Archive for the ‘Cites & Insights’ Category

GOAJ3: February 2019 update

Thursday, February 28th, 2019

Readership figures for GOAJ3 (unfortunately missing most of today, 2/28, and the last day of each month)–and, for now, I’ll keep reporting on GOAJ2 as well.

All links available from the project home page, as always.

GOAJ3: 2012-2017

  • The dataset: 959 views, 141 downloads
  • GOAJ3: 2,840 PDF ebooks + 237 copies of first few chapters (C&I 18.3)
  • Countries: 873 PDF ebooks
  • Subject supplement (C&I 18.4): 296 downloads
  • No paperbacks

GOAJ2: 2011-2016

  • The dataset: 695 views, 129 downloads.
  • GOAJ2: 2,459 PDF ebooks (and two paperbacks), plus 1,390 copies of chapters 1-7 (C&I 17.4)
  • Countries: 1,064 PDF ebooks (no paperbacks)
  • Subject supplement (C&I 17.5): 2,047 copies

Gray OA



OA and Malware: A halfway post

Friday, February 8th, 2019

You might think of this as a really tiny issue of Cites & Insights–and it’s the only one you’ll see in February or, almost certainly, March.

I’m roughly halfway through the initial scan of DOAJ journals for GOAJ4: Gold Open Access Journals 2013-2018 (“roughly”: I’ve done 6,000 and have 6,415 left to do). Seemed like a good point to pause, save off the first 6,000 (so I can save the “done” spreadsheet faster–in a second instead of two or three) and comment on a few things.

Malware So Far, Everybody Else

See this post: nearly all malware cases, including all from Indonesia and Malaysia, have been fixed.

Still Avoiding PlanS

In the October 2018 Cites & Insights, one of a group of small essays was titled “One I Do Not Plan to Cover,” explaining why I was ignoring PlanS (at least for the moment)–not even tagging items for later discussion.

Briefly, the reasons were that too much was being written for me to follow; that it’s European and I’m not; that I don’t know that I understand all the issues; that I’ve never published in APC-based OA journals (or in any peer-reviewed journals in quite a while); that I was seeing growing honesty from scholars of a sort I found disheartening; and that there was stuff about “academic freedom”that struck me as remarkable.

All those reasons are still valid, especially the penultimate one–and there’s another one that I predicted to myself and wanted to avoid.

That last one: I suspected the long knives would come out in force, attempting in various ways to undermine serious OA or any attempts to upset the current regime. That was a pretty safe prediction, to be sure…

As to the penultimate one: We’re seeing a lot of the Yabbuts come out: That is, “Oh, I’m all for OA, but...” Pretty much like “Some of my best friends are X, but…”

I suspect that around 705-80% of scholars-who-publish just don’t care (or in some cases know) about OA as something that affects them. They have their access, coming out of the library’s budget (aka Somebody Else’s Problem) and they don’t much care about wider distribution for their scholarship–as long as it gets cited and/or helps them get promoted.

I don’t think there’s anything new about the Yabbuts. I do think they’ve been made aware that something serious might actually happen, making the BUT more important.

There’s also another reason I’m staying away: I haven’t read PlanS, and from what I’ve been unable to avoid hearing about it, I suspect I wouldn’t be wholly in favor (e.g., provisions that effectively make it unfeasible for the thousands of very small academic and society journals with no formal funding) to keep going. And since I haven’t read the thing, I may be wrong…

So I’m staying away.

Really Unfortunate, If True

One final and somewhat blind note. I tagged an article that, if I didn’t misunderstand it in a brief skim, seemed to be seriously suggesting that one retired librarian should determine what articles should be included in review articles, and specifically biomed articles. Oh, not in those words, but arguing that articles in “predatory” journals–defined only by reference to The Lists–shouldn’t be included in review articles.

If I read it correctly, this is appalling. Here’s a counter proposal: no articles in any journal published by a publisher with an article that’s probably caused more lost lives (and recurrence of supposedly-obliterated diseases!) than all articles in Listed journals put together should be considered for reviews. Whoops: There goes 10% of the literature.

And, of course, I don’t really believe all Elsevier journals should be tarred because of one article that The Lancet took a long time–twelve years–to fully retract. That would be like smearing thousands of articles and hundreds of journals because one person thinks one of the journals looks bad, without providing any reason. Which is, of course, the whole thing with The Lists. [You can read a pretty good summation of the killer-article history in Wikipedia.)

Now I see that the Master of the Lists is writing for THE (Tabloid on Higher Education? I may have that wrong). And far too many people still treat the lists as significant.

Sigh.

Enough of this. Back to the journal scan: 9,415 left to go.



C&I readership in 2018

Monday, December 31st, 2018

Since there may not be another Cites & Insights for several months, I thought I’d do a quick wrapup of C&I readership for 2018–noting, as always, that counts are typically about 3% low (because all but the first five hours of the last day of each month are missing).

It hasn’t been a great year: only two issues so far have cleared the 1,000-download mark, and only one the 2,000-download. Oddly enough, the subject supplement to GOAJ3 was not one of them–and, in fact, has done very poorly. Month-to-month trends suggest that shutting down C&I may be happening on its own, little by little–but, including the oddity that every single issue gets some downloads each month (an oddity that makes me wonder whether some of those hits are crawlers that the statistics package fails to recognize as such), there were 150,223 downloads over the course of the year.

Here are the 2018 issues sorted by downloads:

IssueCountTopic
civ18i2.pdf2,268Writing, Wikipedia
civ18i1.pdf1,716OA issues, audio prices
civ18i7.pdf427audio prices, small essays
civ18i6.pdf376Predator!
civ18i5.pdf260futurism, GOAJ commentary
civ18i4.pdf259GOAJ3 subject supplement
civ18i3.pdf201GOAJ3 ch, 1-7
civ18i9.pdf137books and media
civ18i8.pdf131ethics

Top issues by 2018 downloads

These issues had at least 1,600 downloads in 2018 (including counts for “on” versions):

IssueCountTopic
civ17i1.pdf3,233gray OA 2012-2016
civ18i2.pdf2,268
civ14i7.pdf2,239investigating the lists
civ14i4.pdf2,173the sad case of jeffrey beall
civ13i3.pdf1,985acad. Library circ/
civ16i1.pdf1,971ppppread. Article counts
civ12i4.pdf1,930futurism, public library closures
civ12i3.pdf1,872public library closures
civ13i10.pdf1,842books and library ROI
civ12i11.pdf1,670Google book settlement
civ12i5.pdf1,638fair use

Top issues, 2015-2018

These issues have had at least 7,000 downloads since 2015 (including counts for “on” versions but not individual articles):

IssueCountTopic
civ14i4.pdf21,781the sad case of jeffrey beall
civ14i7.pdf12,564investigating the lists
civ10i8.pdf10,321books and publishing
civ6i10.pdf9,596liblogs
civ12i2.pdf9,153social networks, misc.
civ12i8.pdf8,350blogging
civ8i7.pdf7,398various
civ15i9.pdf7,068gold oa 2011-2014
civ14i5.pdf7,036ethics and access: the “sting”


Cites & Insights volume 18 available in paperback

Monday, December 3rd, 2018


Cites & Insights 18 (2018) is now available in paperback for the usual $35.00.

The 462-page 6×9″ paperback includes all nine issues of Volume 18, and adds indexes only available in the paperback.

If you’re a Lulu user or check the front page, look for the frequent discount codes…

Cites & Insights 18:9 (December 2018) available

Monday, November 26th, 2018

Cites & Insights 18:9 (December 2018) is now available for downloading at https://citesandinsights.info/civ18i9.pdf

The 36-page issue includes:

The Front  pp. 1-2

Notes on GOAJ4 and what it means for Volume 19 of Cites & Insights.

Words: Books, Ebooks and Libraries  pp. 2-26

Not just “books, print vs. e” but a broader range of notes on books, including a couple of library-related items.

Media: Media Notes  pp. 26-36

Two parts: magazine notes (including some anecdata about individual magazine changes) and other media notes.

That’s it. For the hundreds dozens one or two of you eagerly awaiting the print volume, index and all, I’ll post something when it’s available, probably in mid-December.

Possible temporary outage at Cites & Insights

Monday, November 26th, 2018

If you’re unable to download any issues of Cites & Insights or, indeed, reach the home page:

It’s my fault. I may have mistakenly hit a key while getting ready to upload the December 2018 Cites & Insights and deleted the entire site on my host. And I’m not enough of an expert (putting it mildly!) to undo the deletion cleanly. I’ve asked for help from my host.

The site will be restored as soon as possible.

Thanks to Blake Carver’s fast work, the site is back. The fault was ENTIRELY mine, and LISHost continues to be a great place to host library-related sutes.

Cites & Insights 18:8 (November 2018) available

Monday, October 29th, 2018

The November 2018 Cites & Insights, volume 8, issue 8, is now available for downloading at https://citesandinsights.info/civ18i8.pdf

The 40-page issue consists of one essay:

Policy: Ethics  pp. 1-40

Starting with the “grievance” hoax, continuing with other stings and peer review, “predatory” nonsense, open access, and various other ethical issues–and ending with some thoughts on society publishers and for-profit publishers.

Will there be a December 2018 issue to close out the volume? Hard to say. One way to help: VOTE. Make sure others VOTE. Some indications that our experiment in democracy hasn’t been completely swamped would be encouraging. I’m more likely to write when I’m not despairing for the soul of the nation…

Cites & Insights 18:7 (October 2018) available

Tuesday, October 2nd, 2018

Cites & Insights 18:7 (October 2018) is now available for downloading at https://citesandinsights.info/civ18i7.pdf

The 24-page issue includes:

Intersections: A Few Small Essays   pp. 1-13

Half of this section is an informal commentary on a remarkable new free list of >35,000 open access journals (and other things) in the humanities and social sciences (mostly) from Jan Szczepanski. There are also commentaries on “when good scholars go bad”–why I think the new spate of articles Viewing With Alarm scholars at serious institutions with articles in “bad” journals are looking at the wrong side of the equation; the colors, and why I think two is enough; why I do not (currently) plan to cover the new Hot Topic in OA; whether you can or should be an OA observer without being an advocate [for or against] or a skeptic; why “Intersections”; and a comprehensive guide to really useful applications of blockchain in libraries. [Omitted for space and because I’m a coward: A suggestion that societies that depend on subscription revenues aren’t necessarily better than commercial publishers…]

The Back: Audiophile System Prices 2018  pp. 13-24

This time around, I’m including median systems in each category: systems composed of median-priced components. You can assemble a complete (CD and LP) audiophile system for $1,918–or you can spend $832,223 before adding power conditioners and other extras.

Cites & Insights 18:6 (September 2018) available

Sunday, September 2nd, 2018

The September 2018 Cites & Insights (18:6) is now available for downloading at https://citesandinsights.info/civ18i6.pdf

The 70-page issue consists of one essay/roundup:

Intersections: Predator!  pp. 1-70

The lists have ended, but the malady lingers on… There seems to be a burgeoning industry of Pointing With Alarm at the (usually wildly overestimated) array of “predatory” journals (usually identified as predatory based on one librarian’s typically-unsupported claims).

This roundup began with more than 130 tagged articles, most quite recent; despite narrowing it down, it still includes more than 60–and there are many more not discussed.


Erratum: I am informed by a reader (Marc Couture–thanks!) that there is a probable error on page 15, where I say

“What I have not done, ever, is to submit an article to an outlet with being fairly comfortable with that outlet”

I meant “without being fairly comfortable,” to be sure.

Can I blame my six-fingered typing since suffering nerve damage? Nah, didn’t think so: blame sloppy proofreading. I would fire the proofreader, but that won’t work either…

I usually won’t fix an error in a published issue (unless there’s a legal or other problem, as opposed to a simple goof), but in this case, adding the three letters didn’t affect the rest of the layout at all–not even the line wrap–so I’ve updated it.

GOAJ3: July report

Tuesday, July 31st, 2018

Readership figures for GOAJ3 (unfortunately missing most of today, 7/31, and the last day of each month)–and, for now, I’ll keep reporting on GOAJ2 as well.

All links available from the project home page, as always.

GOAJ3: 2012-2017

  • The dataset: 379 views, 41 downloads
  • GOAJ3: 2,002 PDF ebooks + 82 copies of first few chapters (C&I 18.3)
  • Countries: 534 PDF ebooks
  • Subject supplement (C&I 18.4): 115 downloads
  • No paperbacks

Goaj2: 2011-2016

  • The dataset: 526 views, 100 downloads.
  • GOAJ2: 2,119 PDF ebooks (and two paperbacks), plus 1,285 copies of chapters 1-7 (C&I 17.4)
  • Countries: 806 PDF ebooks (no paperbacks)
  • Subject supplement (C&I 17.5): 1,867 copies

Gray OA

Note the huge one-month increases in GOAJ3 and Gray OA 2012-2016 PDF ebooks.