Recent replies to "Open-Access"

Reply from Simon Tauff

Simon Tauff — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:27:43 -0000

Hello,

I think all the editors should start for e paper or m paper so that everyone gets a pleasant experience of online reading and distributed on all new media channels like mobiles, RSS, search engines, blogs, newsletters and pod casts.

Reply from Maxine Clarke

Maxine Clarke — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 09:59:12 -0000

In response to Graham’s note about the “OA mandate being signed into US law”, it has been Nature journal (and NPG journal) policy for some years now to encourage authors to upload their accepted versions of articles to PubMed and other academic repositories six months after the publication date. This is not only within the terms of the new law, but is encouraging faster upload, as the law specifies one year after the publication date.

See here for license policies
and here for policies on preprints (posting articles before they are submitted).

Reply from Irene Hames

Irene Hames — Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:13:07 -0000

Noah, just to clarify – yes, it is, or should be, standard practice where there is a chargeable OA option to leave discussion until after acceptance. We add the guidance note to authors to prevent them inadvertently declaring their intentions prematurely, in their submission letters or in other communications during review.

Reply from Graham Steel

Graham Steel — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 19:20:07 -0000

Just out…..

OA mandate at NIH now law

Reply from Graham Steel

Graham Steel — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:03:41 -0000

Two good points very well made Noah !!!

Since I’m fairly new to the land of attempting to have my Manuscripts accepted for publication, this was initially quite an eye opener since I’m from outwith Academia.

Being a strong supporter of OA and Creative Commons, I was extremely happy to have a Paper accepted and published in Nature Precedings on Monday this week.

After the Festive break, I’ll get back to work on the next three Manu’s that are at various stages of construction.

A few hours ago, I was alerted to this “little” development. Cue Dylan et al, “The Times They Are A Changin’”

Reply from Noah Gray

Noah Gray — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:38:47 -0000

I think that this (to wait and discuss open access options) is a pretty standard practice for most journals that have this sort of option, based on my conversations with others. There is no need to discuss publication costs or open access possibilities unless a paper is accepted, anyway.

Another way to get around this issue of open access is to use the Nature Precedings website. This provides a forum for your paper to be received by the community for free even before it is accepted for publication. This issues was discussed here.

Reply from Maxine Clarke

Maxine Clarke — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:35:52 -0000

Sorry, I meant to type “Irene”, Irene. Thanks again.

Reply from Maxine Clarke

Maxine Clarke — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:34:37 -0000

That’s a good point, Ingrid, thank you.

Reply from Irene Hames

Irene Hames — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 13:45:23 -0000

Something for editors and journals to take into account:
Where journals offer authors the option of paying to make their articles available for free access on publication, it’s important to avoid any potential bias or allegations of bias. The financial aspects should therefore be dealt with after the review process has been completed, or kept concealed from the review process and the individuals involved in that. This includes knowledge of whether or not an author intends to take up a paid open access option.

So we tell our authors the following:
IMPORTANT: Please do not inform the Editorial Office or Editors prior to acceptance whether or not you intend to take up the open access option.

Irene Hames
Managing Editor of The Plant Journal (which is not published by NPG)

Reply from Maxine Clarke

Maxine Clarke — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 07:08:08 -0000

Neither of these factors affects the role of the editor, who decides which papers to send out for review. This is decided on editorial grounds of novelty, interest to a wide range of readers, and so on. See ‘Criteria for publication’ on this page of the authors’ and reviewers’ website.