterpreting anything. She provided some additional resources, which I reviewed.  I also re-read selected articles on the blog the scholarly kitchen, which I think provides a balanced perspective on this and many other topics. Then I finished the editorial and the rest, as they say, is history.  I enjoy writing useful editorials that allow me to help people update their knowledge and think about both sides of an issue. This editorial, given all the emails and comments I have received, clearly achieved that! What more could an editor ask for?

Author biography

Marion E Broome, PhD, RN, FAAN, is Dean and Distinguished Professor at Indiana University School of Nursing. She is a leader in nursing research, service and education and has helped pioneer the treatment of pain in children. She founded the Society of Pediatric Nurses and has been inducted as a charter member of the Sigma Theta Tau International Nurse Researcher Hall of Fame.

Gemma Deakin

How important is the publisher version of the article to researchers?

A recent study has discovered that the majority of researchers want to access the publisher’s final version of the article, i.e. the official version that includes the volume and year.

Read more >


Gemma Deakin | Senior Research Executive, Elsevier

In the past, when articles were largely only available in print, it was safe to assume that most researchers were accessing the publisher’s version. If readers wanted to double check that, getting hold of the author’s manuscript would take much longer than it does nowadays (i.e. finding the contact details for the author, writing to them, waiting for a response). However now that articles are available online in multiple formats (author manuscript, pre-print servers, subject repositories) it is reasonable to question how many researchers still want to access the final publisher version and, in addition, whether they are confident they can distinguish between different versions.

In a recent researcher study carried out by Elsevier’s Research and Academic Relations team, it was found that the majority of researchers wanted to access the publisher’s final version, i.e. the official version that included the volume and year. This was particularly the case when researchers were citing an article (83% indicated they would want the final publisher version for this activity).

However, when researchers were undertaking other activities, i.e. those not related to authoring such as general browsing, they were less concerned about the publisher’s version. For example, when browsing to keep up-to-date only 57% wanted to access the final version, 20% were happy with the author’s manuscript after peer review, 11% the pre-reviewed manuscript, with 25% saying that the version did not matter (note that respondents could select more than one option).

Researchers prefer the publisher version of the article for all tasks and it is especially important when citing the article.

Given the importance of accessing the final version in specific situations, it might be expected that researchers would be confident they could identify the final version. When asked how confident they were, only 58% were confident.

There was variation across subject areas. Mathematicians, life scientists and earth/environmental scientists were most confident they could distinguish between different versions. Least confident were computer scientists and those in medicine & allied health. Computer scientists are less concerned about the version being used so it makes sense that they would be less likely to distinguish between versions, whereas in contrast medical researchers are more likely to want the final version, so not being able to tell is a greater issue for them.

These results suggest that publishers and importantly, repository managers, are not making it explicitly clear to researchers which version the researcher is accessing.

Inez-van-Korlaar-PhD-square-150x150

Postdoc free access to ScienceDirect program returns

Success of the initial pilot – and an increasingly competitive job market – convince Elsevier to once again offer postdocs access to ScienceDirect, this time with fewer restrictions.

Read more >


Inez van Korlaar | Director of Project Management for STM Journals Marketing, Elsevier

Last year, we offered selected scholars unlimited complimentary access to all our journals and books on ScienceDirect, for up to six months. To qualify they had to have recently received their PhDs and not yet found a research position,  In response to the success of the program– and an increasingly competitive job market – we are bringing back the Postdoc Free Access program with fewer restrictions.

In 2012, the editors and publisher of the Tetrahedron chemistry journals conceived the idea for a program to help postdocs stay competitive in between research positions. Last December, we ran a pilot program granting free access to our books and journals on ScienceDirect to 64 unemployed researchers. Of the 176 applicants, 40 percent came from Asia and 34 percent from Europe. One of the recipients, Daniele Vergara of the University of Salento in Italy, wrote:

"As a postdoc fellow in biological sciences, this program gives me the chance to maintain a vital scientific network, to read papers and write grants. In the absence of help from government and local institutions, the Elsevier program was a great experience, an innovative way to support postdocs during their research career."

Some recipients have used the free access to prepare grant proposals. Miguel Pedroza, who has a PhD in enology from the University of Castilla-La Mancha in Spain, wrote:

"During the last six months I have been using the free access to prepare a research project for pursuing a Post-doctoral stay in Europe. This Elsevier program has provided me with an efficient resource to conduct a consistent literature review for my research proposal, while keeping me updated of the most recent publications in my field. I am certainly grateful with the people involved in the Free Access project. I hope that this kind of initiative continues."

And virologist Ullas P. Thankappan of the National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences in Bangalore, India, wrote:

"I accessed a lot of articles on neglected tropical diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis, and several reviews related to cancer biology. Unfortunately, the geographic location I live in has a high burden of infectious diseases and cancers, but the facilities for their early identification remain rather limited here. With the help of the information gained from the articles, I have been working to develop research proposals on the development of cost-effective and rapid diagnostic technologies which would help the local laboratories to detect these diseases at an early stage."

Although we were able to help out these researchers, many others have missed out because they did not qualify for our criteria or learned about the offer too late. Based on the feedback we have received, we are pleased to announce that this summer, we will repeat the offer. Even better, we have extended the application period and relaxed our criteria to allow more researchers to apply.

In 2012, the main reason for non-qualification was that applicants did not yet have a postdoc position after completing their PhD (27 percent of applicants). This told us that a program like this is just as needed for recent PhD graduates as for people with postdoc experience. We therefore now allow everyone with a recent PhD (< 5 years since graduation) to apply. In addition, we have extended the application period to three months, with the application period open until August 31.

What your postdocs need to do

To qualify, candidates must complete a form verifying their credentials by August 31, 2013. Once approved, they will receive a personal code allowing access to ScienceDirect. Qualifying criteria are:

  • Postdoctoral researchers who have received their PhD within in the past five years.
  • Candidates must have completed the last research position (either PhD research or a postdoc or equivalent) on or after December 31, 2012, or have a position that will end before August 31, 2013.

Applicants should submit a scanned image of a letter from their last academic mentor or advisor that states the position held and the date on which the position ended or will end. For more on the program and an application, visit elsevier.com/postdocfreeaccess 

A version of this article first appeared in Elsevier Connect.

The Journal of Academic Librarianship

Journal dedicates issue to open access debate

The Journal of Academic Librarianship focused on open access in its January issue. Here two co-Editors explain why.

Read more >


Wendi Arant Kaspar and Wyoma vanDuinkerken | Co-Editors of The Journal of Academic Librarianship

Wendi Arant Kaspar

Wendi Arant Kaspar

With the first issue of 2013, The Journal of Academic Librarianship (JAL) focused on the open access (OA) debate. As new editors, we hoped that this issue would communicate the diversity of opinions and experiences that the topic merits. Those invited to contribute were not only librarians but publishers, policymakers and academic professionals in a variety of disciplines. The majority of the contributors supported the OA movement, but there was variance in terms of how OA is defined, what it should look like, and the ideal model for implementing and sustaining it. 

We achieved part of our goal of bringing JAL readers a balanced view of the OA debate.

OA is a noble goal for scholarship, based upon free information for all, furthering research and scholarship, and dissemination of information. However, some fundamental aspects of OA are often overlooked. A perfect example is provided by one of the contributors. He refers to a compelling term: “digital advantage,” an elegant term for a messy sociopolitical issue. It illuminates a number of assumptions made about OA and scholarly communication and is used to address the dynamics of expanding OA into developing countries.

Wyoma vanDuinkerken

Wyoma vanDuinkerken

Another article discussed the concern over universities mandating graduate students to place their Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETDs) into institutional repositories, losing their copyrights. We were also fortunate to have Mark J. McCabe, Christopher M. Snyder and Anna Fagin discuss OA vs. traditional journal pricing. David J. Solomon examined the past 20 years of the digital distribution of academic journals and their impact on scholarly communication, while Alicia Wise presented a commercial publisher’s perspective from Elsevier. Several authors contributed to a broad spectrum of perspectives on OA outside the United States, including Saskia Woutersen-Windhouwer, Dehua Hu, Aijing Luo, Haizia Liu, Sarika Sawant, Rajiv Nariani, Sandra Miguel, Paola C. Bongiovani, Nancy D. Gómez, Gema Bueno-de-la-Fuente and Williams E. Nwagwu.

We hope that this JAL issue will continue to cultivate and amplify a thoughtful and open conversation about OA among the scholarly community of libraries, researchers, faculty, publishers, and their representative associations. We encourage letters to the editor about the articles in the OA issue, and we will publish feedback and commentary throughout 2013 to continue the dialogue.

Visit ScienceDirect to view this issue.

This article first appeared in Elsevier's LibraryConnect.

Green-route-sticker

What is the green route?

If you have been following recent developments in open access (OA), you will have heard mentioned the different OA ‘routes’ available such as gold or green. Confused? You are not alone, so in this article we explore Green Open Access and what it means – not only for researchers, but for your journal and the wider […]

Read more >


If you have been following recent developments in open access (OA), you will have heard mentioned the different OA 'routes' available such as gold or green. Confused? You are not alone, so in this article we explore Green Open Access and what it means - not only for researchers, but for your journal and the wider public.

What is Green Open Access (OA)?

The term Green OA refers to an author posting a version of their article (usually as an accepted manuscript) on their personal or institutional website. It is essentially self-archiving of their research. It means that in addition to subscribers accessing and using their final published article, anyone in their institution, or indeed outside, can also access and read the draft version of their paper.

Green OA is dependent on the subscription model. The costs incurred during submission, peer-review process and subsequent publishing and dissemination are all covered by subscriptions. This is different to the Gold Open Access model where authors cover the costs associated with publication, and their final published articles are immediately available and permanently free for readers to access and reuse.

Elsevier’s perspective

Our posting policy allows authors publishing in an Elsevier journal to voluntarily add their accepted author manuscript to either their personal or institutional website.

However, if a particular institution or funding body has a mandate or systematically organizes posting, this can have an impact on the sustainability of the journals involved. In this case, we require a posting agreement between the institution or funder and Elsevier. This agreement allows the maximum benefit for the public - who can access the research from repositories - while allowing the journals to remain sustainable and operational in the future.

More information about our policies can be found on our website.

What does this mean for authors?

When submitting to a journal, authors will increasingly need to ensure they comply with new OA policies and mandates which have details about Green OA or self-archiving.

We are actively engaging with funding bodies and institutions to establish posting agreements that will allow us to test and learn how best to support Green OA. For example, we have a long-standing arrangement with the National Institutes of Health (NIH), through which Elsevier deposits around 18,000 manuscripts into PubMed Central on an annual basis.

We have also established agreements with organizations such as The World Bank and World Health Organization which allow employees to post to open repositories.

These agreements have been designed to allow authors to continue submitting and publishing in Elsevier journals, while we ensure that the journals remain sustainable, both now and in the future.

How does the public benefit?

Green OA is an alternative route to enable the public to access research. Repositories such as PubMed Central and World Health Organization provide another viable way for people to search for, and find, research. In addition to these types of repositories, Elsevier has funded an Open Archives initiative. This enables archived material in 82 journals to become open access after an embargo period. This period varies depending on the journal in question, but is normally between 12-48 months. For example, all Cell Press articles are free to access after a period of 12 months.

Sustainable Green Open Access

Our aim is to ensure we continue to facilitate access to research. For us this means working with institutions, governments and funders to find a workable solution, sustainable for our journals, which will help to maintain such access long into the future.

Author biography

David Tempest

David Tempest
UNIVERSAL ACCESS TEAM LEADER
David is involved in strategy development and implementation of access initiatives. In addition, he acts as a key contact between Elsevier and funding organizations, universities and research institutions around the world. He has worked at Elsevier for more than 16 years, initially in editorial and marketing positions before taking on the management of the scientometric research and market analysis department. He has a BSc in pharmacology from the University of Sunderland and an MBA with distinction from Oxford Brookes University.


Publishing-sticker

How authors can publish open access in your journal

Since 2010, we have been busy scaling our services.  Alongside traditional subscription publishing, authors are now offered a greater choice of open access (OA) options. These developments include the introduction of our Open Access Articles program, now available in 1,500 journals. What is Open Access Articles? This Elsevier program gives authors a choice when publishing […]

Read more >


Since 2010, we have been busy scaling our services.  Alongside traditional subscription publishing, authors are now offered a greater choice of open access (OA) options. These developments include the introduction of our Open Access Articles program, now available in 1,500 journals.

What is Open Access Articles?

Journal of Hepatology

The Journal of Hepatology, one of our Open Access Articles journals.

This Elsevier program gives authors a choice when publishing in a traditional subscription journal; they can either make their research available only to subscribers, or decide to publish open access. If they choose the open access route, upon publication the article will immediately be available to both subscribers and the wider public via our ScienceDirect platform. The article will also have additional user rights attached which govern how readers can use and reuse the article.

Journals included in this program are also referred to in the industry as ‘hybrid’ as they publish both subscription and OA content. This means authors can continue to publish in indexed, quality journals important for their individual communities,  while having the option to publish OA and comply with any new policies or mandates by their funding bodies or institutions.

After acceptance, authors can indicate their publication preference and funding body information.  The Open Access Articles option does not introduce any additional workload for editors or reviewers and has been introduced to give authors more publishing options.

Publication fees

When publishing in a subscription journal, costs associated with publication and dissemination are covered by subscribers. When publishing OA, where readers can access the content for free, authors or their funders are asked to cover the costs associated with publication. This is referred to as an open access publishing fee.

Elsevier publishes journals encompassing the full breadth of scientific research and the full range of research outcomes. As such, our OA publication fees reflect this diversity and range from $500USD to $5,000USD. In some cases, funding bodies will reimburse these fees for authors.

We recognize the potential conflict of interest when offering such a program in a subscription journal. We have a strict no-double-dipping policy and do not charge subscribers for OA content.

User licenses

Authors who choose to publish via our Open Access Articles program will also get a choice of user licenses. These determine how readers can use and reuse their articles. For further details about what this means for authors see our article Understanding the fine print: what changes when publishing open access?.

Other OA options for authors

International Journal of Surgery Case ReportsOpen Access Articles is only one of a number of publishing options we offer our authors. We also have more than 35 open access journals where all articles are open access, as well as agreements with institutions regarding self-archiving in repositories.

Our first open access journal, International Journal of Surgery Case Reports was launched in 2010. Since then we have used a test and learn approach and have been working with the community to help facilitate the successful implementation of OA. We hope that the Open Access Articles option available in 1,500 journals will continue to give authors a choice in how their research is published.

Author biography

Els Bosma

Els Bosma

Els Bosma
PROGRAM DIRECTOR OPEN ACCESS
Els is leading the open access program for the Science, Technology and Medicine (STM) Journal division at Elsevier. She is responsible for accelerating the roll out of the STM open access journal portfolio, which includes supporting the rapid expansion of OA journals and improved hybrid open access offerings. Els was a United Nations (FAO) Field Officer before moving into publishing with Elsevier 12 years ago. Since then she has been responsible for introducing and rolling out the Elsevier online submission systems, Vice President of Publishing and Marketing at Cell Press and Publishing Director for the Elsevier Chemistry portfolio. Els has a Master’s in Marine Biology.


Fine-printing-sticker

Understanding the fine print: what changes when publishing open access

With the introduction of open access publishing and the move into e-only, there is now greater focus upon the rights of the author and the rights of the reader (user) in journal publishing. This article will help to explain what has changed and how this impacts on the publication and use of your research. Author […]

Read more >


With the introduction of open access publishing and the move into e-only, there is now greater focus upon the rights of the author and the rights of the reader (user) in journal publishing. This article will help to explain what has changed and how this impacts on the publication and use of your research.

Author rights and permissions

In order for a publisher to do their job of publishing and disseminating research articles, publishing rights are required. In a subscription journal, these rights are traditionally determined by a copyright transfer, which enables clear administration of rights and the use of content in new technological ways. Even when Elsevier obtains copyright transfers, authors retain scholarly rights to post and use their articles for a wide range of purposes.

However, for open access articles we use an exclusive licensing agreement, which applies to all our Gold Open Access content. While granting publishing and distribution rights to us, this exclusive licensing agreement means that authors retain copyright alongside the scholarly usage rights we have always supported.

User rights and permissions

The exclusive licensing agreement between publisher and author only covers one side of the picture. Users or readers also need to be clear on how they can use the article. For subscription journals, the online user rights are generally defined by subscription access agreements.

For all open access articles, whether published in an Elsevier open access journal or via our Open Access Articles option, we currently offer various user licenses. The choice is dependent on the journal in which the author chooses to publish and specific details can be found on the journal's homepage. These licenses allow readers to not only read and download an article, but to reuse it for other defined purposes. The new user licenses are designed to make it easier for readers to understand how they can use an open access article. They are provided by the Creative Commons organization and are now being adopted into academic publishing. We continue to test and learn about author preferences and business impacts, and will refine our approach as we learn more. One size does not fit all academic communities and journals.

For all user licenses offered, it remains fundamental that the author receives full acknowledgment and credit for their work and that a link to the original published version of their article is featured.

So what is the difference between user licenses?

Different licenses will appeal to different academic communities and authors.  It is important that an author decides what is relevant to them and what this means for their own research. We are continuously working with our authors to provide the best range of license options. Below we define some of the more common user licenses available:

  • CC BY: This is the broadest usage license and allows for the widest possible use of the research, including commercial use.  Users are permitted to:
    • Copy and distribute the article
    • Create extracts, abstracts, translations and new works from the article
    • Alter and revise the text of the article
    • Make commercial use of the article - provided the author is attributed and is not represented as endorsing the use made of the work
    • Text or data mine the article
  • CC BY-NC-SA: This allows for the same uses as CC BY but only for non-commercial purposes.  Further, any new derivative works must be made available on the same user license conditions.
  • CC BY-NC-ND: This allows users to copy and distribute the article, provided this is not done for commercial purposes and the article is not changed or edited in any way. Again, the author must be attributed and must not be represented as endorsing the use made of the work.  This does not allow users to text or data mine the article.

For our Open Archives content – archived content that we make available after an embargo period - we use a bespoke user license. This permits users to access, download, copy, display and redistribute documents as well as adapt, translate, text and data mine, provided that the original authors and source are credited and that the reuse is not for commercial purposes.

New developments

As the Creative Commons user licenses were not specifically developed for academic publishing, there have been some concerns raised by authors and publishers about ‘grey’ areas. These relate to the need to protect an article from plagiarism and to preserve its scientific integrity.  In addition, concerns have been raised about the possibility of commercial advertising being associated with research content without authorisation.

To help address these concerns, the International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers, STM, is contemplating the release of a more specific user license designed for scholarly communication. This would likely:

  • Permit scholarly non-commercial use
  • Prohibit the creation of derivative products
  • Expressly permit text and data-mining for academic purposes and translation

It may also be included in our current offering of user licenses for open access content.

Author choice

While we look forward to the new developments and continued evolution of copyright and licensing, we have an on-going commitment to provide researchers with a choice about how their work is disseminated and used. By offering a variety of user licenses we hope to better understand authors’ needs and tailor our future approach accordingly.

Author biographies

Jessica Clark

Jessica Clark
SENIOR COMPANY COUNSEL
Jessica’s primary focus is publishing policy issues.  Jessica started her career at a law firm in London and worked for four years for Penguin Books before joining Elsevier. She is a member of the Copyright Committee at the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers.


Federica Rosetta

Federica Rosetta
ACCESS RELATIONSHIP MANAGER, EUROPE
Federica is involved in the strategy development and implementation of initiatives and mechanisms aimed at enabling the broadest possible access to quality research content. In her role she acts as a liaison between Elsevier and governments, funding bodies, universities and research institutions in Europe. Her experience in scientific publishing, earned during nine years at Elsevier, spans marketing communications, publishing and business development. Her passion for publishing traces back to her Master’s degree in Literature, Press and Publishing History.


Compliance-sticker

Complying with open access policies and mandates

April is set to be a busy month for open access (OA), particularly for UK authors. In fact, on April 1st new OA policies were introduced by both the Research Councils UK (RCUK) and the Wellcome Trust.  The UK is one of the only countries to have a national OA policy so all eyes are […]

Read more >


April is set to be a busy month for open access (OA), particularly for UK authors. In fact, on April 1st new OA policies were introduced by both the Research Councils UK (RCUK) and the Wellcome Trust.  The UK is one of the only countries to have a national OA policy so all eyes are focused on the UK to see how successful this will be.

However, one important question arises: will authors publishing in Elsevier journals still be compliant with the new UK policies?

The short answer to this is yes! Elsevier has been actively engaged with funding bodies and institutions to help facilitate the successful implementation of OA policies and mandates. In fact, we have established agreements with major funding bodies, including RCUK and the Wellcome Trust, to ensure authors can comply.

We have also been busy scaling our Gold OA services to offer authors greater publication choices - 1,500 of our established journals offer OA publication options and we have more than 35 open access journals. With each of these options, authors can choose from a range of publication licenses, including Creative Commons' CC BY. These options allow us to test and learn about author preferences and business impacts. With the knowledge we gain we will continue to refine our approach.

We have also developed a Green Open Access policy, further details of which are available in the article What is the green route?. Under the terms of this policy, when funding is not available, authors for whom we have an agreement with their funder or institution will still be able to publish OA by self-archiving their accepted author manuscripts after journal-specific embargo periods.

Figure 1. Publishers Association decision tree (endorsed by BIS and RCUK)

What does this mean for my journal?

Simply said, it means that authors will be able to continue to publish in your journal and comply with a variety of OA policies or mandates which will vary depending on their funding body, their location and, of course, their subject area.

Elsevier’s aim is to try to help facilitate the successful implementation of open access by offering authors choices. We have taken steps to streamline our publishing processes and help improve awareness of OA options within our journals.

We have also ensured our agreements with funders and institutions allow our journals to operate in a sustainable way. We support both open access and subscription business models and will scale our services as the needs of both authors and the wider community develop and change.

For further information on our funding body and institutional agreements visit www.elsevier.com/openaccess.

Author biography

Alicia Wise

Alicia Wise
DIRECTOR OF UNIVERSAL ACCESS
Alicia holds a PhD in Anthropology from the University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill. She joined Elsevier in June 2010 to lead the Universal Access team. In this role she is responsible for our access strategy and policies, for launching and monitoring access pilot projects, and for building relationships with other stakeholders in the scholarly communication landscape who share our interest in broadening access. The Universal Access team works closely with colleagues throughout Elsevier and is a catalyst for information exchange and innovation.


Open-Access-sticker

Welcome to this Open Access Special Report

Surf any news website or pick up any newspaper and it is likely you won’t have to read far before the words open access appear. That has never been more true than this month as new open access policies from RCUK and the Wellcome Trust come into effect. This Open Access Special Report has been […]

Read more >


Surf any news website or pick up any newspaper and it is likely you won’t have to read far before the words open access appear.

That has never been more true than this month as new open access policies from RCUK and the Wellcome Trust come into effect.

This Open Access Special Report has been developed to run through some of those changes and update you on open access developments at Elsevier.

In Complying with open access policies and mandates you can discover more about the OA options we offer and how we are engaging with institutions and funding bodies to ensure compliance with recent regulations.

Understanding the fine print: what changes when publishing open access provides a detailed look at the licenses governing author and reader rights in an open access world. We outline the Creative Commons licenses we have on offer and turn our thoughts to the future.

In How authors can publish open access in your journal we discuss our Open Access Articles program, currently available in 1,500 of our journals. This initiative allows authors to choose the open access path when publishing in our subscription journals.

And last but not least, in What is the green route? we look at what Green Open Access means, not only for the author but for your journal and the general public.

This edition also marks the launch of a new development for Editors’ Update – a Special Report.  This format allows us to streamline our usual content and focus on a particular topic in the news. These periodic Special Reports will be published in addition to our regular quarterly editions. If there is a topic you would like us to highlight, please do let us know by emailing us at editorsupdate2@elsevier.com.

As always, your thoughts on any of the articles in this edition are very welcome and we provide an opportunity to post your comments at the end of each piece.

Issue 39 of Editors’ Update is scheduled for a June release so, until then, thanks very much for reading and I hope to hear from you soon.

Open-access-model

Research4Life_logo

Research4Life Significantly Expands Developing World Access

Building a viable research culture in developing countries takes more than just access; it calls for training in how to find and use scientific resources, sufficient bandwidth, author workshops and much more. But access certainly forms a critical foundation on which to build. In mid May, Research4Life announced that the content available through its collaborative […]

Read more >


Building a viable research culture in developing countries takes more than just access; it calls for training in how to find and use scientific resources, sufficient bandwidth, author workshops and much more.

But access certainly forms a critical foundation on which to build. In mid May, Research4Life announced that the content available through its collaborative public-private partnership has dramatically increased since 2011 to 17,000 peer-reviewed scientific journals, books and databases. Thanks to this rise, more than 6,000 institutions in more than 100 developing countries now have free or low cost access to peer-reviewed online content. The sharp increase is largely a result of Elsevier’s contribution of 7,000 books this past year, in addition to the existing access to Scopus and more than 2,000 journals in the collection.

Research4Life is a unique public-private partnership with four UN agencies, four discipline specific programs (HINARI, AGORA, OARE, ARDI), 150 publishers and technology partners such as Microsoft. And as an avid user of Research4Life, Dr Patrick Kyamanywa, Dean, Faculty of Medicine National University of Rwanda, has particularly welcomed the addition of the ebooks, “A culture of evidence-based practice can no longer be an option but the rule. The publishers involved in the HINARI project should be praised for their commitment to improving access to information to students, researchers and practitioners in some of the poorest countries in the world.  Elsevier appears to be leading the way and our hope is that other publishers will follow suit and help to achieve the target of ‘Health Information For All by 2015’.”

Making a Difference, Stories from the field

Ten years ago, Elsevier was one of the six founding publishers and continues to serve as a driving force behind Research4Life, contributing a quarter of the content and a team of colleagues working to develop the partnership through their technical, communications and industry expertise. There is no room for complacency, however.  Access does not mean active usage or even a thriving research culture. But through programs like the Elsevier Foundation’s Innovative Libraries in Developing Countries, we are able to further support infrastructure building, medical library needs assessments, preservation of unique research and, most critically, training, such as the MLA’s Librarians without Borders program, which has given thousands of researchers, doctors, nurses and librarians training in how to use Research4Life resources.

Research4Life recently celebrated its 10th anniversary by holding a competition for the best stories from the field.  The resulting case study book, Making a Difference, maps the evolution of research cultures in 10 different countries. Below you can read an extract from just one of the inspiring articles it contains. Dr Arun Neopane in Nepal shares how access to Research4Life enabled him to transform his annual hospital publication into a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

CASE STUDY: Research out of reach

In his role as a pediatrician at Kathmandu’s Shree Birendra Hospital, Arun Neopane is a voracious consumer of journal papers. This passion led to his appointment in 2003 as the hospital’s Officer in Charge and Editor of the Journal of Shree Birendra Hospital (JSBH). Over the next few years, Dr Neopane led the conversion of JSBH from an annual publication with news, views and hospital updates to a biannual peer-reviewed scientific journal – with original papers, review articles and case reports – and made it available electronically through Nepal Journals OnLine (NepJOL).

Despite having subscriptions to a small number of international journals, the hospital was desperately short of the up-to-date medical literature that doctors need to maintain and upgrade their skills and knowledge. As is the case in other low-income countries, university libraries and research organizations in Nepal do not have the budgets to pay for important peer-reviewed journals. Critically, Dr Neopane and his team convinced the hospital administration in 2007 to invest in an internet connection. This unblocked the window to the wider world of medical research, but, without access to journals, a key component remained locked. The hospital staff could now read abstracts via the PubMed database, but the complete papers – crucial for the understanding required to incorporate research results into practice – remained out of reach.

It was the new internet connection that led Dr Neopane to Research4Life’s HINARI Program. The institution was granted access to HINARI in February 2008 and it hasn’t looked back since.

“I can remember those days,” says Dr Neopane, “when we had to go to the library and sit in the archives section turning page after page, reading all the abstracts and getting them Xeroxed, and finally coming back to square one, frustrated by the literature search and not finding what one needed. Gone are those days for doctors now, and all because of free access to medical literature through HINARI.”

Better clinical treatment

Waiting for treatment: Research4Life’s HINARI program is helping to improve the standard of medical research and practice for Nepalese people. Photo courtesy WHO/Tom Pietrasik.

The most concrete result of the hospital’s access to HINARI is better clinical treatment that has directly improved patient health. For example, research published in Pediatrics (the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics) showed that zinc is essential in treating diarrheal diseases in children, mitigating illness and even saving lives. Ironically, although some of this work had been performed in Nepal, Nepalese institutions could not afford the subscriptions to the journal and the country’s doctors did not have access to the results. Using HINARI, Nepalese pediatricians discovered the information and changed their treatment of diarrhea, saving many lives and improving the quality of life of many sick children.

Dr Neopane

In gaining access to Research4Life programs, Kathmandu’s Shree Birendra Hospital has not only lifted the standard of medical research in Nepal, but has also improved – and even saved – the lives of many of its patients.

Beyond better clinical practice based on others’ research, HINARI has transformed the way that medical research is performed, not only at Shree Birendra Hospital but also for the Nepalese medical community as a whole. And it was because of HINARI that Dr Neopane was able to advance his own research. In March 2007, he was appointed Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Nepal Paediatric Society (JNPS), the oldest specialty journal in the country. Launched in 1981 and published annually, JNPS had struggled as a credible scientific publication. With a small editorial team, Dr Neopane has transformed it into a thrice-yearly, internationally recognized, peer-reviewed journal with its own website. HINARI made all this possible by allowing Dr Neopane and his colleagues to learn from leading journals.

Dr Neopane’s achievements were further recognized with his appointment as General Secretary of the recently established Nepal Association of Medical Editors. He describes Nepal’s medical research as still in its infancy, but he is confident that it will progress from the current work, which mostly comprises clinical features and epidemiology, to more complex work based on molecular biology and genetics.

HINARI has fundamentally changed the research landscape in Nepal, with five national journals now indexed in PubMed and many more aspiring to this (including JNPS, which was considered for PubMed in February 2012). Internationally renowned journals such as BMJ, the New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet occasionally publish articles by Nepalese researchers. Without HINARI, such achievements would have remained a dream.

Author Biography

Ylann Schemm

Ylann Schemm
CORPORATE RELATIONS MANAGER
Ylann Schemm manages Elsevier’s corporate responsibility and partnerships program which focuses on research access in the developing world, promoting women in science, popularizing an understanding of peer review and inspiring early career researchers to become ambassadors of sound science. She is the Chair of Research4Life’s Communications and Marketing team which promotes this unique public-private partnership providing free or low cost access to researchers in the developing world. Ylann also runs the Elsevier Foundation’s New Scholars program – which supports projects to expand the participation of women in STEM and create a more family friendly academia – as well as the Innovative Libraries in Developing Countries program with capacity-building projects in science, technology and medicine—through training, education, infrastructure digitization and preservation of information.


Henk Moed

The Effect of Open Access upon Citation Impact

Does open access publishing increase citation rates?
Studies conducted in this area have not yet adequately controlled for various kinds of sampling bias.

Read more >


Henk F Moed | Senior Scientific Advisor, Elsevier

Does open access publishing increase citation rates?

Studies conducted in this area have not yet adequately controlled for various kinds of sampling bias.  Read on...

The debate about the effects of open access upon the visibility or impact of scientific publications started with the publication by Steve Lawrence (2001) in the journal Nature, entitled ‘Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact’, analyzing conference proceedings in the field computer science. Open access is not used to indicate the publisher business model based on the ‘authors pay’ principle, but, more generally, in the sense of being freely available via the Web. From a methodological point of view, the debate focuses on biases, control groups, sampling, and the degree to which conclusions from case studies can be generalized. This note does not give a complete overview of studies that were published during the past decade but highlights key events.

In 2004, Stevan Harnad and Tim Brody (2004) claimed that physics articles submitted as pre-print to ArXiv (a preprint server covering mainly physics, hosted by Cornell University), and later published in peer reviewed journals, generated a citation impact up to 400% higher than papers in the same journals that had not been posted in ArXiv. Michael Kurtz and his colleagues (Kurtz et al., 2005) found in a study on astronomy evidence of a selection bias – authors post their best articles freely on the Web -  and an early view effect – articles deposited as preprints are published earlier and are therefore cited more often. Henk Moed (2007) found for articles in solid state physics that these two effects may explain a large part, if not all of the differences in citation impact between journal articles posted as pre-print in ArXiv and papers that were not.

In a randomized control trail related to open versus subscription-based access of articles in psychological journals published by one single publisher, Phil Davis and his colleagues (Davis et al, 2008) did not find a significant effect of open access on citations. In order to correct for selection bias, a new study by Harnad and his team (Gargouri et al., 2010) compared self-selective self archiving with mandatory self archiving in four particular research institutions. They argued that, although the first type may be subject to a quality bias, the second can be assumed to occur regardless of the quality of the papers. They found that the OA advantage proved just as high for both, and concluded that it is real, independent and causal. It is greater for more citable articles then it is for less significant ones, resulting from users self-selecting what to use and cite. But they also found for the four institutions that the percentage of their publication output actually self-archived was, at most, 60%, and that for some it did not increase when their OA regime was transformed from non-mandatory into mandatory.  Therefore, what the authors labeled as ‘mandated OA’ is in reality, to a large extent, subject to the same type of self selection bias as non-mandated OA.

On the other hand, it should be noted that all citation based studies mentioned above seem to have the following bias: they were based on citation analysis carried out in a citation index with a selective coverage of the good, international journals in their fields. Analyzing citation impact in such a database is, in a sense, a bit similar to measuring the extent to which people are willing to leave their car unused during the weekend by interviewing mainly persons on a Saturday at the parking place of a large warehouse outside town. Those who publish in the selected set of good, international journals – a necessary condition for citations to be recorded in the OA advantage studies mentioned above – will tend to have access to these journals anyway. In other words: there may be a positive effect of OA upon citation impact, but it is not visible in the database used. The use of a citation index with more comprehensive coverage would enable one to examine the effect of the citation impact of covered journals upon OA citation advantage; for instance: is such an advantage more visible in lower impact or more nationally oriented journals than it is in international top journals?

Analyzing article downloads (usage) is a complementary and, in principle, valuable method for studying the effects of OA. In fact, the study by Phil Davis and colleagues mentioned above did apply this method and reported that OA articles were downloaded more often than papers with subscription-based access. However, significant limitations of this method are that not all publication archives provide reliable download statistics, and that different publication archives that do generate such statistics may apply different ways to record and/or count downloads, so that results are not directly comparable across archives. The implication seems to be that usage studies of OA advantage comparing OA with non-OA articles can be applied only in ‘hybrid’ environments, in which publishers offer authors who submit a manuscript both an ‘authors pay’ and a ‘readers pay’ option. But this type of OA may not be representative for OA in general, as it disregards self-archiving in OA repositories that are being created in research institutions all over the world.

An extended version of this paper will be published soon in the Elsevier publication Research Trends.


References

Davis, P.M., Lewenstein, B.V., Simon, D.H., Booth, J.G., Connolly, M.J.L. (2008). Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: Randomised controlled trial. BMJ, 337 (7665), 343-345.

Gargouri, Y., Hajjem, C., Lariviére, V., Gingras, Y., Carr, L., Brody, T., Harnad, S. (2010). Self-selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research. PLoS ONE, 5 (10), art. no. e13636.

Harnad, S., Brody, T. (2004). Comparing the impact of open access (OA) vs. non-OA articles in the same journals. D-Lib Magazine, 10(6).

Kurtz, M.J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C., Demleitner, M., Henneken, E., Murray, S.S. (2005). The effect of use and access on citations. Information Processing & Management, 41, 1395–1402.

Lawrence, S. (2001). Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact. Nature, 411 (6837), p. 521.

Moed, H.F. (2007). The effect of “Open Access” upon citation impact: An analysis of ArXiv’s Condensed Matter Section. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 2047-2054.

OA Shutters

Experience from the Field – Open Access Article Options

As discussed earlier in this issue, Elsevier’s open access article options offer authors the opportunity to make individual articles within subscription journals available open access. Biophysical Journal has experienced a reasonable uptake of this option and we asked Editor-in-Chief, Professor Edward Egelman, for his thoughts. He says: “While I do not view the open access […]

Read more >


As discussed earlier in this issue, Elsevier’s open access article options offer authors the opportunity to make individual articles within subscription journals available open access.

Biophysical Journal has experienced a reasonable uptake of this option and we asked Editor-in-Chief, Professor Edward Egelman, for his thoughts. He says: “While I do not view the open access option that we offer as highly significant, it remains a useful source of revenue for Biophysical Journal.”

Edward Egelman

Edward Egelman

He adds: “We have some papers, where research has been supported by HHMI or the Wellcome Trust, which require the authors to use our open access option. This option involves a payment for immediate open access for that paper, as opposed to our normal policy of providing access to subscribers for one year, after which all of our papers are freely available to everyone. If we look at the last 24 papers published in Biophysical Journal with open access, only seven of these have been supported by HHMI or Wellcome. The rest have used other funds to pay for this open access, and we do not know if the open access was mandated by the source of the funds.”

Biophysical JournalIn terms of the importance of sponsored articles within the field, Professor Egelman is yet to be convinced. He says: “The reason that I feel that the open access option is not terribly important within the biophysical community is that the vast majority of people who are reading and citing our papers within the first year after publication are either at institutions which have subscriptions to the journal, or are members of the Biophysical Society, where access to the Biophysical journal is one of the benefits of membership. I do not see many individuals who are involved in biophysical research who would not have such access to the journal.”

Keeping it fair and square

In relation to Professor Egelman’s comments, it is important that we discuss the element of pricing. Currently, Elsevier charges a standard charge for sponsorship of $3,000 across our journals, with Cell Press and The Lancet being the only exceptions. We do not differentiate our pricing according to journals, nor in different disciplines of science and medicine. This is something that we are evaluating and we would ask you to provide feedback to your publishing contact on the appropriate pricing of this option within your field.

Further to this, and to expand on our discussion about 'double dipping' in the article Open Access: Developing New Publishing Models, it is important that we distinguish and account for revenue we receive from subscriptions and from sponsored articles within the same journal. To do this, we have developed an approach to ensure that revenue from sponsored articles is taken into consideration when setting journal prices.

First, we correct our prices across the overall Elsevier list price, so the average price is corrected in relation to this additional revenue. Next, as there are significant differences in uptake of sponsored articles at journal level, we correct journal prices at individual journal level too, so the higher the percentage of sponsored articles in a particular journal, the higher the correction to that individual journal’s price. We believe this is a fair way to ensure we do not double dip and, even though open access article option uptake remains a very low percentage of our total revenue (less than 1%), we take this no double dipping policy extremely seriously. As the uptake increases, this may have a more profound influence on our journal pricing moving forwards, but we have not seen a huge growth in uptake and, consequently, this correction remains at a low level.

This is a topic on which we would greatly appreciate the opinion of our Editors. You can post your comments below, or please feel free to raise it with your publishing contact.

 

Peer Review and Open Access

There have been some questions around the continued quality of peer review in an open access environment, as several 'mega journals' have been launched by other publishers. These journals often operate under a 'sound science' perspective, which does not assert a quality seal in accordance to the aims and scope of a journal.

Elsevier remains firmly committed to upholding the principles of quality peer review. To us, whether a journal is subscription or open access is not of any significance when it comes to assuring the publication of the highest quality articles within our journals. We continue to support industry initiatives such as CrossCheck, which screens published and submitted content for originality. We are also committed to the development of our own peer-review initiatives and pilots - more information on these will be available in the next issue of Editors’ Update.

Author Biography

David Tempest

David Tempest

David Tempest
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF UNIVERSAL ACCESS
David’s role focuses on the development of a wide range of strategies and implementation of access initiatives and he is a key contact between Elsevier and funding organizations, universities and research institutions around the world. He has worked at Elsevier for more than 15 years, including periods in both editorial and marketing positions, and spent the majority of his career managing the scientometric research and market analysis department within the company. David speaks frequently at various global events about the development of new universal access initiatives and technologies, as well as publishing matters in general.  He has a BSc in pharmacology from the University of Sunderland and an MBA with distinction from Oxford Brookes University.


OA Copyright image

Copyright in an Open Access World

Copyright plays a vital role in the world of publishing scientific, medical and technical content. It provides authors with a set of rights to enable them to utilize their work and to be recognized as the creator of the work.  Publishers are empowered to act on behalf of the author through a copyright transfer or […]

Read more >


Copyright plays a vital role in the world of publishing scientific, medical and technical content. It provides authors with a set of rights to enable them to utilize their work and to be recognized as the creator of the work.  Publishers are empowered to act on behalf of the author through a copyright transfer or exclusive license to copy, publish, and adapt works, whilst protecting their integrity. In this way, publishers are empowered to do various things on behalf of the author, for example to ensure that the article is widely disseminated, that all requests for the rights to re-use content and provision of permissions are answered efficiently, and to ensure that the original is correctly attributed. Each month, Elsevier receives more than 10,000 rights and permissions requests for content – both books and journals - and we have developed sophisticated systems to facilitate these requests and make the process as simple and timely as possible. We take this role very seriously.

The importance of protecting content

But what about copyright in an open access world? Does it make a difference that articles are being made available to all and should we be concerned? The answer is…well, yes and no.

To all intents and purposes, the fact that journal articles are being made available to all through open access, or to subscribers under the subscription model, should not really affect things.  Issues can arise, however, as there is a common misperception that open access means anyone can do anything with an article  – in fact, the rights in the content must still be understood and upheld.

In addition, from an editorial perspective, copyright helps to prevent elements such as plagiarism, multiple submission and fraud in journal articles, and whilst is does not actually detect these elements, it acts as a protective measure to uphold the quality of journals.

Within open access publishing there seems to be a dilemma over copyright and the three choices facing an author: retain copyright, share it or transfer it. Elsevier believes that it remains a fundamental role of a publisher to act on the author’s behalf and by continuing to transfer copyright, we can ensure and uphold the rights of the author and handle all subsequent permission requests. If copyright is retained, then this process remains with the author and, if it is shared, there is a greater risk that fraudulent use may occur, which is why we continue to advocate the transfer of copyright for our journals.

Clearing up the confusion

Some believe that in an open access world these factors become blurred and journal articles are easier to copy and incorporate into other works. For example, open access journals offer additional usage rights which may introduce some confusion in relation to copyright. These factors may threaten the rights of the author and make it difficult for publishers to enforce copyright policy. However, if it is clear where copyright lies through consistent application, the usage rights of the article in question become independent of the publishing model and work for both subscription and open access content.

Of course, one of the main issues with copyright in general is that it is often widely misunderstood and interpreted in a different way by each individual. A study published by JISC in 20051 investigated the level of understanding of researchers towards copyright. It found that from a pool of 355 respondents, 30% of researchers did not know who initially owned the copyright of their own research articles and a further 26% of the respondents indicated that they had a low interest in the copyright issues of their own research articles! Clearly, this continues to be one of the important roles a publisher must embrace: ensuring that it is clear and easy to understand what can be done with content.

1 Towards good practices of copyright in Open Access Journals: A study among authors of articles in Open Access journals, Esther Hoorn, University of Groningen, Faculty of Law, Maurits van der Graaf, Pleiade Management & Consultancy, 2005-08-05

Author Biography

David Tempest

David Tempest

David Tempest
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF UNIVERSAL ACCESS
David’s role focuses on the development of a wide range of strategies and implementation of access initiatives and he is a key contact between Elsevier and funding organizations, universities and research institutions around the world. He has worked at Elsevier for more than 15 years, including periods in both editorial and marketing positions, and spent the majority of his career managing the scientometric research and market analysis department within the company. David speaks frequently at various global events about the development of new universal access initiatives and technologies, as well as publishing matters in general.  He has a BSc in pharmacology from the University of Sunderland and an MBA with distinction from Oxford Brookes University.


OA Boyana Konforti

Case Study: Cell Reports and the Creative Commons Path

Cell Reports is not only the latest addition to the Cell Press suite of journals, it also holds the honor of being the group’s first open access journal and the first Creative Commons journal published by Elsevier. Authors in Cell Reports retain full copyright over their articles and are able to choose between two Creative […]

Read more >


Cell Reports is not only the latest addition to the Cell Press suite of journals, it also holds the honor of being the group’s first open access journal and the first Creative Commons journal published by Elsevier.

Authors in Cell Reports retain full copyright over their articles and are able to choose between two Creative Commons licenses for publication, one of which is the most permissive license offered by Creative Commons.

Cell Reports_issue2

Cell Reports Editor, Boyana Konforti, spoke to Editors’ Update about why the journal chose this particular open access path.

“Cell Press has always placed a high priority on access to its content; each of the journals offers free featured articles and the sponsored article option*, and all content is freely available after 12 months. Cell Reports goes further by providing authors with an opportunity to publish in a prestigious journal with immediate and unrestricted access.

Why Creative Commons?

“It was important for Cell Reports to be able to offer authors Creative Commons licenses. The most permissive license allows end users to share and adapt the paper, both commercially and non-commercially. The other option allows the article to be copied and distributed, but it cannot be changed in any way or used commercially.

“I’m not sure how much time our authors spend deciding between these two licenses. However, I do know that for open access advocates, the fact that we offer the most accommodating Creative Commons license, and that copyright is retained by the authors, is a big deal.

“It is still early days - we published our inaugural issue at the end of January and we publish new articles weekly – but as time goes on it will be interesting to see whether authors favor one license over the other.

“The aim of Cell Reports is to publish high-quality papers encompassing all scales of biology, from the organism to the atom, with a focus on short papers.   There are, of course, other open access journals – in fact, quite a number have launched just in recent years – though few have the high standards and prestige of the Cell Press brand. There are also other journals that publish short papers, and still others that have a broad remit. But it is the unique combination of these features that will distinguish Cell Reports within Cell Press and beyond. I like to think of the old adage of the sum being greater than its parts.

The peer review process

"So far, we have been very pleased with the number and breadth of papers we’ve been receiving. The in-house editorial team of Cell Reports, which consists of me and Sabbi Lall, are responsible for reading all the papers and deciding which ones go out for external review. In making that decision we have the good fortune to be able to call on the extensive editorial expertise available across all the other Cell Press journals.

"We also ask our Editorial Board for advice. This unique board consists of up-and-coming scientists who are the new leaders in their respective fields and will help shape the journal from the ground up. They are passionate about their subject areas and enthusiastic about the journal.

"Even for those papers that do go out for review, the reviewers are holding the bar high. That way we can ensure we maintain the high quality and selectivity you would expect from Cell Press. As part of the Cell Press family, we also benefit from the manuscript-transfer system between journals, so one review process can serve for consideration at more than one journal.

First impressions

"I have been an Editor for many years and yet it is very exciting to start a journal from scratch – especially a high caliber, broad, open access journal at Cell Press. I am especially proud of the fact that the moment the paper is published it is available to everyone, everywhere.

"I’d like to say a big thank you to all the reviewers and our Editorial and Advisory Boards but especially to our authors who helped us get the journal launched. It’s always a big leap of faith to get involved with a new project like this so I’m very grateful. I look forward to further expanding the scope of Cell Reports so that it truly covers all of biology."

* Cell Press journals permit sponsored articles only in accordance to agreements with funding organizations.

Author Biography

Boyana Konforti

Boyana Konforti

Boyana Konforti
EDITOR, CELL REPORTS
Boyana earned her PhD at Stanford University with Ron Davis, studying the mechanism of DNA recombination. She then did postdoctoral studies on the mechanisms of RNA splicing at Rockefeller University with Magda Konarska and at Columbia University with Anna Pyle. Boyana has been a professional Editor for more than 13 years, and she brings a wealth of experience in scientific journal publishing, as well as a deep understanding of biology and the communities that Cell Press serves.

OA Creative Commons

Open Access and Creative Commons – Are they Separable?

Picture the scene, a publisher is giving a presentation on new approaches to journals at a large conference. He touches on content innovation, linking to datasets, enhancement of peer review and open access. There is a question from the audience: “Are you using Creative Commons licenses on your open access journal?” The publisher replies: “No, […]

Read more >


Picture the scene, a publisher is giving a presentation on new approaches to journals at a large conference. He touches on content innovation, linking to datasets, enhancement of peer review and open access. There is a question from the audience: “Are you using Creative Commons licenses on your open access journal?” The publisher replies: “No, we offer a range of licensing options,” to which the audience member responds: “Then it’s not really an open access journal is it?”

There is a common perception that a journal cannot be open access unless it utilizes a Creative Commons License, but is this really the case?

Creative Commons – the lowdown

Creative Commons licenses are designed to allow authors to permit others to copy, distribute, and make some uses of their work — and if applicable to indicate whether this can be used in a commercial environment. Creative Commons licenses also try to ensure that authors get the credit for their work. There are multiple versions of these licenses – in total there are four major condition modules, which form six major license options - which can sometimes complicate their use.

The Creative Commons licenses and the icons for them are widely used for open access publishing and so there are benefits to using them. There are some challenges too. From a legal perspective, it is not entirely clear how the Creative Commons licenses would be interpreted in all countries. They are also generic and so do not explicitly address all the issues that matter to our customers, authors and readers. This is a challenge because Elsevier needs to communicate very clearly with these users as each group has its own specific needs. We really like the machine readable versions of the Creative Commons licenses, but wish they could be conveyed in a more accepted communication standard.

Our approach to licensing

In addition to the journal publishing agreement, at Elsevier we are experimenting with a wide array of approaches.  Sometimes we use a Creative Commons license, other times we use a straightforward publishing license we have developed that enables the various groups to use the open access articles.

One key element to consider is that there are many perspectives when thinking about licensing: for example, the author perspective, where agreement between author and publisher is enabled through copyright transfer or license to publish; and the user perspective, where a license or statement is needed to clearly convey what can be done with the article in question and ensure that credit, authority and commercial use are correctly assigned and the moral rights of the author are protected. There is often a blurring of these elements and, indeed, a journal can be open access using copyright transfer for an author agreement and a suitable user license to determine usage – this does not need to be Creative Commons. There are many facets to consider when developing responsible, adequate and protective publishing models to ensure the use of the journal articles by the various groups, the validity of the journal article and to protect the intellectual property of the author.

Author Biography

Jan bij de Weg

Jan bij de Weg

Jan bij de Weg
DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL
Jan studied law at the universities of Groningen and Stockholm and oversees the team of attorneys responsible for all aspects of Elsevier's legal affairs in Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. This includes putting the right legal tools and guidelines in place for the appropriate Elsevier staff, editors and authors to use. Jan started his career at a law firm in France and worked for four years as a legal advisor at Akzo Nobel before joining Elsevier. Before taking on his current role, he was an Associate General Counsel based in New York. He is a member of the copyright committee at the Dutch Publishers Association and is a member of the International Publishers Rights Organization (IPRO) board.


OA Sign Post

Open Access: Developing New Publishing Models

The term open access is a hotly debated concept which has many implications and meanings. A number of people are self-described open access advocates, and they can be motivated to achieve a wide array of changes.  Some wish to make content ‘free-at-the-point-of-use’ whereas others wish to make content available without any sorts of restrictions at […]

Read more >


The term open access is a hotly debated concept which has many implications and meanings. A number of people are self-described open access advocates, and they can be motivated to achieve a wide array of changes.  Some wish to make content 'free-at-the-point-of-use' whereas others wish to make content available without any sorts of restrictions at all.  Others envision a world where content is paid for but flows over the internet in frictionless ways.  Some believe it is a crusade to replace the subscription-based publication method, or to rid the world of commercial publishers, whilst many don’t see what all the fuss is about!

One thing is certain: open access, in its many forms, is here and open access publishing will continue to grow.

While open access publishing has gained the support of a number of different actors, authors, funders and research organizations, uptake remains modest in many research fields. In certain areas, such as life and medical sciences, open access publishing has reached a point where around a quarter of all research is available at the point of use through the different open access models. In other fields, such as social sciences and economics, there is a reduced focus on open access publishing and we do not feel any particular push from our authors.

Understanding the options

Authors want publishing choices, and Elsevier is happy to provide them!  Let’s take a closer look at the options:

Open access journals – These are often referred to as 'gold' open access journals and the primary business model is that authors pay an article processing fee to support the costs of publishing.

Ted Shortliffe

Ted Shortliffe

Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Biomedical Informatics, Ted Shortliffe, indicates: “Scientists in our community are strongly in favor of open access and a significant number have started to shift towards open-access venues, even if it means that they have to pay the article processing fee.

Blind adherence to open-access idealism is untenable from an economic perspective, even with an all-digital publishing model.

We must not undervalue the role that editorial functions and tools play in quality control and logistical management.  I accordingly look for ways to decrease overall publishing costs, to maintain revenues (from authors or subscribers), and to provide free and open access as soon after publication as is fiscally viable.”

Elsevier’s Open Access Journals

This model is a sustainable form of open access, as long as the article processing fee covers the costs of publishing the article and is affordable for the author. In recent years, several publishers have emerged offering open access journals, including BioMedCentral and Public Library of Science (PLoS).

Elsevier has now launched 12 open access journals and is developing more in collaboration with our author communities. We remain committed to the subscription model of publishing, but also see journals that operate with article processing fees as a sustainable alternative. Consequently, we will proactively continue to develop journals under the most appropriate model, both in discussion with our author communities and Editors, and in reaction to customer requests.

Open access articles – Sometimes referred to as 'hybrid' open access publications, these individual articles are made open access to non-subscribers of subscription journals after the author pays a sponsorship fee.  These fees are often reimbursed by either the author’s institution or funding organization.

At Elsevier, we have had a sponsored option available since 2006 and this is now active on more than 1,200 of our journals. We will continue to expand this option to other journals as there is a demand to do so. In addition, we have agreements with several funding organizations whose grant recipients are specifically asked to ensure their articles are published with open access.

In 2011, Elsevier had more than 1,000 articles sponsored in our journals, with only 10% of these being sponsored by individual authors – the remainder enabled through our agreements with funding bodies. One major element we need to stress for sponsored articles is that we are careful to not 'double dip', that is collect income from subscriptions and sponsorship on the same article. To ensure we do not do this, we alter our journal prices to reflect any revenue we receive through sponsored articles. Click here to view our policy.

Elsevier has sponsorship agreements with:

Elsevier also works with several societies that wish to sponsor open access to journals. Under this model, Elsevier hosts the journal on SciVerse ScienceDirect, makes it open access and also produces print copies for the society. The journals we operate using this model are not branded as Elsevier titles, and ownership and control remains entirely with the society in question – for example, even peer review of the journal is handled by the society. This is a way for Elsevier to facilitate journal development in local and regional markets and promote international visibility of science in emerging countries.

Open archives This involves providing free access to a journal article after a particular time has elapsed following publication. Elsevier now offers open archives for 43 of our journals, including several of our most significant journals such as Cell, Neuron and Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

The Journal of Biomedical Informatics recently adopted this model and Shortliffe says: “I have been able to make it clear that our journal and Elsevier are committed to making the scientific literature in our journal available to all while implementing a 12 month delay that allows a subscription-based model to continue and provides open access after a year to everything that we publish.  Many colleagues have welcomed this approach and this may have affected the uptake of sponsored articles since they know that their paper will be accessible in a year (and for many will be accessible immediately through institutionally-based subscriptions).”

Elsevier believes that authors should be able to distribute their accepted manuscripts, e.g. posting to their websites or their institution’s repository and emailing to colleagues etc... Consequently, we have developed an article posting policy that enables them to do this voluntarily.

This approach, often referred to as 'green' open access, is a passion for some academics (e.g. high-energy physicists) and a relatively low priority for other researchers (e.g. economists and social scientists), but several organizations have introduced mandates that require their researchers to deposit articles, often in the absence of any recognition to the journal that published the article - or indeed without any time between publication and deposit.

In cases of mandated deposit, Elsevier is working hard to develop agreements with organizations to introduce a sustainable element to manuscript posting – often involving the introduction of journal level embargo periods, which allow the publisher to recoup the investment made in publishing the article.

We have significantly developed our open access publishing options and also continue to develop and invest in subscription publishing at the same time. In the longer term, we anticipate continued mixed-model publishing, with both subscription and open access publishing operating alongside one another.

Riaz Agha

Riaz Agha

Dr Riaz Agha BSc (Hons), MBBS, MRCSEng, MRCSEd, FHEA is the founder, Managing and Executive Editor of the International Journal of Surgery and a trainee surgeon at Frimley Park Hospital NHS Foundation Trust in Surrey. Here he reflects on the launch of The International Journal of Surgery: Case Reports (IJSCR) for which he is Managing and Executive Editor.

“In May 2010, we launched Elsevier’s very first open access journal, the International Journal of Surgery: Case Reports.1 The journal complements its subscription-based sister journal, the International Journal of Surgery. I always felt that open access was a good model for many journals.

Most of the open access journals in this field actually charge £1,000-2,000 to publish full length articles. As we wanted to focus on case reports – and that kind of charge is often beyond the affordability of surgeons in training or individuals without access to institutional funds/grants - our charge of £250 per accepted case report is more appropriate.

I am happy to see the number of authors willing to pay this rise year on year as the journal develops. It is also great to see our articles are being read widely too with more than 10,000 downloads in just our second year. Most satisfying is that we have provided a new journal that the scholarly community and surgeons alike appreciate.’’

1 Agha R and Rosin DR.  Time for a new approach to case reports.  International Journal of Surgery: Case Reports 2010;1(1):1-3 PMCID PMC3199611.  Co-published in the International Journal of Surgery 2010;8(5):330-332.  PMID: 20470911.

Author Biography

David Tempest

David Tempest

David Tempest
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF UNIVERSAL ACCESS
David’s role focuses on the development of a wide range of strategies and implementation of access initiatives and he is a key contact between Elsevier and funding organizations, universities and research institutions around the world. He has worked at Elsevier for more than 15 years, including periods in both editorial and marketing positions, and spent the majority of his career managing the scientometric research and market analysis department within the company. David speaks frequently at various global events about the development of new universal access initiatives and technologies, as well as publishing matters in general. He has a BSc in pharmacology from the University of Sunderland and an MBA with distinction from Oxford Brookes University.


OA Open Doors

So, What is Universal Access?

Elsevier made a commitment in 2008 towards a new and exciting approach for our publishing business: to work actively to realize our vision of universal access. The vision is simple, yet powerful, and this is to build a world where everyone has access to high-quality scientific content.  We are tenacious in moving to realize this […]

Read more >


Elsevier made a commitment in 2008 towards a new and exciting approach for our publishing business: to work actively to realize our vision of universal access.

The vision is simple, yet powerful, and this is to build a world where everyone has access to high-quality scientific content.  We are tenacious in moving to realize this goal, and are willing to use all publication models to achieve it.  A small team has been set up at the heart of the business with a remit to work with stakeholders in the community and all parts of Elsevier.

The remit of the universal access team is very wide and encompasses many different approaches including – and keep in mind this was an especially new departure for Elsevier in 2008 – open access publishing. We’ve been quietly working behind the scenes over the last few years to push all of these initiatives forward, but some have only become visible relatively recently.

What we can offer

There has been a concern that Elsevier uses the term 'universal access' instead of 'open access' because we are uncomfortable with the latter.  This is not the case.  Rather, we see open access publishing as one of a number of initiatives under the broader umbrella of initiatives we are using to drive forward our vision for universal access.  These initiatives include:

patientINFORM logoAccessibility:
Extending access to the content we publish for people with disabilities and for patients, for example the patientINFORM program.


Research4Life logoAccess for researchers in the developing world:
Providing free or low-cost access to the content we publish in the poorest countries. Elsevier was a founding participant in the Research4Life program.


Open access journals:
Journals in which authors pay an article processing fee to have their articles published and made freely available.

Open archives:
Journals that make content available to non-subscribers after a time delay.

Licensing models:
The high degree of satisfaction with electronic journal access is a result of widespread licensing from Elsevier and other STM publishers, for example, Elsevier’s freedom collection and subject collections in SciVerse ScienceDirect.

Manuscript posting:
Authors that publish with Elsevier can voluntarily post their preprints or accepted author manuscripts to personal websites and repositories.

Open access article options:
In the majority of our established subscription titles, we offer authors an option to sponsor access for non-subscribers.

Flexible article purchase and rental options:
Elsevier also offers several options to purchase both single articles and groups of articles, as well as rental options (through DeepDyve) and document delivery.

This is just a fraction of what our universal access program provides. We will continue to develop new solutions which continue to maximize access to research content.

Visit www.elsevier.com/openaccess for more details.

Author Biography

David Tempest

David Tempest

David Tempest
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF UNIVERSAL ACCESS
David’s role focuses on the development of a wide range of strategies and implementation of access initiatives and he is a key contact between Elsevier and funding organizations, universities and research institutions. He has worked at Elsevier for more than 15 years, including periods in both editorial and marketing positions, and spent the majority of his career managing the scientometric research and market analysis department within the company. David speaks frequently at various global events about the development of new universal access initiatives and technologies, as well as publishing matters in general.  He has a BSc in pharmacology from the University of Sunderland and an MBA with distinction from Oxford Brookes University.


EU35_open_access

Welcome to this Editors’ Update Open Access Special

In a recent Editors’ Update poll, we asked you to let us know which topics you would like to see covered in upcoming editions. May I begin by extending a big thank you to those of you who responded, and it was interesting to note that the three we had suggested – peer review, ethics […]

Read more >


In a recent Editors’ Update poll, we asked you to let us know which topics you would like to see covered in upcoming editions. May I begin by extending a big thank you to those of you who responded, and it was interesting to note that the three we had suggested – peer review, ethics and plagiarism and open access – proved equally popular.

Well, you voted and we listened. An ethics and plagiarism special is on the agenda for sometime in the future – please feel free to email us with ideas about what you would like to see covered. Meanwhile, our next edition features an article on the latest peer review pilots and their progress so far.

And open access? Well, we have devoted this entire edition to the topic and we hope you will find the contents useful. Perhaps they will prove enlightening too – after all, this is a subject around which much mystery remains. One thing we hope will become clear is that the open access path is one we are keen to walk down. And indeed one we have already made substantial progress along.

YS Chi

Youngsuk Chi

Youngsuk (YS) Chi, Chairman of Elsevier’s Management Committee, explains: “Elsevier is committed to the science and health communities, and this commitment drives our business decisions.  By heavily investing in making our content more discoverable and more accessible, we allow our customers to achieve their goals faster and more easily. We are committed to universal access and to sustainable business models, and have worked cooperatively and successfully with funding bodies to provide open access.

“Our company has actively and progressively promoted a wide range of access options.  This is important, since no one model will ever be the only solution for every type of journal.  For example, we publish 12 open access journals, including the flagship journal Cell Reports, we offer authors the option to sponsor open access to their article in more than 1,200 titles, and we have one of the industry's most liberal author posting policies for manuscripts and preprints.  We also provide a range of free and low-cost access options through programs like Research4Life, PatientINFORM, and the DeepDyve article rental service that allow our content to be accessed by those who need it most.”

In this Open Access Special, we begin by outlining our vision for the future of access to high-quality research in So, What is Universal Access?. We then burrow a little deeper with Open Access: Developing New Publishing Models, in which we shine a spotlight on the models currently available.

Creative Commons licenses are explored in two of our articles: Open Access and Creative Commons – Are they Separable? and Case Study: Cell Reports and the Creative Commons Path; in the latter Cell Reports Editor, Boyana Konforti, shares her thoughts on the launch of the latest Cell Press journal.

Copyright in an Open Access World takes a look at the complexity surrounding authors’ rights and Experience from the Field – Open Access Article Options discusses pricing and our strict no double dipping policy.

The release of this issue also marks the launch of an exciting new development on our Editors’ Update website – the new Short Communications bulletin board. This area has been created with you in mind; we wanted to develop a place where you can share news and opinions with fellow Editors. Wondering what to post? Why not take inspiration from existing contributors? You can read about Free Radical Biology & Medicine’s exciting Your Paper, Your Way pilot, which allows authors to format papers only after acceptance, or Environmental and Experimental Botany’s experiments with virtual special issues.

Editors’ Update is YOUR publication and we want you to be involved in shaping its future. I encourage you to use the online interactive elements we have introduced; write a Short Communication, cast a vote in a poll, and don’t forget you can post comments on our articles. It may be a cliché but your views are important to us so let us know how we can better serve you.

Thank you for taking the time to read this Open Access Special edition and we hope it will shed a little light on this very important topic. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and feedback.

Linda Willems
Editor-in-Chief
Elsevier

webinar-universal-access_150

What does ‘Open Access’ mean to you and your research community?

Of interest to: Journal editors (key), additionally authors and reviewers Archive views to date: 180+ Average feedback: 3.3 out of 5

Read more >


Of interest to: Journal editors (key), additionally authors and reviewers
Archive views to date: 180+
Average feedback: 3.3 out of 5

In the future, will authors have only a few mega journals to choose from when submitting their manuscripts?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Short Communications

  • Call for Elsevier Foundation nominations for 2015 physics and math awards

    The nomination deadline is Friday 17th October, 2014. Learn more

  • Elsevier is expanding its use of altmetrics

    Learn more about our plans to expand the use of almetrics on our platforms and the other metrics-related projects we are working on. Learn more

  • Open access FAQs for editors now available

    This new resource on the editor pages of Elsevier.com is designed to provide you with answers to some of the most common open access questions. Learn more

  • What role should we play at conferences?

    We would like to hear your thoughts about how publishers can best support you at conferences. Learn more

  • Humanizing the values for publishing in India

    Dr. D Chandramohan argues that Indian researchers should be encouraged to prioritize Indian journals when choosing a home for their papers. Learn more

  • New program offers funding to research on evaluation metrics

    As interest in measurement metrics continues to grow, Elsevier launches a new program to fund research in this area. Learn more

  • Registrations are now open for the first Altmetrics Conference

    A conference dedicated to altmetrics - the first of its kind - will take place in London this September. Find out how you can register. Learn more

  • Registrations open for journal editor webinar series

    Registrations are now open for the remaining webinars in our 2014 series for journal editors. Learn more

  • Finding reviewers in EES just got easier…

    Improvements to the Find Reviewers tool in EES have simplified the process of searching for potential referees. Find out more... Learn more

Other articles of interest

Webinars & webcasts

Upcoming webinars

How to make your journal stand out from the crowd
Tuesday 21st October, 2014

Discover our webinar archive. This digital library features both Elsevier and external experts discussing, and answering questions on, a broad spectrum of topics. Latest addition: Trends in journal publishing from September 18th, 2014.

Learn more about our growing library of useful bite-sized webcasts covering a range of subjects relevant to your work as an editor, including ethics, peer review and bibliometrics.