This document discusses the history and rise of the open access movement in academic publishing. It provides: - A brief history of academic publishing, noting its shift from personal letters to commercial publishing companies in the late 19th/early 20th centuries. - An overview of the "academic spring" protest movement against large commercial publishers' control and profits from publicly funded research. - Statistics showing over 8,500 open access journals and millions of openly accessible documents now available online. - Evidence that open access articles tend to be cited more often than articles hidden behind paywalls, indicating greater visibility and impact.

1. and
s o cial media –
the future of research?
Service goes Accessible symposium
January 10, 2013 @ Otaniemi, Finland
Dr. Toma Susi
(Department of Applied Physics / Aalto SCI)

2. Open access to research
– the tide has turned

3. (A very brief) history of academic publishing
• Scholarly publishing started as personal letters
• Moved to serials published by scholarly societies
(Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 1665)
• Nature (1865), Science (1880), Elsevier (1880)...
Christopher Wren
• A series of mergers and acquisitions (1960s onwards)
concentrated journals into the hands of a few giants
• Elsevier, Springer, Wiley: 42% of articles published1
• Monopolistic power: price increases, huge profits
• In 1986, libraries spent 44% of their budgets on books
compared with 56% on journals; in 1998, the ratio had
skewed to 28% and 72% – recently even worse
• The rise of alternatives (such as PLoS) and increasing
protests culminated in the “academic spring” of 2011
1http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/
aug/29/academic-publishers-murdoch-socialist

4. The academic spring
• Research Works Act (RWA) in US congress (Dec 16, 2011)
• Prohibit open access for Fed funded research (ie. NIH)
• Large donations to bill sponsors from Elsevier...
• Strong backlash in the blogosphere and media
• Blog post by Fields medalist Timothy Gowers (Jan 21)1
• Boycott site thecostofknowledge.com (Jan 23)
• Reporting by The Guardian, The Economist2, NYT, etc...
• Elsevier withdraws support from RWA (Feb 27)
• Hours later bill sponsors drop it
• Activists happy, but want much more change
• UK: minister David Willets, Finch report, RCUK
• EU: open access for Horizon 2020 (80 B€)
1http://gowers.wordpress.com/2012/01/21/elsevier-my-part-in-its-downfall
2http://www.economist.com/node/21545974

5. Yliopisto 5/2012 Tiedetoimittaja 2/2012
http://www.tiedetoimittajat.fi/lehdet/Tiedetoimittaja2_12.pdf
                /    
Jani Kotakoski, Toma Susi
Tiedejulkaisemisen
noidankehää murtamassa
Arabikevään mukaan nimetty akateeminen kevät -protestiliike alkoi matemaa-
tikkojen Elsevier-kustantajaa vastaan suunnattuna protestina. Tutkijat kamppai-
levat entistä riippumattomamman tieteellisen julkaisemisen puolesta kaupallis-
ten kustantajien ylivaltaa vastaan.
Arabikevään mukaan nimetty akatee- kustantajien välit tulehdutti suurim- yli 12 000 allekirjoitusta, eikä suinkaan
minen kevät -protestiliike on jäänyt man tieteellisten lehtien kaupallisen pelkästään matemaatikoilta.
suomalaisessa mediassa varsin vähäl- kustantajan Elsevierin tuki Yhdysval-
le huomiolle. Muualla maailmassa se tain edustajainhuoneen Research Works
on herättänyt kiinnostusta myös ei- Act (RWA) -lakialoitteelle, joka pyrki Kustantajat keräävät
akateemisille suunnatuissa julkaisuis- estämään liittovaltion – eli veronmak- taloudellisen hyödyn
sa, esimerkiksi aihetta laajasti käsitel- sajien – rahoittaman tutkimuksen avoi-
leessä englantilaisessa The Guardian men julkaisemisen. Tutkijoiden ja kustannusyhtiöiden
-lehdessä. Sosiaalisen median kataly- Itse protesti sai alkunsa kun Cam- huonojen välien perimmäinen syy on
soiman liikkeen saama julkisuus on bridgen professori ja Fields-mitalisti tutkimusartikkelien päätyminen kus-
nopeasti lisännyt kansalaisten ja päät- Timothy Gowers toivoi tammikuisessa tantajien yksityisomistukseen huo-
täjien tietoisuutta tieteellisen julkaise- blogissaan sivustoa, jonka kautta ma- limatta siitä, että tieteentekijät tuke-
misen ongelmista, mikä näyttäisi joh- temaatikot voisivat irtisanoutua työs- vat työtä merkittävällä ilmaisella työ-
tavan muutoksiin kansainvälisessä tie- kentelemästä Elsevierin hyväksi. New panoksella. Tutkijathan paitsi tekevät
depolitiikassa. Yorkin yliopiston tohtoriopiskelija Ty- tutkimukset myös vertaisarvioivat ar-
Liikkeen tavoite on tuoda tutkimus- ler Neylon toteutti pian Gowersin toi- tikkelit ja usein vielä toimittavat jul-
tulokset kaikkien saataville, kun jul- veen, ja vain kaksi päivää myöhemmin kaisut. Yliopistokirjastot puolestaan
kaisutoiminta tällä hetkellä keskittyy thecostofknowledge.com alkoi kerätä tut- joutuvat ostamaan kustantajalta sato-
voittoa tavoitteleville yrityksille. Vii- kijoiden nimiä boikottiin. Nyt kesä- jen lehtien niputettuja tilauksia, joten
meksi liikettä tukevien tutkijoiden ja kuun alussa sivustolle on kertynyt jo lehtiin uppoaa vuosi vuodelta kasvava
Akateeminen kevät -kampanja
sai alkunsa Cambridgen
professori Timothy Gowersin
tammikuisesta blogista.
Protesti ei ole ensimmäinen
laatuaan.
Signum 6/2012: Toma Susi & Jani Kotakoski:
Kohti tutkimuksen avointa verkkojulkaisemista—hinnalla millä hyvänsä?

6. A Very Brief Introduction to Open Access
by Peter Suber
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/brief.htm
Open-access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of
most copyright and licensing restrictions. What makes it possible is the
internet and the consent of the author or copyright-holder.
OA is entirely compatible with peer review, and all the major OA initiatives
for scientific and scholarly literature insist on its importance. Just as
authors of journal articles donate their labor, so do most journal editors
and referees participating in peer review. Open
OA literature is not free to produce, even if it is less expensive to produce
than conventionally published literature. The question is not whether
scholarly literature can be made costless, but whether there are better
Access
ways to pay the bills than by charging readers and creating access barriers.
Business models for paying the bills depend on how OA is delivered.
There are two primary vehiclesWeek 2012 materials to research articles:
Open Access for delivering OA
OA journals and OA (http://openaccessweek.org/)
archives or repositories.
OA Journals: OA Archives or repostories:
OA journals perform peer review and then make the OA archives or repositories do not perform peer
approved contents freely available to the world. Their review, but simply make their contents freely available
expenses consist of peer review, manuscript preparation, to the world. They may contain unrefereed preprints,

7. A Very Brief Introduction to Open Access
by Peter Suber
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/brief.htm
Open-access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of
most copyright and licensing restrictions. What makes it possible is the
internet and the consent of the author or copyright-holder.
OA is entirely compatible with peer review, and all the major OA initiatives
for scientific and scholarly literature insist on its importance. Just as
authors of journal articles donate their labor, so do most journal editors
and referees participating in peer review. Open
OA literature is not free to produce, even if it is less expensive to produce
than conventionally published literature. The question is not whether
scholarly literature can be made costless, but whether there are better
Access
ways to pay the bills than by charging readers and creating access barriers.
Business models for paying the bills depend on how OA is delivered.
There are two primary vehiclesWeek 2012 materials to research articles:
Open Access for delivering OA
OA journals and OA (http://openaccessweek.org/)
archives or repositories.
OA Journals: Open Access Explained
OA Archives or repostories:
(http://www.slideshare.net/UQSPADS/)
OA journals perform peer review and then make the OA archives or repositories do not perform peer
approved contents freely available to the world. Their review, but simply make their contents freely available
expenses consist of peer review, manuscript preparation, to the world. They may contain unrefereed preprints,

8. Some statistics
• >8500 open access journals, >3 added per day
(Directory of Open Access Journals, www.doaj.org)
• >36 million documents, +2 million in last 3 months
(BASE, http://www.base-search.net)
• PubMedCentral: 3.5 million fulltexts (17% of total)
• arXiv: 750 000, RePEC: 1 million, SSRN: 350 000
Laasko & Björk, BMC Medicine 2012, 10:124
up to 17%
of research
papers
http://poeticeconomics.blogspot.ca now going
to open
access
journals!1
1http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/occams-corner/2012/
oct/22/inexorable-rise-open-access-scientific-publishing

9. @bmcmatt: “A striking example of a society journal improving
its impact factor radically following a move to #openaccess”
Matthew Cockerill (co-founder of BMC)
(http://twitpic.com/a1vdy3)

10. Open access impact (selected articles)
• Lawrence, S. 2001. Free online availability substantially increases a
paper's impact. Nature 411:521
• Xia, J. and Nakanishi, K. 2012. Self-selection and the citation advantage
of open access articles. Online Information Review 36:40-51
• Xia, J., Myers, R. L., and Wilhoite, S. K. 2011. Multiple open access
availability and citation impact. Journal of Information Science 37:19-28
• Riera, M. and Aibar, E. 2012. Does open access publishing increase the
impact of scientific articles? an empirical study in the field of intensive
care medicine. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.medin.2012.04.002
• Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., and Rowland, F. 2008. The citation
advantage of open-access articles. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 59:1963-1972
• Eysenbach, G. 2006. Citation advantage of open access articles. PLoS
Biol 4:e157+
• Hajjem, C., Harnad, S., and Gingras, Y. 2006. Ten-Year Cross-
Disciplinary comparison of the growth of open access and how it
increases research citation impact. http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.DL/0606079
• Gargouri, Y., Hajjem, C., Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Carr, L., Brody, T., and
Harnad, S. 2010. Self-Selected or mandated, open access increases
citation impact for higher quality research. PLoS ONE 5:e13636+
• Bjork, B. C. and Solomon, D. 2012. Open access versus subscription
journals: a comparison of scientific impact. BMC Medicine 10:73+
Thanks to Ross Mounce (http://rossmounce.co.uk/)
More at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html

11. driven transition to free access for all
1989–1990 1995–1996 articles in all journals is possible.
% of articles freely available online
1991–1992 1997–1998 ESA’s business plan is simple: it will
100 1993–1994 1999–2000 provide immediate free web access, at a fair
price, to authors who want it. As the cost of
80
offering this rises (because of subscription
60
cancellations), the price will increase. No
author will be required to purchase it, and
40 sales of subscriptions to the journals will
continue as long as they are profitable. The
20 endpoint of this plan is uncertain, but it
may lead to the demise of paper publication
0 Open access ~doubles
and subscriptions, as authors and the
1
27
3
7
3
1
15
–3
institutions that support them embrace
–6
4–
2–
–1
8–
16
32
the number of citations!
In 2001, Lawrence found that articles in computer science that were openly accessible (OA) on the
64
Figure 2: (a): Open Accessaccess and strivemorereduce costs.werewe used 1,307,038 articles (OA+N OA),
Number of citations
Web were cited substantially to than those that Discipline. Total replicated this effect in
free Citation Impact Advantage by
physics. To further test its cross-disciplinary generality,
not. We have since
articles published across
Direct costs in 10 disciplinespercentage OA citation advantage: ((OA − N OA
of the present system
age OA: (OA/(OA + 12 OA)) articles, black bars; (Biology, Psychology, Sociology, Health, Political Science,
N years (1992-2003)
Economics, printingLaw, Business, Management). Comparing OA and NOA articles in the same
include Education, paper issues, limiting
Analysis of 119,924 conference articles inaveraged across 1992-2003 and ranked by total citations, theAll disciplines from 25%-250% bycitat
The mean number of citations of openly available computer
science conference papers was 256% whitehigher than non-
bars, journal/year, OA articles have consistently more articles. advantage varying show an OA
computer science and related disciplines. Citationdiscipline andelectronicC., Harnad, S., and Gingras, Y. 2006. Ten-Year Cross-Disciplinary comparison of
open. (Lawrence, S. 2001. Free online availability substantially
Open Access access to year. Hajjem, versions, and making
Impact Advantage by Country. Total articles (gray curve), percent OA articl
increases a paper's impact. Nature 411:521) the growth of open access and how it increases research citation impact. http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.DL/0606079)
The actual percentage of articles available past and present volumes accessible in
percent OA citation advantage (white bars); averaged across all disciplines and years 1992-2003; rank
Of a sample of owing to limitations ing i s t i c r g r e s shundreds, of T h i s r e s e alibraries.i Indirect Articles whose curve), percent OA articl
research r h x a m n s t h e
online is greater,4,633 articles OpenoAccess eCitation Impact Advantagec bye Year.eTotal articles (gray authors have supplemented
(c): I n a l the ion model
percentarticles compared to non-OA articles access impact of articles and publisher's version by self-archiving their
from online potential costs are reduced (OA)between multiple open
examined, 2,280 (49%) were OA and
extraction of article informationcontrolling citation advantage (white bars): 1992-2003, journal s uacrosst iall - disciplines.s sNo yearly
had a mean citation count of 9.04 OA OA
for confounders, relationship
availability of averaged
bscrip on based acce to the
whereas the mean for TA articles was locating twice as likely to be cited restricted and the citation advantage in final draft to make it accessible free for
severely articles access by researchers own
documents and limitations in size of the OA citation advantage, but %OA is growing from year to year (see Table 1). Note t
remained in
5.76. There appears to be a clear the the first 4–10 mo after publication, with by collecting data of OA copies and all on the web (OA) are cited significantly
articles on the web. Only points with greater make the to 2.9 growth citation numbersin developing more than articles in the same journal and
citation advantage for those articleslogarithmic ratio increasing smaller institutions and in 20 top library
the odds (to OA 10–16 visible).
than 100 articles are computed. mo an immediate OA article on the Nonetheless,correlation journals. year that havegreater formade more The OA
that are OA as opposed to those that
are TA. This advantage, however, as
countries. and discover a many stakeholders
after publication. Articles published
We
information science
between advantage is
not been
the
OA.
citable
varies between disciplines, with journal site have higher impact than the two variables; namely, multiple articles, not because of a quality bias from
sociology having the highest citation (Figure 3.b) which means that within each citation range,a the percentage ofwhat to makethat but O
self-archived or otherwise openly
© 2001 Macmillan Magazines LtdOA articles. We found strong
OA availability of an article has authors self-selecting articles OA, are
521
advantage, but the lowest number of accessible positive impact on its citation because of a quality advantage, from users
OA articles, from the sample taken, than the percentage of articles that are The statistical analysis are all positive and very freed by Tab
evidence that, even in a journal that is count. NOA (correlations self-selecting what to use and cite, high,
and ecology having the highest widely available in research libraries, reveals that for every increase in OA from the constraints of selective
individual citation count for OA differential also increases with the citation range, being lowest for uncited articles(Gargouri,
OA articles are more immediately the availability of OA articles, accessibility to subscribers only. and high
articles, but the smallest citation recognized and cited by peers than non- citation numbers increase by 2.348. Y., Hajjem, C., Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Carr,
advantage. (Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., over sixteen citations. This confirms J., Myers, R. L., and Wilhoite, S. for computer science articlesSelf- [15
OA articles published in the same (Xia, the pattern reported L., Brody, T., and Harnad, S. 2010. by
and Rowland, F. 2008. The citation
advantage of open-access articles. J. If we look at our total sample of 1,307,038 articles across allmandated, open quality increases w
journal. (Eysenbach, G. 2006. Citation
advantage of open access articles. PLoS
K. 2011. Multiple open access
availability and citation impact. Journal
Selected or access
disciplines and years,
citation impact for higher research.
Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 59:1963-1972) Biol 4:e157+) of Information Science 37:19-28) PLoS ONE 5:e13636+)
(61%) of them are uncited; of the remaining 513544 (39%), 155265 (12%) have 1 citation,
(4%) with 16+ citations (Figure 4, gray curve). 156845 (12%) of the total articles are OA

12. Finland and Aalto
• A good overview1 in Signum 4/2012
• Academy of Finland “recommends” open access
• No unified national policy
• University of Helsinki open access policy (2010)
• Fulltexts of ALL articles should be deposited to
Uni database
• Not known, not followed, violates copyright (?)
• Aalto preparing open access policy
• A strategic tool to increase research impact
(and make it to the top 100?)
• Aalto Open Data very ambitious2
1http://ojs.tsv.fi/index.php/signum/article/view/6967/5587
2http://sci.aalto.fi/en/current/news/view/2012-11-07-003/

13. Social media for research
– a real tool or just for fun?

14. Data from October 2011
http://inspiredm.com/current-state-of-social-media-the-big-four-exclusive-infographic/

16. Started Aug 29, 2012. Took a
couple of hours to set up and tweak.
38 posts (~10 / month)
~2000 views (busiest day: 112)
ResearchGate:
40 followers, following 47 people
All article fulltexts available, 140 downloads
Google+ account:
Became active in Dec 2011.
~1 post / day, mostly science topics
~4400 have me in their circles

17. (Eysenbach, G. 2012. Can tweets predict citations? metrics of social
impact based on twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of
scientific impact. Journal of Medical Internet Research 13.)

18. Social media impact (selected articles)
• Eysenbach, G. 2012. Can tweets predict citations? metrics of
social impact based on twitter and correlation with traditional
metrics of scientific impact. Journal of Medical Internet
Research 13(4):e123. http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2012
• Bar-Ilan, J., Haustein, S., Peters, I., Priem, J., Shema, H., and
Terliesner, J. 2012. Beyond citations: Scholars' visibility on the
social web. http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.5611
• Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., and Hemminger, B. M. 2012.
Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly
impact. http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4745
• Kelly, B. and Delasalle, J., 2012. Can LinkedIn and
Academia.edu Enhance Access to Open Repositories? In:
OR2012: the 7th International Conference on Open
Repositories, Edinburgh, Scotland
http://opus.bath.ac.uk/30227/1/or12-136-final.pdf
• Not much solid research yet, a LOT more sure to follow...
Thanks to Ross Mounce (http://rossmounce.co.uk/)

19. A linear multivariate model with time and tweets as significant predictors (P < .001)
could explain 27% of the variation of citations. Highly tweeted articles were 11 times
more likely to be highly cited than less-tweeted articles (9/12 or 75% of highly tweeted
article were highly cited, while only 3/43 or 7% of less-tweeted articles were highly
cited; rate ratio 0.75/0.07 = 10.75, 95% confidence interval, 3.4–33.6). Top-cited articles
can be predicted from top-tweeted articles with 93% specificity and 75% sensitivity.
(Eysenbach, G. 2012. Can tweets predict citations? metrics of social impact based on twitter Altmetrics and citations track forms of impact that are distinct, but related;
and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. Journal of Medical Internet neither approach is able to describe the complete picture of scholarly use
Research 13.) alone. There are moderate correlations between Mendeley and Web of
Science citation (comparable to that between Web of Science and Scopus),
but many altmetric indicators seem mostly orthogonal to citation. Third,
articles cluster in ways that suggest several different impact “flavors,” that
capture impacts on different audiences and of different types; for instance
some articles (cluster B) may be heavily read and saved by scholars but
seldom cited. (Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., and Hemminger, B. M. 2012. Altmetrics
in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv)
No clear picture yet.

20. Summary
• Public pays for research – public should have access
• Reporters, independent scholars, patient groups...
• Stop bleeding libraries dry: price competition
• >60% of EU funded research open by 2016
• Citation advantage is real and tangible
• Citations are the career currency...
• ...and citations are 20-32.5% of Uni ranking!
• How about social media?
• Science outreach and public engagement
• Natural for younger researchers?
• Networking, contacts; citation advantage?
Thank you.