Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

eLife presentation at Max Planck Martinsreid - June 27 2013

eLife presentation at Max Planck Martinsreid - June 27 2013

Ian Mulvany

July 02, 2013
Tweet

More Decks by Ian Mulvany

Other Decks in Science

Transcript

  1. Max Planck - Martinsried, June 27, 2013
    Challenging
    conventions in
    research
    communication
    Ian Mulvany

    View full-size slide

  2. v1
    2
    Jun 11 Jul 11 Nov 11 Jun 12 Oct 12 Dec 12 Jan 13 Jun 13

    View full-size slide

  3. v1
    2
    Jun 11 Jul 11 Nov 11 Jun 12 Oct 12 Dec 12 Jan 13
    Announcement
    Jun 13

    View full-size slide

  4. v1
    2
    Jun 11 Jul 11 Nov 11 Jun 12 Oct 12 Dec 12 Jan 13
    Announcement
    EIC
    Jun 13

    View full-size slide

  5. v1
    2
    Jun 11 Jul 11 Nov 11 Jun 12 Oct 12 Dec 12 Jan 13
    Announcement
    EIC
    Editorial Board
    Jun 13

    View full-size slide

  6. v1
    2
    Jun 11 Jul 11 Nov 11 Jun 12 Oct 12 Dec 12 Jan 13
    Announcement
    EIC
    Editorial Board
    1st Submission
    Jun 13

    View full-size slide

  7. v1
    2
    Jun 11 Jul 11 Nov 11 Jun 12 Oct 12 Dec 12 Jan 13
    Announcement
    EIC
    Editorial Board
    1st Submission
    1st Publication
    Jun 13

    View full-size slide

  8. v1
    2
    Jun 11 Jul 11 Nov 11 Jun 12 Oct 12 Dec 12 Jan 13
    Announcement
    EIC
    Editorial Board
    1st Submission
    1st Publication
    Journal Platform
    Jun 13

    View full-size slide

  9. v1
    2
    Jun 11 Jul 11 Nov 11 Jun 12 Oct 12 Dec 12 Jan 13
    Announcement
    EIC
    Editorial Board
    1st Submission
    1st Publication
    Journal Platform
    60 Publications
    Jun 13

    View full-size slide

  10. v1
    2
    Jun 11 Jul 11 Nov 11 Jun 12 Oct 12 Dec 12 Jan 13
    Announcement
    EIC
    Editorial Board
    1st Submission
    1st Publication
    Journal Platform
    60 Publications
    Jun 13
    104 RA
    170 Pubs

    View full-size slide

  11. World-class backing
    Editorially, eLife is entirely independent of the
    funders

    View full-size slide

  12. Editors
    •Editor-in-
    Chief
    •2 Deputy eds
    •17 Senior eds
    •Board of
    reviewing eds
    ~180

    View full-size slide

  13. Editors
    •Editor-in-
    Chief
    •2 Deputy eds
    •17 Senior eds
    •Board of
    reviewing eds
    ~180

    View full-size slide

  14. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed

    View full-size slide

  15. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process

    View full-size slide

  16. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  17. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  18. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  19. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  20. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  21. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  22. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  23. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  24. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  25. 6
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  26. 7
    Not Author
    Focussed
    Painful
    Process
    Distorted
    Assessment

    View full-size slide

  27. Serve
    Science
    7

    View full-size slide

  28. Serve
    Science
    7

    View full-size slide

  29. Open Access
    8

    View full-size slide

  30. Motivation 1 – drive OA
    OA journals with APC
    OA journals no APC
    Hybrid subscription journals
    Laakso and Björk BMC Medicine 2012 10:124 doi:
    10.1186/1741-7015-10-124

    View full-size slide

  31. 10
    UK – part 1
    • Support at the highest levels of
    government
    • “The Government believes that
    published research material
    which has been publicly financed
    should be publicly accessible –
    and that principle goes well
    beyond the academic
    community”
    • David Willetts, Minister of State,
    Universities and Science

    View full-size slide

  32. 11
    UK – part 2
    • Finch – strong support for OA
    publishing, supported by
    publication fees
    • Wellcome – strengthened policy,
    emphasizing most liberal license
    (CC-BY) plus sanctions for non-
    compliance
    • Research Councils UK –
    strengthened policy, with support
    for payment of publication fees

    View full-size slide

  33. eLife is on the more open side
    12
    CC-BY

    View full-size slide

  34. v1
    13
    ... there's plenty still broken in the world, if you
    know how to see it.
    a tedious,
    unpleasant task
    Schlep:
    “Schlep Blindness”
    - Paul Graham

    View full-size slide

  35. v1
    14
    Media policy 2
    Simplifying
    Submission

    View full-size slide

  36. v1
    Media Policy
    - Authors: openly discuss and
    share your work whenever you
    have the chance
    - eLife: share openly, promote,
    foster understanding

    View full-size slide

  37. v1
    No
    Inglefinger

    View full-size slide

  38. v1
    By the end of October, we will have
    covered 122 studies from journals for
    our consumer service. Of those, 45
    were embargoed — but we didn’t hit
    the embargo on 12 of them, because
    we had better things to do, like cover
    more interesting studies that weren’t
    embargoed.
    - Ivan Oransky
    73%

    View full-size slide

  39. v1
    18
    Media policy 2
    Correcting
    Corrections

    View full-size slide

  40. v1
    No
    required style

    View full-size slide

  41. v1
    23
    Media policy 2
    Rapid
    Publication

    View full-size slide

  42. v1
    25
    Media policy 2
    Rethinking
    Review

    View full-size slide

  43. v1
    26
    Media policy 2
    20
    Cover letter and
    single PDF
    Swift triage
    process by
    Senior Editors
    Full submission
    BRE member
    plus external
    reviewer(s)
    Decision after
    peer review
    Revision
    assessed by BRE
    member
    Consultation
    Single decision letter

    View full-size slide

  44. v1
    Single set of instructions – focused
    revision
    Limit rounds of revision
    Reduced times from submission
    to acceptance
    No “3rd” reviewer problem

    View full-size slide

  45. v1
    28
    Media policy 2
    Articulate
    Articles

    View full-size slide

  46. Making supplementary files usable

    View full-size slide

  47. Making supplementary files usable

    View full-size slide

  48. Making supplementary files usable

    View full-size slide

  49. • From narrative to primary
    data sources
    • From summary data to
    primary/source data
    • From main figures to
    secondary figures
    • All parts searchable,
    discoverable, citable
    Connecting narrative with data

    View full-size slide

  50. • From narrative to primary
    data sources
    • From summary data to
    primary/source data
    • From main figures to
    secondary figures
    • All parts searchable,
    discoverable, citable
    Connecting narrative with data

    View full-size slide

  51. • From narrative to primary
    data sources
    • From summary data to
    primary/source data
    • From main figures to
    secondary figures
    • All parts searchable,
    discoverable, citable
    Connecting narrative with data

    View full-size slide

  52. • From narrative to primary
    data sources
    • From summary data to
    primary/source data
    • From main figures to
    secondary figures
    • All parts searchable,
    discoverable, citable
    Connecting narrative with data

    View full-size slide

  53. v1
    38
    Architecture
    of Attention

    View full-size slide

  54. v1
    40
    Strategy
    Peer review
    Traditional Venues

    View full-size slide

  55. v1
    41
    Peer review
    Traditional Venues

    View full-size slide

  56. v1
    41
    Peer review
    Traditional Venues

    View full-size slide

  57. v1
    41
    Peer review
    Traditional Venues
    API
    Non-Traditional Venues

    View full-size slide

  58. v1
    41
    Peer review
    Traditional Venues
    API
    Non-Traditional Venues

    View full-size slide

  59. v1
    41
    Peer review
    Traditional Venues
    API
    Non-Traditional Venues

    View full-size slide

  60. v1
    41
    All Curated
    Peer review
    Traditional Venues
    API
    Non-Traditional Venues

    View full-size slide

  61. v1
    42
    Media policy 2
    Cultivating
    Careers

    View full-size slide

  62. v1
    Media policy 2
    Open
    Reviews

    View full-size slide

  63. v1
    Media policy 2
    Letter of
    recommendation


    View full-size slide

  64. Research
    assessment

    View full-size slide

  65. Research
    assessment
    Institutions
    Researchers
    (authors and
    readers)
    Publishers
    Funders
    Policy makers
    The public
    Librarians

    View full-size slide

  66. The impact
    factor is…
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/m2w2/191545978/sizes/z/in/
    photostream/

    View full-size slide

  67. • Started with a group of editors who met at ASCB
    • Diverse group
    – Commercial and non-profit
    – Range of business models (OA and subscription)
    • Recognise the deficiencies in current system
    • Identify opportunities to do better

    View full-size slide

  68. • General recommendations
    – Move away from impact factors
    – Assess outputs on their own merits
    – Exploit new tools and approaches
    • And specific recommendations for publishers, funders,
    institutions, metrics suppliers, and researchers
    • >6000 signatories

    View full-size slide

  69. Step 1 – sign the declaration!
    http://am.ascb.org/dora/
    Google San Francisco DORA

    View full-size slide

  70. 53
    lens.elifesciences.org

    View full-size slide

  71. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  72. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  73. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  74. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  75. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  76. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  77. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  78. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  79. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  80. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  81. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  82. eLife Lens http://elifesciences.github.io/articl

    View full-size slide

  83. eLife FAQ
    59
    FAQ

    View full-size slide

  84. eLife FAQ
    60
    What’s the scope of eLife?

    View full-size slide

  85. 61
    eLife – scope
    • BROAD
    From basic and theoretical work to
    translational, applied and clinical research.
    • SELECTIVE
    Highly influential work that advances understanding,
    opens new doors or has real-world impacts.

    View full-size slide

  86. eLife FAQ
    62
    Are all submissions treated
    equally, irrespective of
    funder?

    View full-size slide

  87. eLife FAQ
    63
    YES!

    View full-size slide

  88. eLife FAQ
    64
    For the funders, will
    publishing with eLife count
    as a high quality
    publication?

    View full-size slide

  89. eLife FAQ
    65
    YES!

    View full-size slide

  90. eLife FAQ
    66
    When we introduce APCs will
    they be the same for all
    researchers?

    View full-size slide

  91. eLife FAQ
    67
    YES!

    View full-size slide

  92. eLife FAQ
    68
    Can I publish for free for the
    next year?

    View full-size slide

  93. eLife FAQ
    69
    YES!

    View full-size slide

  94. eLife FAQ
    70
    Will publishing in eLife satisfy
    the RCUK OA Policy?

    View full-size slide

  95. eLife FAQ
    71
    YES!

    View full-size slide

  96. eLife FAQ
    72
    Should you publish in eLife?

    View full-size slide

  97. eLife FAQ
    73
    Well, that’s up to you to
    decide, but you might like
    to know ....

    View full-size slide

  98. 76
    Conclusion
    • Wellcome Trust, HHMI, MPS and the Editors are
    committed to scientific excellence
    • Publication alongside other outstanding science
    • Fair and swift editorial process
    • Enhancements:
    – plain language summaries
    – expert commentaries
    – great presentation - enhances your story
    • Letters of recommendation
    • It’s exciting

    View full-size slide