WEBVTT

1
00:00:12.240 --> 00:00:14.210 A:middle L:90%
like all. Good evening. I'm Kiri DeBose,

2
00:00:14.210 --> 00:00:16.679 A:middle L:90%
the College Librarian for Natural Resources and Environment.

3
00:00:16.690 --> 00:00:18.890 A:middle L:90%
And I'm here to introduce our faculty panel. We'll

4
00:00:18.890 --> 00:00:21.539 A:middle L:90%
be talking about open access. We have Dr Zachary

5
00:00:21.539 --> 00:00:24.320 A:middle L:90%
Drescher, a dresser. He is from religion and

6
00:00:24.320 --> 00:00:26.969 A:middle L:90%
culture. Dr. Deborah Good. She is from

7
00:00:26.969 --> 00:00:30.190 A:middle L:90%
human nutrition Foods and exercise. And Dr Morella,

8
00:00:30.190 --> 00:00:32.869 A:middle L:90%
who is from department of Chemistry. So they're gonna

9
00:00:32.869 --> 00:00:34.840 A:middle L:90%
be giving us some of their perspectives on the various

10
00:00:34.850 --> 00:00:37.549 A:middle L:90%
disciplines that they work with with open access. Um

11
00:00:37.560 --> 00:00:39.280 A:middle L:90%
, we'll take questions from the audience. And if

12
00:00:39.280 --> 00:00:41.130 A:middle L:90%
nobody has any, I have an entire list which

13
00:00:41.130 --> 00:00:42.549 A:middle L:90%
they have seen and said, Oh, God,

14
00:00:44.340 --> 00:00:50.000 A:middle L:90%
yes. So please ask questions. I don't know

15
00:00:50.000 --> 00:00:52.409 A:middle L:90%
. Maybe we should start without. Our experiences are

16
00:00:52.509 --> 00:00:54.969 A:middle L:90%
Do you think? Sounds good. Sounds good.

17
00:00:54.979 --> 00:00:59.060 A:middle L:90%
Get the discussion started. And since you stepped forward

18
00:00:59.070 --> 00:01:02.750 A:middle L:90%
, go ahead. Um, so I guess,

19
00:01:02.759 --> 00:01:06.340 A:middle L:90%
um, I would start by saying that I am

20
00:01:06.340 --> 00:01:10.180 A:middle L:90%
technically an editor of a on the editorial bar of

21
00:01:10.180 --> 00:01:12.420 A:middle L:90%
an open access panel or an open access journal.

22
00:01:12.430 --> 00:01:15.620 A:middle L:90%
Um, that was asked in 2000 and eight.

23
00:01:15.620 --> 00:01:17.920 A:middle L:90%
I looked back in my notes on that, and

24
00:01:17.920 --> 00:01:19.799 A:middle L:90%
at the time, it actually seems like a really

25
00:01:19.799 --> 00:01:23.689 A:middle L:90%
good journal. I've reevaluated it at this point and

26
00:01:23.689 --> 00:01:26.260 A:middle L:90%
decided that it's probably not, and I actually think

27
00:01:26.260 --> 00:01:27.629 A:middle L:90%
it's not even functional at this point. I can't

28
00:01:27.629 --> 00:01:32.260 A:middle L:90%
get a hold of anyone there, But as part

29
00:01:32.260 --> 00:01:34.549 A:middle L:90%
of that, I mean, I know that if

30
00:01:34.549 --> 00:01:36.489 A:middle L:90%
you look at some of the literature on there have

31
00:01:36.489 --> 00:01:38.159 A:middle L:90%
been a lot of reports about lack of peer review

32
00:01:38.159 --> 00:01:42.109 A:middle L:90%
, I know that the articles that I, um

33
00:01:42.120 --> 00:01:46.790 A:middle L:90%
, put through or saw were as rigorously peer reviewed

34
00:01:46.790 --> 00:01:49.030 A:middle L:90%
by myself as any other paper that I would peer

35
00:01:49.030 --> 00:01:53.569 A:middle L:90%
review. So, uh, you know, I

36
00:01:53.569 --> 00:01:56.859 A:middle L:90%
I guess it all depends on the actual individual.

37
00:01:56.859 --> 00:01:57.680 A:middle L:90%
I think that actually is true of any journal,

38
00:01:57.680 --> 00:02:00.420 A:middle L:90%
though. So I sit on the editorial board of

39
00:02:00.430 --> 00:02:06.219 A:middle L:90%
the Open your endocrinology board journal, but I'm I'm

40
00:02:06.219 --> 00:02:07.389 A:middle L:90%
going to tell them to take my name off very

41
00:02:07.389 --> 00:02:09.789 A:middle L:90%
soon. Uh, if I ever hear from them

42
00:02:09.789 --> 00:02:12.870 A:middle L:90%
. And then even this morning, I got an

43
00:02:12.879 --> 00:02:14.800 A:middle L:90%
email and I get them all the time asking me

44
00:02:14.800 --> 00:02:16.819 A:middle L:90%
to join the editorial board of such and so journal

45
00:02:16.830 --> 00:02:21.460 A:middle L:90%
. Uh, I have papers in PLOS one,

46
00:02:21.460 --> 00:02:24.219 A:middle L:90%
which is a highly reputable open access journal, and

47
00:02:24.219 --> 00:02:27.590 A:middle L:90%
I would publish their again, and I have peer

48
00:02:27.590 --> 00:02:30.659 A:middle L:90%
reviewed for them as well. So I guess that's

49
00:02:30.659 --> 00:02:35.960 A:middle L:90%
my experience with open access. Yes, my experience

50
00:02:35.960 --> 00:02:38.409 A:middle L:90%
is actually quite similar. I am also on the

51
00:02:38.409 --> 00:02:44.110 A:middle L:90%
editorial board of a couple of open access journals that

52
00:02:44.110 --> 00:02:49.800 A:middle L:90%
when they initially invited me, I was fairly naive

53
00:02:49.810 --> 00:02:53.210 A:middle L:90%
about open access. Other than, um, I

54
00:02:53.219 --> 00:02:55.650 A:middle L:90%
did have good experience with one that I'll talk about

55
00:02:55.650 --> 00:02:59.030 A:middle L:90%
in a minute. And since I did think that

56
00:02:59.030 --> 00:03:00.659 A:middle L:90%
this was a good thing, I said yes.

57
00:03:01.139 --> 00:03:05.759 A:middle L:90%
One particular one, though even from the start,

58
00:03:06.340 --> 00:03:10.330 A:middle L:90%
was you know, they invited me to actually submit

59
00:03:10.330 --> 00:03:14.870 A:middle L:90%
a paper which I did, and I never heard

60
00:03:14.870 --> 00:03:19.159 A:middle L:90%
anything, never heard anything tried to contact people,

61
00:03:19.639 --> 00:03:23.509 A:middle L:90%
got no response. I've asked them since to withdraw

62
00:03:23.520 --> 00:03:28.319 A:middle L:90%
that submission and take my name off the editorial board

63
00:03:28.330 --> 00:03:30.030 A:middle L:90%
, which they haven't and I have not heard back

64
00:03:30.030 --> 00:03:32.500 A:middle L:90%
from anybody. So again, that's now made me

65
00:03:32.500 --> 00:03:36.270 A:middle L:90%
much more wary as well as a lot of the

66
00:03:36.280 --> 00:03:39.439 A:middle L:90%
publications that have popped up about predatory journals and other

67
00:03:39.439 --> 00:03:44.759 A:middle L:90%
things. So, um, that was the kind

68
00:03:44.759 --> 00:03:49.169 A:middle L:90%
of negative experience I've had, and it continues to

69
00:03:49.169 --> 00:03:52.860 A:middle L:90%
this day that I get lots of requests almost on

70
00:03:52.860 --> 00:03:55.169 A:middle L:90%
a weekly basis. Would you please be on our

71
00:03:55.169 --> 00:04:00.180 A:middle L:90%
editorial board? But I have published five papers in

72
00:04:00.189 --> 00:04:05.629 A:middle L:90%
a well established, long established, highly reputable journal

73
00:04:05.629 --> 00:04:10.990 A:middle L:90%
for crystallography. Um, it's got probably one of

74
00:04:10.990 --> 00:04:14.150 A:middle L:90%
the most rigorous peer reviews of any journal that I've

75
00:04:14.150 --> 00:04:16.560 A:middle L:90%
worked with, and they've been in in the business

76
00:04:16.560 --> 00:04:21.370 A:middle L:90%
for 30 some years. And so very good experience

77
00:04:21.370 --> 00:04:25.579 A:middle L:90%
with them. Um uh, when lots of good

78
00:04:25.579 --> 00:04:28.750 A:middle L:90%
interactions with the editors whenever I have submitted a paper

79
00:04:29.339 --> 00:04:33.300 A:middle L:90%
and nicely that, uh, lately when I've submitted

80
00:04:33.300 --> 00:04:38.199 A:middle L:90%
them this wonderful sub mention fund that the library offers

81
00:04:38.199 --> 00:04:42.850 A:middle L:90%
actually paid for it. So great experience on that

82
00:04:42.850 --> 00:04:46.660 A:middle L:90%
end. Okay, um, I am going to

83
00:04:46.660 --> 00:04:48.899 A:middle L:90%
be the outlier in this panel because things are different

84
00:04:48.910 --> 00:04:51.389 A:middle L:90%
in the humanities and especially I'm trained as a historian

85
00:04:51.389 --> 00:04:55.360 A:middle L:90%
. I am an American historian. Um, religion

86
00:04:55.360 --> 00:04:57.540 A:middle L:90%
and culture is this kind of hodgepodge of folks different

87
00:04:57.540 --> 00:05:00.779 A:middle L:90%
disciplines. Um and I guess so. I'm at

88
00:05:00.779 --> 00:05:04.230 A:middle L:90%
the beginning stages of my career. I am a

89
00:05:04.240 --> 00:05:06.110 A:middle L:90%
haven't even been a PhD for a year at this

90
00:05:06.110 --> 00:05:08.819 A:middle L:90%
point. Um, and so I'm not on any

91
00:05:08.829 --> 00:05:11.579 A:middle L:90%
advisory boards just trying to get things published at this

92
00:05:11.579 --> 00:05:15.680 A:middle L:90%
point, But I have worked for a traditional print

93
00:05:15.680 --> 00:05:17.779 A:middle L:90%
journal that well regarding the field, the Journal of

94
00:05:17.779 --> 00:05:24.279 A:middle L:90%
Southern History, that shows absolutely no effort or desire

95
00:05:24.279 --> 00:05:28.730 A:middle L:90%
to move towards open access. So I've I've seen

96
00:05:28.740 --> 00:05:30.839 A:middle L:90%
that. And I think that that journal represents how

97
00:05:30.839 --> 00:05:33.990 A:middle L:90%
the most highly respected journals, at least in history

98
00:05:33.990 --> 00:05:36.839 A:middle L:90%
, are working. Um, they don't really see

99
00:05:36.839 --> 00:05:41.480 A:middle L:90%
any incentive to move toward any open access. Um

100
00:05:41.490 --> 00:05:44.459 A:middle L:90%
, there are journals that are starting to pop up

101
00:05:44.470 --> 00:05:46.410 A:middle L:90%
that are open access and peer reviewed. And,

102
00:05:46.420 --> 00:05:49.720 A:middle L:90%
um, even put forward some good work, one

103
00:05:49.720 --> 00:05:51.980 A:middle L:90%
that's popping up to mind and in my sub fields

104
00:05:51.980 --> 00:05:57.240 A:middle L:90%
, The Journal of Southern Religion. But it's it's

105
00:05:57.240 --> 00:05:59.490 A:middle L:90%
not a publication you're gonna seek after. If you're

106
00:05:59.490 --> 00:06:01.379 A:middle L:90%
in my stage of your career, right, you're

107
00:06:01.379 --> 00:06:06.290 A:middle L:90%
gonna still want to aim for these more traditional print

108
00:06:06.290 --> 00:06:10.620 A:middle L:90%
based sources. Another thing that I'm involved in right

109
00:06:10.620 --> 00:06:12.810 A:middle L:90%
now is, um, people I know are putting

110
00:06:12.810 --> 00:06:16.519 A:middle L:90%
together an open access textbook for American history and in

111
00:06:16.519 --> 00:06:19.759 A:middle L:90%
order to compile a lot of different voices. So

112
00:06:19.759 --> 00:06:21.379 A:middle L:90%
I am at the moment, I think one of

113
00:06:21.389 --> 00:06:25.529 A:middle L:90%
210 contributors to this, uh, so this is

114
00:06:25.540 --> 00:06:30.389 A:middle L:90%
a massively collective collaborative project that's That's kind of different

115
00:06:30.389 --> 00:06:34.060 A:middle L:90%
from the issues that my co Panelists were talking about

116
00:06:34.069 --> 00:06:38.769 A:middle L:90%
involving journals. But it's still I think it's an

117
00:06:38.769 --> 00:06:46.370 A:middle L:90%
important thing that we're doing. You mentioned your early

118
00:06:46.379 --> 00:06:47.939 A:middle L:90%
stage career, and there's not a huge incentive to

119
00:06:47.939 --> 00:06:51.360 A:middle L:90%
publish these open access. How do we get around

120
00:06:51.620 --> 00:06:56.050 A:middle L:90%
? This is not going away. Yeah. Um

121
00:06:56.740 --> 00:06:58.620 A:middle L:90%
well, I mean, again, answering from my

122
00:06:58.620 --> 00:07:00.060 A:middle L:90%
discipline. So there was this. I don't know

123
00:07:00.060 --> 00:07:01.790 A:middle L:90%
if any of you are familiar with the statement that

124
00:07:01.790 --> 00:07:05.670 A:middle L:90%
the American Historical Association, um put forward. I

125
00:07:05.670 --> 00:07:08.949 A:middle L:90%
mean, I'm sure that the information professionals in the

126
00:07:08.949 --> 00:07:13.110 A:middle L:90%
room our but the American Historical Association issued a statement

127
00:07:13.120 --> 00:07:17.009 A:middle L:90%
about open access policy regarding dissertations over the summer.

128
00:07:17.019 --> 00:07:21.889 A:middle L:90%
And they basically said institutions should make it possible for

129
00:07:21.899 --> 00:07:26.319 A:middle L:90%
recently minute PhDs to put an embargo on their dissertation

130
00:07:26.329 --> 00:07:30.129 A:middle L:90%
and hide it from the world. Mm. And

131
00:07:30.129 --> 00:07:32.360 A:middle L:90%
that provoked a lot of controversy, mainly because people

132
00:07:32.360 --> 00:07:34.420 A:middle L:90%
said, um, you know, that's fine,

133
00:07:34.420 --> 00:07:36.189 A:middle L:90%
giving people a choice. But this isn't what are

134
00:07:36.189 --> 00:07:40.089 A:middle L:90%
leading institutions should do? Our leading institutions should stand

135
00:07:40.089 --> 00:07:42.589 A:middle L:90%
up for the most vulnerable people, right? Grad

136
00:07:42.589 --> 00:07:46.600 A:middle L:90%
students and recent, you know, new PhDs.

137
00:07:46.610 --> 00:07:47.939 A:middle L:90%
Uh, and they haven't done that Uh And so

138
00:07:47.949 --> 00:07:50.649 A:middle L:90%
that's the problem, right? Is that especially in

139
00:07:50.649 --> 00:07:54.819 A:middle L:90%
the humanities, where folks or humanities and even some

140
00:07:54.819 --> 00:07:58.269 A:middle L:90%
social sciences, where new graduates are really vulnerable If

141
00:07:58.269 --> 00:08:01.110 A:middle L:90%
they don't get that academic job, then what's next

142
00:08:01.120 --> 00:08:05.509 A:middle L:90%
? Um and so there's There's a call for greater

143
00:08:05.509 --> 00:08:07.550 A:middle L:90%
, I guess, institutional awareness and activism, uh

144
00:08:09.639 --> 00:08:11.870 A:middle L:90%
, to start accepting other forms of publication to start

145
00:08:11.870 --> 00:08:20.019 A:middle L:90%
accepting more openly available things. Look for a number

146
00:08:20.019 --> 00:08:22.430 A:middle L:90%
of publications in the quality, and if someone has

147
00:08:22.430 --> 00:08:24.329 A:middle L:90%
50 publications, can't beat them all. Tell the

148
00:08:24.329 --> 00:08:28.230 A:middle L:90%
quality. So you looked at the German name basically

149
00:08:28.230 --> 00:08:30.759 A:middle L:90%
as a metric for this giving one way around.

150
00:08:30.759 --> 00:08:33.360 A:middle L:90%
This would be just point those out. Awesome.

151
00:08:33.740 --> 00:08:35.940 A:middle L:90%
Require CDs with the Journal is not on it.

152
00:08:35.070 --> 00:08:39.009 A:middle L:90%
In place of that put citations or something like this

153
00:08:39.720 --> 00:08:43.200 A:middle L:90%
. I think that I don't think that's fair,

154
00:08:43.200 --> 00:08:48.250 A:middle L:90%
because there really is a quality gap in stuff that's

155
00:08:48.250 --> 00:08:52.179 A:middle L:90%
published in the top journals. And then a lot

156
00:08:52.179 --> 00:08:54.480 A:middle L:90%
of open access journals are and you really I mean

157
00:08:54.490 --> 00:09:00.649 A:middle L:90%
, it's comparing apples and you have a lower journal

158
00:09:00.659 --> 00:09:05.470 A:middle L:90%
. Yeah, A. And you have 100 citations

159
00:09:05.470 --> 00:09:09.240 A:middle L:90%
in your the other one. The review committee has

160
00:09:09.240 --> 00:09:11.759 A:middle L:90%
never seen. They just see your nature. You

161
00:09:11.759 --> 00:09:13.779 A:middle L:90%
gotta be better than this other one. Despite them

162
00:09:13.779 --> 00:09:16.659 A:middle L:90%
having the exact same Controlling. Probably. Good.

163
00:09:16.539 --> 00:09:20.129 A:middle L:90%
Yeah. So isn't this I mean, I think

164
00:09:20.129 --> 00:09:20.960 A:middle L:90%
it needs to get away from this chase of the

165
00:09:20.970 --> 00:09:24.940 A:middle L:90%
big publications. Otherwise, you have all these someone

166
00:09:24.950 --> 00:09:28.120 A:middle L:90%
mentioned before the panel. All this fraud is correlated

167
00:09:28.129 --> 00:09:31.970 A:middle L:90%
with impact factor. Make sense of smell. Since

168
00:09:31.970 --> 00:09:37.460 A:middle L:90%
you know what inches it seems to me that what

169
00:09:37.840 --> 00:09:43.059 A:middle L:90%
? What? What that says about reading a book

170
00:09:43.539 --> 00:09:48.429 A:middle L:90%
is that the market is determined whether you should get

171
00:09:48.440 --> 00:09:50.909 A:middle L:90%
10 years. Do you have a popular topic?

172
00:09:50.919 --> 00:09:52.009 A:middle L:90%
Do you have a topic that the publisher wants to

173
00:09:52.009 --> 00:09:56.250 A:middle L:90%
sell and we'll make enough money to? Should that

174
00:09:56.259 --> 00:10:01.490 A:middle L:90%
be what determines I say? No. But again

175
00:10:01.490 --> 00:10:03.460 A:middle L:90%
, I can't I don't have that say at this

176
00:10:03.460 --> 00:10:03.889 A:middle L:90%
point in my career, you know? So it's

177
00:10:03.889 --> 00:10:09.259 A:middle L:90%
up to folks who are established to start worrying about

178
00:10:09.259 --> 00:10:11.460 A:middle L:90%
these issues. And from what I've seen, that's

179
00:10:11.460 --> 00:10:15.889 A:middle L:90%
a slow change. Right? Um So what?

180
00:10:15.899 --> 00:10:18.440 A:middle L:90%
What she's referring to is that the reason this whole

181
00:10:18.440 --> 00:10:20.029 A:middle L:90%
dissertation embargo thing was a big deal is that to

182
00:10:20.039 --> 00:10:22.610 A:middle L:90%
get tenure in the humanities, you have to get

183
00:10:22.610 --> 00:10:24.820 A:middle L:90%
that first book out. And that's really the only

184
00:10:24.820 --> 00:10:28.629 A:middle L:90%
way that a lot of places, uh, teaching

185
00:10:28.629 --> 00:10:33.080 A:middle L:90%
colleges decide. Um, and academic publishers don't really

186
00:10:33.080 --> 00:10:33.840 A:middle L:90%
make a lot of money. Um, and they're

187
00:10:33.840 --> 00:10:37.379 A:middle L:90%
making less money. And so they are becoming more

188
00:10:37.379 --> 00:10:39.720 A:middle L:90%
and more hesitant to publish things, especially things that

189
00:10:39.720 --> 00:10:43.580 A:middle L:90%
are freely available on the Internet. And so one

190
00:10:43.580 --> 00:10:46.940 A:middle L:90%
of the fears is that, um, you know

191
00:10:46.950 --> 00:10:50.480 A:middle L:90%
, I'll have my dissertation out there available, and

192
00:10:50.480 --> 00:10:52.980 A:middle L:90%
Publisher X, which is a good publisher, may

193
00:10:52.980 --> 00:10:54.669 A:middle L:90%
have some hidden policy. We don't publish anything that's

194
00:10:54.669 --> 00:10:58.460 A:middle L:90%
even, you know, half available. Um,

195
00:10:58.940 --> 00:11:03.899 A:middle L:90%
openly. That's the fear. Um, and you

196
00:11:03.899 --> 00:11:05.809 A:middle L:90%
know, the debate since has been is that really

197
00:11:05.809 --> 00:11:09.519 A:middle L:90%
how publication works? And people have argued on both

198
00:11:09.519 --> 00:11:11.580 A:middle L:90%
sides of that, and I don't really know how

199
00:11:11.580 --> 00:11:15.690 A:middle L:90%
publication works now in chemistry. We don't really have

200
00:11:15.690 --> 00:11:16.779 A:middle L:90%
that issue. I mean, it's it's an entirely

201
00:11:16.779 --> 00:11:22.889 A:middle L:90%
different group of metrics, and certainly publications are are

202
00:11:22.889 --> 00:11:24.419 A:middle L:90%
the main issue now back to the question, though

203
00:11:24.429 --> 00:11:31.000 A:middle L:90%
, of what makes for a good publication. I

204
00:11:31.000 --> 00:11:35.759 A:middle L:90%
think both promotion and tenure committees and hiring committees do

205
00:11:35.759 --> 00:11:41.659 A:middle L:90%
look at the name but tied to what is its

206
00:11:41.669 --> 00:11:45.919 A:middle L:90%
impact factor, which is tied not to that individual

207
00:11:45.919 --> 00:11:50.860 A:middle L:90%
persons publications, obviously, but to the overall citation

208
00:11:50.240 --> 00:11:56.009 A:middle L:90%
. But we we do take advantage of the citation

209
00:11:56.009 --> 00:12:01.769 A:middle L:90%
report that can be obtained on any individual. And

210
00:12:01.769 --> 00:12:05.360 A:middle L:90%
I don't know if anybody is familiar with the what

211
00:12:05.360 --> 00:12:09.090 A:middle L:90%
is it called the H in, uh, the

212
00:12:09.090 --> 00:12:13.039 A:middle L:90%
H Index, which it's kind of interesting because I'm

213
00:12:13.039 --> 00:12:16.259 A:middle L:90%
not sure what made the person who came up with

214
00:12:16.259 --> 00:12:18.639 A:middle L:90%
it pick that. I think it's their last name

215
00:12:18.639 --> 00:12:22.299 A:middle L:90%
starts with age, but age is, you know

216
00:12:22.299 --> 00:12:24.580 A:middle L:90%
, you're If you've got an age index of 10

217
00:12:24.590 --> 00:12:31.649 A:middle L:90%
, you've got 10 publications with 10 or more citations

218
00:12:31.659 --> 00:12:33.529 A:middle L:90%
. So you know why that metric, regardless of

219
00:12:33.529 --> 00:12:39.080 A:middle L:90%
whether it's called age, is kind of unusual in

220
00:12:39.080 --> 00:12:43.120 A:middle L:90%
some respect. I mean, 10 publications of 100

221
00:12:43.129 --> 00:12:48.250 A:middle L:90%
Citation strikes me as better than 10 with 10 or

222
00:12:48.250 --> 00:12:52.100 A:middle L:90%
more, but nevertheless, so the index actually talks

223
00:12:52.100 --> 00:12:54.820 A:middle L:90%
about the numbers of papers with a certain number of

224
00:12:54.820 --> 00:13:00.679 A:middle L:90%
citations, and so that's one way of looking at

225
00:13:00.690 --> 00:13:03.220 A:middle L:90%
them. But then, one of the things that

226
00:13:03.220 --> 00:13:09.220 A:middle L:90%
I've discovered with respect to reviews of papers is more

227
00:13:09.220 --> 00:13:13.779 A:middle L:90%
and more. The reviewers, since they typically are

228
00:13:13.779 --> 00:13:18.720 A:middle L:90%
chosen from the same field, are basically demanding that

229
00:13:18.730 --> 00:13:22.740 A:middle L:90%
well your paper is okay, but you're missing all

230
00:13:22.740 --> 00:13:26.639 A:middle L:90%
of these references that absolutely must be in this paper

231
00:13:26.639 --> 00:13:30.879 A:middle L:90%
before publication. So it's to me a conflict of

232
00:13:30.879 --> 00:13:33.360 A:middle L:90%
interest that they are kind of able to call the

233
00:13:33.840 --> 00:13:39.159 A:middle L:90%
It's called the shots on the review process based on

234
00:13:39.159 --> 00:13:41.279 A:middle L:90%
they want you to put, you know, and

235
00:13:41.279 --> 00:13:43.350 A:middle L:90%
you can tell obviously right away who it is because

236
00:13:43.740 --> 00:13:46.679 A:middle L:90%
you know, the 10 references they want all have

237
00:13:46.679 --> 00:13:50.350 A:middle L:90%
the same author. I wonder if I could ask

238
00:13:50.360 --> 00:13:54.269 A:middle L:90%
ask you a question about, um, sort of

239
00:13:54.269 --> 00:13:56.789 A:middle L:90%
the social sciences. Uh, you know, I

240
00:13:56.789 --> 00:14:00.919 A:middle L:90%
mean tradition for for Joan eyes that we would publish

241
00:14:00.929 --> 00:14:03.649 A:middle L:90%
our dissertation research, probably in several papers in a

242
00:14:03.649 --> 00:14:05.799 A:middle L:90%
journal. And I wonder why that's not cheering the

243
00:14:05.799 --> 00:14:09.039 A:middle L:90%
social sciences. Why can't that be true? And

244
00:14:09.039 --> 00:14:11.409 A:middle L:90%
and it and it still has to do with interest

245
00:14:11.409 --> 00:14:13.600 A:middle L:90%
level. So you mentioned, you know, a

246
00:14:13.600 --> 00:14:16.419 A:middle L:90%
publisher isn't going to be maybe as interested in a

247
00:14:16.419 --> 00:14:18.289 A:middle L:90%
book on subject acts that's still the same in a

248
00:14:18.289 --> 00:14:20.750 A:middle L:90%
journal, right? I mean, a journal can

249
00:14:20.750 --> 00:14:24.850 A:middle L:90%
say the science is all sound, but it's just

250
00:14:24.860 --> 00:14:26.370 A:middle L:90%
is not going to generate enough interest. Um,

251
00:14:26.370 --> 00:14:28.580 A:middle L:90%
but still, there are lots of other options is

252
00:14:28.580 --> 00:14:33.009 A:middle L:90%
that is that it would open access journals actually give

253
00:14:33.009 --> 00:14:37.049 A:middle L:90%
some of the reputable ones that is, give social

254
00:14:37.049 --> 00:14:41.860 A:middle L:90%
scientists sort of that opportunity to publish essays. I

255
00:14:41.860 --> 00:14:45.919 A:middle L:90%
guess it would be more essays on the information rather

256
00:14:45.919 --> 00:14:48.159 A:middle L:90%
than rather than a whole textbook or a whole,

257
00:14:48.740 --> 00:14:50.929 A:middle L:90%
you know. And so, from conversations I've had

258
00:14:50.929 --> 00:14:52.539 A:middle L:90%
with maybe one sociologist I'm thinking of, he was

259
00:14:52.539 --> 00:14:56.559 A:middle L:90%
able to do something like that. But coming from

260
00:14:56.570 --> 00:15:01.629 A:middle L:90%
history, I don't know that a split up product

261
00:15:01.629 --> 00:15:03.820 A:middle L:90%
is ever going to be accepted like that. Um

262
00:15:03.820 --> 00:15:07.789 A:middle L:90%
, and I think this is largely because it's tradition

263
00:15:07.789 --> 00:15:09.269 A:middle L:90%
, right? And historians, uh, they are

264
00:15:09.279 --> 00:15:11.320 A:middle L:90%
stuck in the past in more ways than one.

265
00:15:11.330 --> 00:15:13.399 A:middle L:90%
Uh, I joke about what I do, but

266
00:15:13.399 --> 00:15:16.990 A:middle L:90%
it's true. It's really hard to change what historians

267
00:15:16.000 --> 00:15:18.919 A:middle L:90%
want to do. The other thing historians have to

268
00:15:18.929 --> 00:15:22.269 A:middle L:90%
get over is that they have this assumption that they

269
00:15:22.269 --> 00:15:26.379 A:middle L:90%
are not just scholars creating new knowledge, but they're

270
00:15:26.379 --> 00:15:31.350 A:middle L:90%
creating, um, stories or art, or something

271
00:15:31.350 --> 00:15:35.059 A:middle L:90%
that has another, I guess, more aesthetic quality

272
00:15:35.059 --> 00:15:35.850 A:middle L:90%
to what they do, and that needs to be

273
00:15:35.850 --> 00:15:39.960 A:middle L:90%
presented in this book format for some reason. So

274
00:15:41.740 --> 00:15:43.450 A:middle L:90%
there's a lot of things to get over for that

275
00:15:43.450 --> 00:15:45.250 A:middle L:90%
to be possible, I would like to see it

276
00:15:45.740 --> 00:15:48.549 A:middle L:90%
. But then I would also on your comments,

277
00:15:48.549 --> 00:15:52.299 A:middle L:90%
say about reviewers, uh, you know, whenever

278
00:15:52.309 --> 00:15:52.830 A:middle L:90%
, at least in my field. But I'm sure

279
00:15:52.830 --> 00:15:56.529 A:middle L:90%
it's probably two years whenever we submit an article,

280
00:15:56.539 --> 00:15:58.120 A:middle L:90%
uh, we always put down who we think would

281
00:15:58.129 --> 00:16:00.100 A:middle L:90%
be the best reviewers. And I'm not gonna put

282
00:16:00.100 --> 00:16:03.289 A:middle L:90%
down someone that I think hates me or, you

283
00:16:03.289 --> 00:16:04.190 A:middle L:90%
know, hates my work. I'm gonna put down

284
00:16:04.190 --> 00:16:07.789 A:middle L:90%
the people that I talked to at conferences, and

285
00:16:07.789 --> 00:16:10.860 A:middle L:90%
they know my work well, and they respect what

286
00:16:10.860 --> 00:16:11.500 A:middle L:90%
I do, and they're probably going to get my

287
00:16:11.500 --> 00:16:15.909 A:middle L:90%
paper a favorable rating. And that's just, you

288
00:16:15.909 --> 00:16:17.940 A:middle L:90%
know, I rarely put down someone that I have

289
00:16:17.940 --> 00:16:21.820 A:middle L:90%
never met ever. That's I don't in my journals

290
00:16:21.820 --> 00:16:26.009 A:middle L:90%
actually ask you the other questions. Is there somebody

291
00:16:26.009 --> 00:16:29.909 A:middle L:90%
you absolutely do not want to review this paper?

292
00:16:29.919 --> 00:16:33.220 A:middle L:90%
So they do that. And so and so you

293
00:16:33.220 --> 00:16:33.929 A:middle L:90%
know, it goes to the question of peer review

294
00:16:33.929 --> 00:16:37.269 A:middle L:90%
. I mean, certainly some of these predatory journals

295
00:16:37.279 --> 00:16:41.559 A:middle L:90%
maybe are not even reviewing right, you know,

296
00:16:41.559 --> 00:16:44.009 A:middle L:90%
and that's that's kind of established at this point,

297
00:16:44.009 --> 00:16:45.840 A:middle L:90%
but you have to ask the question of even the

298
00:16:45.840 --> 00:16:51.190 A:middle L:90%
non predatory, the more traditional journals we essentially,

299
00:16:51.190 --> 00:16:53.360 A:middle L:90%
we don't know who the who the reviewers ultimately are

300
00:16:53.740 --> 00:16:56.879 A:middle L:90%
. But, I mean, I know that there's

301
00:16:56.879 --> 00:16:57.730 A:middle L:90%
a there's a person. One of my colleagues and

302
00:16:57.730 --> 00:17:00.580 A:middle L:90%
I always send papers to her, and she always

303
00:17:00.580 --> 00:17:02.539 A:middle L:90%
sends the papers to me, and I think we

304
00:17:02.539 --> 00:17:04.450 A:middle L:90%
know how each other we review. I still do

305
00:17:04.450 --> 00:17:07.640 A:middle L:90%
a very thorough job of reviewing her papers. She

306
00:17:07.640 --> 00:17:10.440 A:middle L:90%
still does. I could kind of tell which ones

307
00:17:10.440 --> 00:17:12.140 A:middle L:90%
are hers. She still does a thorough review of

308
00:17:12.140 --> 00:17:15.529 A:middle L:90%
mine. But you know, is that acceptable?

309
00:17:15.529 --> 00:17:19.930 A:middle L:90%
That the scientists submitting gets to determine essentially, who's

310
00:17:19.930 --> 00:17:23.059 A:middle L:90%
going to review their paper because the editors don't have

311
00:17:23.059 --> 00:17:27.529 A:middle L:90%
time to try to find, um, completely anonymous

312
00:17:27.529 --> 00:17:30.650 A:middle L:90%
reviewers. I mean, I came down probably the

313
00:17:30.650 --> 00:17:33.349 A:middle L:90%
time because it didn't used to be. I just

314
00:17:33.349 --> 00:17:34.440 A:middle L:90%
see it more. Almost every journal now asked for

315
00:17:34.440 --> 00:17:37.200 A:middle L:90%
viewers, and I'm going to say, maybe 10

316
00:17:37.200 --> 00:17:41.660 A:middle L:90%
years ago, that wasn't the case. That's probably

317
00:17:42.549 --> 00:17:48.480 A:middle L:90%
they're fine. Uh huh. Also feel any alternative

318
00:17:48.480 --> 00:17:52.880 A:middle L:90%
knowledge from arising fishers. You're looking for people who

319
00:17:52.880 --> 00:17:56.410 A:middle L:90%
will substantiate the argument that you're already making any email

320
00:17:56.410 --> 00:18:04.269 A:middle L:90%
that they are. Yeah, a good point.

321
00:18:04.279 --> 00:18:11.190 A:middle L:90%
A one of the interesting phenomenon about some of the

322
00:18:11.190 --> 00:18:14.279 A:middle L:90%
traditional journals. At least the ones that I deal

323
00:18:14.279 --> 00:18:15.859 A:middle L:90%
with is that they are making it an option.

324
00:18:17.339 --> 00:18:22.450 A:middle L:90%
Two, Have your paper either be open access or

325
00:18:22.740 --> 00:18:25.779 A:middle L:90%
to be quote traditional, which, to me now

326
00:18:25.789 --> 00:18:30.259 A:middle L:90%
raises a whole bunch of questions back to my library

327
00:18:30.259 --> 00:18:33.670 A:middle L:90%
. Friends is are these journals getting any cheaper?

328
00:18:33.680 --> 00:18:37.890 A:middle L:90%
Since people are paying, um, for some publication

329
00:18:37.900 --> 00:18:41.400 A:middle L:90%
, I suspected the answer was no. And I

330
00:18:41.400 --> 00:18:45.069 A:middle L:90%
don't know what percentage of people ultimately have agreed to

331
00:18:45.069 --> 00:18:48.519 A:middle L:90%
pay open access, but they're now making that an

332
00:18:48.589 --> 00:18:52.390 A:middle L:90%
option. And and I always I've actually been wondering

333
00:18:52.390 --> 00:18:55.930 A:middle L:90%
because I've seen that also, in the journals,

334
00:18:55.930 --> 00:19:00.029 A:middle L:90%
I submit to, um you pick that option as

335
00:19:00.029 --> 00:19:02.470 A:middle L:90%
to whether you're you think you might go open access

336
00:19:02.480 --> 00:19:06.369 A:middle L:90%
or traditional before your papers reviewed, and it says

337
00:19:06.380 --> 00:19:07.480 A:middle L:90%
in the text, this will have no influence on

338
00:19:07.480 --> 00:19:11.150 A:middle L:90%
how your papers reviewed. And yet I've always wondered

339
00:19:11.160 --> 00:19:12.589 A:middle L:90%
if one is willing to pay. I mean,

340
00:19:12.589 --> 00:19:18.349 A:middle L:90%
we get into the same predatory practices. Potentially that

341
00:19:18.349 --> 00:19:21.000 A:middle L:90%
may be the editor is more willing to let a

342
00:19:21.000 --> 00:19:23.059 A:middle L:90%
few minor comments, You know that don't need to

343
00:19:23.059 --> 00:19:26.859 A:middle L:90%
be addressed a fly so that publication goes through?

344
00:19:26.869 --> 00:19:30.380 A:middle L:90%
Um, I don't know. I really think that

345
00:19:30.380 --> 00:19:33.950 A:middle L:90%
that question should be asked after acceptance and the paper

346
00:19:33.950 --> 00:19:36.490 A:middle L:90%
should either be accepted or not, and then those

347
00:19:36.500 --> 00:19:37.670 A:middle L:90%
Then that author can decide whether they want to be

348
00:19:37.670 --> 00:19:41.430 A:middle L:90%
open access. And I've I've been very surprised to

349
00:19:41.430 --> 00:19:45.269 A:middle L:90%
see this pop up on nearly. I substituted a

350
00:19:45.269 --> 00:19:47.230 A:middle L:90%
papers this year, and I think every single one

351
00:19:47.230 --> 00:19:48.299 A:middle L:90%
asked just about you know, they had an open

352
00:19:48.299 --> 00:19:52.710 A:middle L:90%
access format as well as the traditional, every single

353
00:19:52.710 --> 00:19:56.809 A:middle L:90%
one asked before I submitted whether or not I wanted

354
00:19:56.809 --> 00:20:00.059 A:middle L:90%
this to be an open access your statement about history

355
00:20:00.059 --> 00:20:03.059 A:middle L:90%
, though, and I'm going to draw a blank

356
00:20:03.059 --> 00:20:07.359 A:middle L:90%
now. But the latest Nobel Prize winner and literature

357
00:20:07.940 --> 00:20:11.500 A:middle L:90%
, she said, You know, she's Finally someone

358
00:20:11.500 --> 00:20:14.240 A:middle L:90%
was recognized for writing short stories, and she said

359
00:20:14.240 --> 00:20:18.230 A:middle L:90%
that she originally always thought short stories were just the

360
00:20:18.230 --> 00:20:22.720 A:middle L:90%
practice Before you got around to publishing that novel.

361
00:20:22.730 --> 00:20:25.500 A:middle L:90%
But, she said, I realized I don't write

362
00:20:25.509 --> 00:20:27.599 A:middle L:90%
novels, I write short stories and she was recognized

363
00:20:27.599 --> 00:20:30.960 A:middle L:90%
for that. So it it, you know,

364
00:20:30.970 --> 00:20:33.769 A:middle L:90%
kind of is a parallel, um, situation to

365
00:20:33.769 --> 00:20:37.589 A:middle L:90%
what you're talking about. And so many revised dissertation

366
00:20:37.589 --> 00:20:41.150 A:middle L:90%
books end up looking like short stories that have been

367
00:20:41.150 --> 00:20:42.730 A:middle L:90%
cobbled together. Right? Um, there's only minimal

368
00:20:42.730 --> 00:20:45.769 A:middle L:90%
revision to tie everything into into a hole. And

369
00:20:47.440 --> 00:20:48.410 A:middle L:90%
, um, yeah, I mean, I think

370
00:20:48.410 --> 00:20:55.849 A:middle L:90%
that doing away with that would be nice question that

371
00:20:55.849 --> 00:20:59.069 A:middle L:90%
sort of is in and around this area. My

372
00:20:59.069 --> 00:21:03.839 A:middle L:90%
experience of science have a strongly articulated value around access

373
00:21:03.849 --> 00:21:07.269 A:middle L:90%
. There's a greater emphasis on the disability. There's

374
00:21:07.740 --> 00:21:14.240 A:middle L:90%
sort of ability to justify research by making some that

375
00:21:14.240 --> 00:21:17.160 A:middle L:90%
research ability. And I find it really interesting that

376
00:21:17.160 --> 00:21:21.849 A:middle L:90%
the humanities outside of the digital humanities is not really

377
00:21:21.849 --> 00:21:25.029 A:middle L:90%
articulated. The strong values that are different because the

378
00:21:25.029 --> 00:21:29.710 A:middle L:90%
humanities are not interested for reproducibility. And that's it

379
00:21:29.730 --> 00:21:33.769 A:middle L:90%
, that it's different data, though different types of

380
00:21:33.779 --> 00:21:36.599 A:middle L:90%
data. And, I mean, if you're if

381
00:21:36.599 --> 00:21:37.809 A:middle L:90%
you're thought, If if a thought pass us of

382
00:21:37.809 --> 00:21:41.230 A:middle L:90%
a historian, that's it. Seems to me like

383
00:21:41.230 --> 00:21:42.029 A:middle L:90%
I'm not a social scientist, so I don't know

384
00:21:42.029 --> 00:21:45.400 A:middle L:90%
. But it would seem to me like that's unique

385
00:21:45.400 --> 00:21:48.079 A:middle L:90%
to that person coming up with that concept. And

386
00:21:48.089 --> 00:21:51.089 A:middle L:90%
how could you reproduce that? And and it could

387
00:21:51.089 --> 00:21:52.829 A:middle L:90%
be just that I'm you know, I'm a basic

388
00:21:52.829 --> 00:21:55.440 A:middle L:90%
scientist and I can you know I can. I

389
00:21:55.440 --> 00:21:57.740 A:middle L:90%
can't do your experiments necessarily. But as someone,

390
00:21:57.750 --> 00:22:00.730 A:middle L:90%
I could do something in someone, and I feel

391
00:22:00.730 --> 00:22:03.609 A:middle L:90%
I can repeat it and you're invited to come to

392
00:22:03.609 --> 00:22:07.500 A:middle L:90%
my lab and head of chemistry so I could maybe

393
00:22:07.500 --> 00:22:11.769 A:middle L:90%
I could do something. Question is, is not

394
00:22:11.140 --> 00:22:15.779 A:middle L:90%
broadly about if the types of drivers for openness that

395
00:22:15.779 --> 00:22:18.099 A:middle L:90%
are within the sciences are not the same as the

396
00:22:18.099 --> 00:22:22.869 A:middle L:90%
humanities, what kinds of things humanity's due to identify

397
00:22:22.869 --> 00:22:26.799 A:middle L:90%
their own unique drivers that would then speak to both

398
00:22:26.799 --> 00:22:32.829 A:middle L:90%
the publishing industry training graduate students, the more experimental

399
00:22:32.829 --> 00:22:36.839 A:middle L:90%
modes of thinking and working, because we it's just

400
00:22:36.849 --> 00:22:40.940 A:middle L:90%
maybe not necessarily question anymore. And because as we

401
00:22:40.940 --> 00:22:45.359 A:middle L:90%
move towards digital work, we don't have traditional research

402
00:22:45.359 --> 00:22:48.579 A:middle L:90%
prize anyway. And so that's already a pressure point

403
00:22:48.589 --> 00:22:52.910 A:middle L:90%
on thinking about things like Europe or how something how

404
00:22:52.910 --> 00:22:56.859 A:middle L:90%
the product of research is published, that that shifts

405
00:22:56.940 --> 00:23:00.900 A:middle L:90%
. Is there a testable hypothesis? And, you

406
00:23:00.900 --> 00:23:02.369 A:middle L:90%
know, we would we would talk and are in

407
00:23:02.369 --> 00:23:06.269 A:middle L:90%
this in the basic scientist about a testable hypothesis.

408
00:23:06.839 --> 00:23:08.700 A:middle L:90%
Um, and I could think of cases you know

409
00:23:08.700 --> 00:23:11.970 A:middle L:90%
, where someone's brought forth, a new theory of

410
00:23:11.980 --> 00:23:17.190 A:middle L:90%
I don't know this somebody in the Civil War really

411
00:23:17.190 --> 00:23:18.230 A:middle L:90%
pulling at straws here. But I would think that

412
00:23:18.230 --> 00:23:22.910 A:middle L:90%
there's data that can be pulled from sources that can

413
00:23:22.910 --> 00:23:25.109 A:middle L:90%
be testable in some ways. And maybe that's what

414
00:23:25.109 --> 00:23:26.799 A:middle L:90%
you're getting at. And that's the purpose of peer

415
00:23:26.799 --> 00:23:29.500 A:middle L:90%
review in the humanities. Is this person interpreting those

416
00:23:29.500 --> 00:23:33.269 A:middle L:90%
sources faithfully, okay Or just making stuff up?

417
00:23:33.339 --> 00:23:36.630 A:middle L:90%
That's that's what that's the test of peer review.

418
00:23:36.630 --> 00:23:38.500 A:middle L:90%
Is this person making stuff up? It's actually problema

419
00:23:38.500 --> 00:23:42.470 A:middle L:90%
ties is the idea of counting citations because those 10

420
00:23:42.470 --> 00:23:48.359 A:middle L:90%
citations could be negative. Interpretation. True good point

421
00:23:48.369 --> 00:23:53.079 A:middle L:90%
. That's a good point. Problematic. It's just

422
00:23:53.079 --> 00:23:57.220 A:middle L:90%
replacing one way exactly about this point. And I

423
00:23:57.220 --> 00:24:06.579 A:middle L:90%
actually converted anywhere our ability factor, basically introducing distinguishing

424
00:24:06.579 --> 00:24:10.059 A:middle L:90%
citations, the one that was supported in one way

425
00:24:10.069 --> 00:24:11.730 A:middle L:90%
. You have a score, but I agree with

426
00:24:11.730 --> 00:24:18.809 A:middle L:90%
you 100% downside. Maybe this was so bad that

427
00:24:18.819 --> 00:24:21.740 A:middle L:90%
that great So I think I mean to me.

428
00:24:21.740 --> 00:24:25.160 A:middle L:90%
It's just shocking how resistant scientists are changing things,

429
00:24:25.740 --> 00:24:27.299 A:middle L:90%
but I also understand it like it's hard to,

430
00:24:27.309 --> 00:24:30.410 A:middle L:90%
you know, submit to an open access as opposed

431
00:24:30.410 --> 00:24:32.430 A:middle L:90%
to the more prestigious journal because you need to get

432
00:24:32.440 --> 00:24:33.180 A:middle L:90%
tenure. But Once you get tenure, you still

433
00:24:33.180 --> 00:24:34.529 A:middle L:90%
need to get funding. I mean, really,

434
00:24:34.529 --> 00:24:37.609 A:middle L:90%
all these career things I don't think it changes,

435
00:24:37.609 --> 00:24:40.220 A:middle L:90%
wants to get tenure for me. That's easy to

436
00:24:40.220 --> 00:24:44.450 A:middle L:90%
say. Grad student mortgage to worry about so idealistic

437
00:24:45.660 --> 00:24:49.339 A:middle L:90%
, but a lot of things but there There are

438
00:24:49.339 --> 00:24:53.269 A:middle L:90%
a couple of very recent stories in chemistry that don't

439
00:24:53.279 --> 00:24:57.210 A:middle L:90%
necessarily specifically deal with open access, but they do

440
00:24:57.210 --> 00:25:03.710 A:middle L:90%
deal with the overall issue of peer review and openness

441
00:25:03.829 --> 00:25:07.210 A:middle L:90%
. So one was that for one of the prestigious

442
00:25:08.240 --> 00:25:15.240 A:middle L:90%
journals, um, within the supplementary material not within

443
00:25:15.240 --> 00:25:18.430 A:middle L:90%
the paper itself, but within the supplementary material.

444
00:25:18.450 --> 00:25:25.109 A:middle L:90%
You find a handwritten note that says to the graduate

445
00:25:25.109 --> 00:25:29.059 A:middle L:90%
student from the professor, What happened to the data

446
00:25:29.440 --> 00:25:32.289 A:middle L:90%
for this? And for this piece of data,

447
00:25:32.289 --> 00:25:36.430 A:middle L:90%
just make up some numbers, Okay, so it

448
00:25:36.430 --> 00:25:40.960 A:middle L:90%
made it through. So they're invest. The journal

449
00:25:40.960 --> 00:25:42.980 A:middle L:90%
itself is investigating because they number one don't know if

450
00:25:42.980 --> 00:25:48.640 A:middle L:90%
that was added post a review or that was in

451
00:25:48.640 --> 00:25:52.900 A:middle L:90%
there, and obviously the reviewers didn't pay a bit

452
00:25:52.900 --> 00:25:55.509 A:middle L:90%
of attention to it. So that's one thing now

453
00:25:55.509 --> 00:25:59.190 A:middle L:90%
that's sparking. The whole issue of you know someone

454
00:25:59.190 --> 00:26:03.589 A:middle L:90%
is telling someone to make up data And then there's

455
00:26:03.599 --> 00:26:11.319 A:middle L:90%
another one. Where somebody in presenting some visual data

456
00:26:11.329 --> 00:26:14.839 A:middle L:90%
in a chemistry journal, it was pretty clear that

457
00:26:14.839 --> 00:26:21.970 A:middle L:90%
there were, like, little white boxes over parts

458
00:26:21.980 --> 00:26:27.859 A:middle L:90%
of the data to block out peaks in a spectrum

459
00:26:29.240 --> 00:26:33.619 A:middle L:90%
that they wanted to pretend weren't there. That shouldn't

460
00:26:33.630 --> 00:26:36.720 A:middle L:90%
have been there. And it was just basically a

461
00:26:36.730 --> 00:26:38.650 A:middle L:90%
very bad photo shop job. And that was a

462
00:26:38.650 --> 00:26:41.029 A:middle L:90%
case of, like, who reviewed this? I

463
00:26:41.029 --> 00:26:45.500 A:middle L:90%
mean, this was so blatant to anybody who saw

464
00:26:45.500 --> 00:26:48.849 A:middle L:90%
it. There's actually one journal now, and I

465
00:26:48.849 --> 00:26:52.579 A:middle L:90%
can't remember its name that is basically asking people to

466
00:26:52.579 --> 00:27:02.539 A:middle L:90%
publish there, attempts to repeat other work in some

467
00:27:02.539 --> 00:27:06.750 A:middle L:90%
of the established journals and say, we saw this

468
00:27:06.759 --> 00:27:08.769 A:middle L:90%
. We thought this was neat. They claimed,

469
00:27:10.140 --> 00:27:11.960 A:middle L:90%
you know, in our field to make a compound

470
00:27:12.839 --> 00:27:15.420 A:middle L:90%
, you talk about yield. They claimed a 90%

471
00:27:15.430 --> 00:27:18.410 A:middle L:90%
yield. The best we ever got after five tries

472
00:27:18.410 --> 00:27:21.809 A:middle L:90%
was 20%. You know, things like that and

473
00:27:21.819 --> 00:27:23.609 A:middle L:90%
our stuff did not look like what they claimed and

474
00:27:23.619 --> 00:27:26.369 A:middle L:90%
things like that. So there is a journal in

475
00:27:26.369 --> 00:27:30.059 A:middle L:90%
terms of openness that is asking for things like that

476
00:27:30.539 --> 00:27:33.809 A:middle L:90%
. Um, and you know, that's not a

477
00:27:33.809 --> 00:27:37.039 A:middle L:90%
bad idea to be honest with you. I wonder

478
00:27:37.039 --> 00:27:38.930 A:middle L:90%
also if you know, as I'm listening to you

479
00:27:38.940 --> 00:27:41.039 A:middle L:90%
talk, I'm wondering and sort of. We have

480
00:27:41.039 --> 00:27:44.859 A:middle L:90%
a little discussion about this before our panel started.

481
00:27:45.240 --> 00:27:48.309 A:middle L:90%
Um, you know, we get the reviews as

482
00:27:48.309 --> 00:27:49.700 A:middle L:90%
an author of a paper, and then we make

483
00:27:49.700 --> 00:27:52.579 A:middle L:90%
a response to that review. Uh, and then

484
00:27:52.579 --> 00:27:56.359 A:middle L:90%
sometimes we have to make revisions based on that response

485
00:27:56.369 --> 00:27:59.950 A:middle L:90%
. Um, and those are included in the paper

486
00:27:59.950 --> 00:28:02.259 A:middle L:90%
, and sometimes even it comes back again and you

487
00:28:02.259 --> 00:28:04.079 A:middle L:90%
make another response to the second review, which could

488
00:28:04.079 --> 00:28:07.630 A:middle L:90%
be editorial or could be actually going back out to

489
00:28:07.630 --> 00:28:10.049 A:middle L:90%
peer review. But none of that goes out to

490
00:28:10.049 --> 00:28:11.309 A:middle L:90%
the public who is now going to read the paper

491
00:28:11.319 --> 00:28:14.910 A:middle L:90%
. And I'm wondering if at least the response to

492
00:28:14.910 --> 00:28:18.170 A:middle L:90%
review might be something that journals could consider adding because

493
00:28:18.640 --> 00:28:23.109 A:middle L:90%
that tells the readers how this paper was reviewed,

494
00:28:23.109 --> 00:28:26.769 A:middle L:90%
how rigorously it might have been reviewed. And we

495
00:28:26.769 --> 00:28:27.980 A:middle L:90%
don't have When you read a paper, you you

496
00:28:27.980 --> 00:28:30.990 A:middle L:90%
actually don't have any. You have to do your

497
00:28:30.990 --> 00:28:33.420 A:middle L:90%
own review. I mean, I teach undergraduates,

498
00:28:33.430 --> 00:28:37.019 A:middle L:90%
uh, in a senior seminar how to critically review

499
00:28:37.019 --> 00:28:38.880 A:middle L:90%
papers. Um, but that's all we can do

500
00:28:38.880 --> 00:28:42.509 A:middle L:90%
is is what with our own knowledge basis to critically

501
00:28:42.509 --> 00:28:45.089 A:middle L:90%
review that paper. And I'm just wondering if,

502
00:28:45.099 --> 00:28:49.779 A:middle L:90%
um, you know, open access journals, especially

503
00:28:49.779 --> 00:28:53.900 A:middle L:90%
could give access to that review and the response to

504
00:28:53.900 --> 00:28:56.049 A:middle L:90%
review That would be a really useful piece of a

505
00:28:56.049 --> 00:28:57.900 A:middle L:90%
paper. Could be supplemental. It doesn't have to

506
00:28:57.900 --> 00:29:00.809 A:middle L:90%
be part of the text itself that people wanted to

507
00:29:00.809 --> 00:29:03.160 A:middle L:90%
go Look at it, they could. But I

508
00:29:03.160 --> 00:29:06.190 A:middle L:90%
mean, generally, I agree that people don't normally

509
00:29:06.190 --> 00:29:08.690 A:middle L:90%
look at the supplemental data unless they really care about

510
00:29:08.690 --> 00:29:18.609 A:middle L:90%
the paper. And that's unfortunate. Superfund basically Howard

511
00:29:18.609 --> 00:29:30.950 A:middle L:90%
Hughes earlier. This is okay, um, their

512
00:29:30.950 --> 00:29:32.789 A:middle L:90%
reviews are open, and I think these are actually

513
00:29:32.789 --> 00:29:34.220 A:middle L:90%
more interesting to read than the supplementary because you actually

514
00:29:34.220 --> 00:29:38.049 A:middle L:90%
see what people are saying. Like the science gossip

515
00:29:38.539 --> 00:29:44.980 A:middle L:90%
. Okay, reports. But also it's starting to

516
00:29:44.990 --> 00:29:48.109 A:middle L:90%
change. They they do use things in life that

517
00:29:48.119 --> 00:29:52.309 A:middle L:90%
I actually think that his name is Pope. This

518
00:29:52.309 --> 00:29:53.589 A:middle L:90%
is an option for years. Now. You can

519
00:29:53.589 --> 00:29:59.279 A:middle L:90%
sign it off the most, and I expect because

520
00:29:59.599 --> 00:30:02.549 A:middle L:90%
they're saying something unfair or be. They know this

521
00:30:02.549 --> 00:30:03.549 A:middle L:90%
person, and it's going to look like they're biased

522
00:30:04.240 --> 00:30:08.220 A:middle L:90%
. Um, well, and I think that that

523
00:30:08.220 --> 00:30:12.059 A:middle L:90%
point is a good one because, um uh,

524
00:30:12.069 --> 00:30:17.089 A:middle L:90%
that if it's a big name in the field and

525
00:30:17.099 --> 00:30:18.500 A:middle L:90%
you know, the thought is that you get the

526
00:30:18.500 --> 00:30:19.519 A:middle L:90%
paper from the big name in the field and maybe

527
00:30:19.519 --> 00:30:21.950 A:middle L:90%
you're not going to be as rigorous, because,

528
00:30:21.950 --> 00:30:22.410 A:middle L:90%
gosh, I mean, they've been doing this for

529
00:30:22.410 --> 00:30:25.299 A:middle L:90%
40 years. This is what this is their whole

530
00:30:25.299 --> 00:30:26.759 A:middle L:90%
life. Your whole lab is based on, you

531
00:30:26.759 --> 00:30:30.430 A:middle L:90%
know, angiogenesis. And and so maybe those papers

532
00:30:30.430 --> 00:30:34.299 A:middle L:90%
aren't as rigorously reviewed as my angiogenesis paper or something

533
00:30:34.309 --> 00:30:37.009 A:middle L:90%
. Um, as an example. Well, that's

534
00:30:37.009 --> 00:30:41.769 A:middle L:90%
what's a bit in my view, um, that

535
00:30:41.779 --> 00:30:48.480 A:middle L:90%
exercise of sending out 300 manuscripts to the, you

536
00:30:48.480 --> 00:30:52.660 A:middle L:90%
know, the same manuscript of 300 open access journals

537
00:30:52.660 --> 00:30:56.170 A:middle L:90%
to see who was being rigorous and who wasn't.

538
00:30:56.940 --> 00:30:59.930 A:middle L:90%
You know, it's one of those again back to

539
00:30:59.930 --> 00:31:02.970 A:middle L:90%
experiments. You know, the number of variables needs

540
00:31:02.970 --> 00:31:06.789 A:middle L:90%
to be kept to a reasonable number that you can

541
00:31:06.789 --> 00:31:08.660 A:middle L:90%
twist out the statistics from, and the fact that

542
00:31:08.670 --> 00:31:12.849 A:middle L:90%
this person made it so that it seemed like English

543
00:31:12.849 --> 00:31:18.089 A:middle L:90%
wasn't the first language by putting it through Google translation

544
00:31:18.089 --> 00:31:21.849 A:middle L:90%
twice, um, and making it seem like and

545
00:31:21.859 --> 00:31:25.130 A:middle L:90%
giving it an address from I mean, yeah,

546
00:31:25.130 --> 00:31:26.740 A:middle L:90%
I guess this person was really, really trying to

547
00:31:26.750 --> 00:31:33.200 A:middle L:90%
completely biased against publication. But But the problem is

548
00:31:33.200 --> 00:31:36.730 A:middle L:90%
again, it really does shed a light that now

549
00:31:36.730 --> 00:31:40.720 A:middle L:90%
makes it seem like all open access is not good

550
00:31:40.730 --> 00:31:45.769 A:middle L:90%
instead of the bigger issue of the so called predatory

551
00:31:47.140 --> 00:31:51.160 A:middle L:90%
journals. And I think Beall's list is a very

552
00:31:51.160 --> 00:31:53.349 A:middle L:90%
good, um, list of predatory journals that does

553
00:31:53.349 --> 00:31:59.319 A:middle L:90%
help people understand some of these these issues. And

554
00:31:59.329 --> 00:32:02.230 A:middle L:90%
it is a problem because, unless you're aware,

555
00:32:02.230 --> 00:32:06.660 A:middle L:90%
there are a number of them that very deliberately try

556
00:32:06.670 --> 00:32:12.470 A:middle L:90%
to give themselves titles that are maybe one word different

557
00:32:12.480 --> 00:32:15.579 A:middle L:90%
from one of the more highly established ones. And

558
00:32:15.579 --> 00:32:17.619 A:middle L:90%
so it's It throws confusion out there, and I

559
00:32:17.619 --> 00:32:21.799 A:middle L:90%
think the biggest problem right now because I think these

560
00:32:21.799 --> 00:32:22.910 A:middle L:90%
things are going to fall by the wayside personally.

561
00:32:22.920 --> 00:32:25.279 A:middle L:90%
But I think one of the biggest problems right now

562
00:32:25.289 --> 00:32:30.170 A:middle L:90%
is a question of information management. To the scientist

563
00:32:30.539 --> 00:32:35.529 A:middle L:90%
is what is trustworthy out there. Not that but

564
00:32:35.539 --> 00:32:37.829 A:middle L:90%
top journals automatically or trustworthy because we know lots of

565
00:32:37.829 --> 00:32:43.309 A:middle L:90%
issues there. But now you're getting all of these

566
00:32:43.309 --> 00:32:45.109 A:middle L:90%
other journals that, you know, maybe to make

567
00:32:45.109 --> 00:32:50.099 A:middle L:90%
sure you've got to now cover a whole broader range

568
00:32:50.099 --> 00:32:53.400 A:middle L:90%
of publications. Who's going to be abstracting them and

569
00:32:53.410 --> 00:32:57.329 A:middle L:90%
indexing them or not? That's a major. That's

570
00:32:57.329 --> 00:33:00.420 A:middle L:90%
a major problem. And so find the information,

571
00:33:00.430 --> 00:33:02.039 A:middle L:90%
Um, that's being published in some of those without

572
00:33:02.049 --> 00:33:06.759 A:middle L:90%
actually just going to their homepage. Sometimes it's in

573
00:33:06.759 --> 00:33:09.730 A:middle L:90%
Google Scholar, but not always. Yeah, that's

574
00:33:09.740 --> 00:33:14.190 A:middle L:90%
that's a big problem. You don't even know if

575
00:33:14.190 --> 00:33:15.539 A:middle L:90%
something has already been done in some cases, you

576
00:33:15.539 --> 00:33:19.569 A:middle L:90%
know, or well, if you believe it.

577
00:33:19.569 --> 00:33:24.329 A:middle L:90%
And if those papers aren't trustworthy for that group for

578
00:33:24.329 --> 00:33:28.089 A:middle L:90%
which the review wasn't good. And perhaps now the

579
00:33:28.089 --> 00:33:30.730 A:middle L:90%
authors themselves are maybe not the most ethical. That

580
00:33:30.730 --> 00:33:36.490 A:middle L:90%
potentially could cause a huge problem for intellectual property issues

581
00:33:36.490 --> 00:33:42.319 A:middle L:90%
worldwide because those do become prior publications that could be

582
00:33:42.319 --> 00:33:45.220 A:middle L:90%
cited against an inventor, even if there's no real

583
00:33:45.220 --> 00:33:47.779 A:middle L:90%
validity to it. So that's that's another whole issue

584
00:33:47.789 --> 00:33:52.349 A:middle L:90%
as to why I'm both hoping and thinking that these

585
00:33:52.359 --> 00:34:00.390 A:middle L:90%
more unethical ones will drop by the wayside. Uh

586
00:34:00.390 --> 00:34:06.460 A:middle L:90%
huh. I usually have to give up, like

587
00:34:06.460 --> 00:34:09.639 A:middle L:90%
to get condition. Do you ever get or share

588
00:34:09.650 --> 00:34:14.170 A:middle L:90%
compromise so that you can use your armies? Yes

589
00:34:15.840 --> 00:34:20.679 A:middle L:90%
, it's usually you sign a copyright farming when you're

590
00:34:20.679 --> 00:34:22.260 A:middle L:90%
publishing it, you're giving it up to the journal

591
00:34:22.739 --> 00:34:25.530 A:middle L:90%
. You can use some of the you can use

592
00:34:25.530 --> 00:34:29.769 A:middle L:90%
your allowed to use the figures and public presentations.

593
00:34:29.769 --> 00:34:31.460 A:middle L:90%
I've never seen anything. Anything that says you can't

594
00:34:31.460 --> 00:34:36.280 A:middle L:90%
do that, but you can't. You'll get your

595
00:34:36.280 --> 00:34:39.150 A:middle L:90%
own personal copy of the pdf normally, um,

596
00:34:39.159 --> 00:34:42.460 A:middle L:90%
and you you are allowed to distribute that, but

597
00:34:42.460 --> 00:34:45.639 A:middle L:90%
not necessarily post it in an open way. If

598
00:34:45.639 --> 00:34:50.010 A:middle L:90%
it's not something that should be. I'm trying to

599
00:34:50.010 --> 00:34:52.489 A:middle L:90%
think of the actual language in these documents. I

600
00:34:52.489 --> 00:34:53.489 A:middle L:90%
mean, there, you know, a full page

601
00:34:53.489 --> 00:34:57.880 A:middle L:90%
document. And honestly, a lot of times you're

602
00:34:57.880 --> 00:35:00.559 A:middle L:90%
happy that your stuff coming and you just sort of

603
00:35:00.559 --> 00:35:04.590 A:middle L:90%
sign the copyright release and and say okay with it

604
00:35:04.599 --> 00:35:07.690 A:middle L:90%
because it is so traditional in our field that that's

605
00:35:07.690 --> 00:35:09.610 A:middle L:90%
what you do. Um, that I guess I

606
00:35:09.610 --> 00:35:12.500 A:middle L:90%
don't I don't think about it that much. I

607
00:35:12.500 --> 00:35:15.150 A:middle L:90%
don't have another. I'm not going to republish the

608
00:35:15.150 --> 00:35:17.250 A:middle L:90%
data anywhere, so I don't have another use for

609
00:35:17.250 --> 00:35:21.030 A:middle L:90%
it. Other than, um, you know,

610
00:35:21.030 --> 00:35:22.789 A:middle L:90%
I'm going to use the figures in a grant proposal

611
00:35:22.789 --> 00:35:25.219 A:middle L:90%
or in a seminar I might give. That's completely

612
00:35:25.219 --> 00:35:30.639 A:middle L:90%
allowed. Now. Some journals are basically giving you

613
00:35:30.789 --> 00:35:36.440 A:middle L:90%
the right to post, um, some period of

614
00:35:36.440 --> 00:35:38.659 A:middle L:90%
time, whether it be a year or three years

615
00:35:38.670 --> 00:35:44.210 A:middle L:90%
after publication so that it could be put into some

616
00:35:44.210 --> 00:35:45.699 A:middle L:90%
of the things like the Virginia Tech archives. It

617
00:35:45.699 --> 00:35:47.809 A:middle L:90%
could be put. I could put Link, put

618
00:35:47.809 --> 00:35:52.050 A:middle L:90%
it on my own website. But I think the

619
00:35:52.050 --> 00:35:54.329 A:middle L:90%
Journal of the American Chemical Society I don't know if

620
00:35:54.329 --> 00:35:57.969 A:middle L:90%
they've got a standard across the border. If it's

621
00:35:57.969 --> 00:36:01.039 A:middle L:90%
journal by journal, think about the electronic Jackie Appiah

622
00:36:01.429 --> 00:36:08.159 A:middle L:90%
. Right. Okay. What we have here,

623
00:36:13.469 --> 00:36:16.000 A:middle L:90%
right? That's okay. I mean, it's I

624
00:36:16.010 --> 00:36:17.820 A:middle L:90%
think that's okay. I would I would do that

625
00:36:17.820 --> 00:36:20.599 A:middle L:90%
. I mean, for internally, as long as

626
00:36:20.599 --> 00:36:22.559 A:middle L:90%
we have, we have access to it. The

627
00:36:22.559 --> 00:36:25.679 A:middle L:90%
d o I in the faculty activities reports, we'll

628
00:36:25.690 --> 00:36:30.190 A:middle L:90%
we'll link to it. Unless you're trying to read

629
00:36:30.190 --> 00:36:32.329 A:middle L:90%
it someplace else. Um, that isn't from a

630
00:36:32.329 --> 00:36:36.980 A:middle L:90%
Virginia Tech address. And you don't VPN in virtual

631
00:36:36.980 --> 00:36:40.750 A:middle L:90%
private network for those of you that name or what

632
00:36:40.760 --> 00:36:44.440 A:middle L:90%
? Or you don't have your subscription, but yeah

633
00:36:45.329 --> 00:36:46.460 A:middle L:90%
, and then a lot of our material, um

634
00:36:46.460 --> 00:36:50.090 A:middle L:90%
, if it was funded by an NIH grant who

635
00:36:50.090 --> 00:36:54.929 A:middle L:90%
has to be publicly available, and so, um

636
00:36:54.929 --> 00:36:58.269 A:middle L:90%
, whenever I publish something that has a grant number

637
00:36:58.269 --> 00:37:00.730 A:middle L:90%
in it. Uh, the pub mad contacts me

638
00:37:00.739 --> 00:37:04.519 A:middle L:90%
and says here, you need to verify that this

639
00:37:04.519 --> 00:37:07.539 A:middle L:90%
is the correct citation and this is the correct paper

640
00:37:07.539 --> 00:37:08.550 A:middle L:90%
we've associated with it. And this is the correct

641
00:37:08.550 --> 00:37:12.280 A:middle L:90%
grant number, and it becomes publicly available. At

642
00:37:12.280 --> 00:37:17.119 A:middle L:90%
that point, just yes. And if if your

643
00:37:17.119 --> 00:37:21.320 A:middle L:90%
publisher didn't and the work was funded by an NIH

644
00:37:21.320 --> 00:37:23.159 A:middle L:90%
grant, it's your requirement to do so. But

645
00:37:23.170 --> 00:37:29.219 A:middle L:90%
normally the what I publish in normally, the publishers

646
00:37:30.130 --> 00:37:31.820 A:middle L:90%
do that. But correct me if I'm wrong,

647
00:37:31.820 --> 00:37:35.849 A:middle L:90%
you can't always get the full paper from apartment.

648
00:37:37.130 --> 00:37:42.800 A:middle L:90%
Um, if it's open access, you can.

649
00:37:42.809 --> 00:37:45.349 A:middle L:90%
If it's if it's an open access in that because

650
00:37:45.349 --> 00:37:47.360 A:middle L:90%
of your grant funding, it had to be made

651
00:37:47.360 --> 00:37:50.409 A:middle L:90%
open. Then you can, but you can't always

652
00:37:50.409 --> 00:37:51.630 A:middle L:90%
. If it's not. I mean, you can

653
00:37:51.630 --> 00:37:53.449 A:middle L:90%
get the abstract from them, and then they'll maybe

654
00:37:53.449 --> 00:37:57.789 A:middle L:90%
give you a link to the delight. But if

655
00:37:57.789 --> 00:38:01.269 A:middle L:90%
we don't then have the right the subscription than you

656
00:38:01.269 --> 00:38:04.940 A:middle L:90%
can't get it, so it isn't like their archiving

657
00:38:04.949 --> 00:38:12.659 A:middle L:90%
it for anybody to get to that Other articles is

658
00:38:12.670 --> 00:38:16.210 A:middle L:90%
divorced. Now this is a requirement. It's maybe

659
00:38:16.210 --> 00:38:21.239 A:middle L:90%
Ben I was gonna say five, but it's not

660
00:38:21.250 --> 00:38:28.840 A:middle L:90%
been that long. Where there's Hmm, right.

661
00:38:29.219 --> 00:38:32.010 A:middle L:90%
Oh, you're saying before the the ones that are

662
00:38:34.059 --> 00:38:38.219 A:middle L:90%
now those have to be full text online. Um

663
00:38:38.230 --> 00:38:40.260 A:middle L:90%
, and I'm not sure if it's a journal.

664
00:38:40.269 --> 00:38:43.059 A:middle L:90%
Um, you know, I'm thinking about if it's

665
00:38:43.059 --> 00:38:45.510 A:middle L:90%
a journal that is not archived by pub med,

666
00:38:45.519 --> 00:38:50.349 A:middle L:90%
and it's an open access journal that should constitute you're

667
00:38:50.349 --> 00:38:52.480 A:middle L:90%
still within, uh, you know what you agree

668
00:38:52.480 --> 00:38:54.510 A:middle L:90%
to do when you take the federal funding, which

669
00:38:54.510 --> 00:38:58.179 A:middle L:90%
is provided as open access? I think you're still

670
00:38:58.179 --> 00:38:59.380 A:middle L:90%
okay. In that sense, you know, a

671
00:38:59.380 --> 00:39:04.670 A:middle L:90%
lot of the open access journals are not necessarily archived

672
00:39:04.679 --> 00:39:07.940 A:middle L:90%
in What I would find is my traditional search engine

673
00:39:07.940 --> 00:39:10.159 A:middle L:90%
, which is pub med or med line. Did

674
00:39:10.159 --> 00:39:20.949 A:middle L:90%
you have a question? So it depends on whether

675
00:39:20.949 --> 00:39:22.679 A:middle L:90%
you wrote that into your grant. Um, and

676
00:39:22.679 --> 00:39:25.260 A:middle L:90%
then what journal you're applying to? There are a

677
00:39:25.260 --> 00:39:29.610 A:middle L:90%
lot of journals that don't charge anything. Um,

678
00:39:29.619 --> 00:39:31.309 A:middle L:90%
it's completely free. Um, I sit on the

679
00:39:31.320 --> 00:39:35.099 A:middle L:90%
Finance Committee for Endocrine Society. They have a lot

680
00:39:35.099 --> 00:39:37.809 A:middle L:90%
of journals. They charge the library's a nice fee

681
00:39:37.820 --> 00:39:40.619 A:middle L:90%
for those journals. Um, and they also have

682
00:39:40.619 --> 00:39:44.750 A:middle L:90%
advertising within the Journal because a lot of clinicians get

683
00:39:44.760 --> 00:39:46.880 A:middle L:90%
those, and a lot of drug companies will advertise

684
00:39:46.880 --> 00:39:50.110 A:middle L:90%
within. In that case, many of their journals

685
00:39:50.110 --> 00:39:52.039 A:middle L:90%
have color figure charges, but not a publishing charge

686
00:39:52.820 --> 00:39:54.510 A:middle L:90%
. Um, there. And then there are other

687
00:39:54.510 --> 00:39:59.489 A:middle L:90%
situations where many times when I read an NIH proposal

688
00:39:59.489 --> 00:40:01.960 A:middle L:90%
, I'll put a 2 to$3000 per year publishing

689
00:40:01.969 --> 00:40:07.650 A:middle L:90%
fees or publishing costs right within my request to NIH

690
00:40:07.659 --> 00:40:09.360 A:middle L:90%
with the thought that it may cost me to have

691
00:40:09.369 --> 00:40:12.889 A:middle L:90%
color publication. Or I may choose to go to

692
00:40:12.889 --> 00:40:15.570 A:middle L:90%
a journal where there's a publication fee. So if

693
00:40:15.570 --> 00:40:16.460 A:middle L:90%
I put it in there, I can always reallocate

694
00:40:16.460 --> 00:40:19.539 A:middle L:90%
that money. But at least I have it as

695
00:40:19.539 --> 00:40:21.730 A:middle L:90%
a line item. Um, but not all journals

696
00:40:21.730 --> 00:40:24.309 A:middle L:90%
charge a fee. Some of them are completely free

697
00:40:24.320 --> 00:40:30.500 A:middle L:90%
, and they're reputable and completely free. But I

698
00:40:30.500 --> 00:40:34.570 A:middle L:90%
still like to write. I actually have one accepted

699
00:40:34.579 --> 00:40:36.679 A:middle L:90%
. Before you submit, you have to agree to

700
00:40:36.690 --> 00:40:40.789 A:middle L:90%
pay. So, um, and I I just

701
00:40:40.800 --> 00:40:45.030 A:middle L:90%
committed to an open access journal, BMC Journal Molecular

702
00:40:45.179 --> 00:40:50.230 A:middle L:90%
Genetics. I email them for us as students sole

703
00:40:50.230 --> 00:40:53.469 A:middle L:90%
author can just wait no give you 400 bucks off

704
00:40:53.480 --> 00:40:57.389 A:middle L:90%
. It was originally$1800. I don't have this

705
00:40:58.110 --> 00:40:59.730 A:middle L:90%
. At least 10% of what I've been here.

706
00:41:00.210 --> 00:41:02.050 A:middle L:90%
Yeah, Um, so I figured, Oh,

707
00:41:02.050 --> 00:41:04.519 A:middle L:90%
I can get the money somewhere. Only to ask

708
00:41:04.519 --> 00:41:07.000 A:middle L:90%
my department or at the library. Thank goodness the

709
00:41:07.000 --> 00:41:10.039 A:middle L:90%
library came through to do this. But in a

710
00:41:10.039 --> 00:41:13.840 A:middle L:90%
lot of cases, I don't know how many universities

711
00:41:13.849 --> 00:41:17.139 A:middle L:90%
have such funds. Yeah, So this really restricts

712
00:41:17.150 --> 00:41:22.179 A:middle L:90%
a lot of people to pay for my my Not

713
00:41:22.190 --> 00:41:27.210 A:middle L:90%
most do charge unless you're invited. Even I've been

714
00:41:27.210 --> 00:41:30.349 A:middle L:90%
invited to write a review. You ended up a

715
00:41:30.360 --> 00:41:32.309 A:middle L:90%
1600 Europe, which means crazy things are going to

716
00:41:32.309 --> 00:41:36.619 A:middle L:90%
strike the view. We wrote it. People ever

717
00:41:36.630 --> 00:41:38.110 A:middle L:90%
unit won't pay anything. And then there were$600

718
00:41:40.210 --> 00:41:42.929 A:middle L:90%
. Well, the open access. I mean,

719
00:41:42.929 --> 00:41:45.639 A:middle L:90%
that's the difference between some of the traditional ones they

720
00:41:45.639 --> 00:41:50.809 A:middle L:90%
don't charge. I don't know of any of the

721
00:41:50.809 --> 00:41:54.679 A:middle L:90%
open access ones that I've worked with. They all

722
00:41:54.679 --> 00:41:58.559 A:middle L:90%
charge for something. Now, again, getting back

723
00:41:58.559 --> 00:42:01.769 A:middle L:90%
to that predatory. Um, I don't understand how

724
00:42:01.780 --> 00:42:07.090 A:middle L:90%
they could be asking for for a fully online journal

725
00:42:07.090 --> 00:42:08.699 A:middle L:90%
. Yes, I do understand that there are servers

726
00:42:08.699 --> 00:42:10.579 A:middle L:90%
and all of these other things, but, you

727
00:42:10.579 --> 00:42:15.119 A:middle L:90%
know, 5 to$6000 per article. I mean

728
00:42:15.130 --> 00:42:16.789 A:middle L:90%
, to me, that's one of the tip offs

729
00:42:16.800 --> 00:42:22.010 A:middle L:90%
that that's got that. Someone is getting a very

730
00:42:22.010 --> 00:42:24.619 A:middle L:90%
nice I mean, that's when I decided I am

731
00:42:24.619 --> 00:42:28.809 A:middle L:90%
I going to start an open access journal for my

732
00:42:28.809 --> 00:42:32.320 A:middle L:90%
retirement age. Now I decided not to go there

733
00:42:35.199 --> 00:42:37.539 A:middle L:90%
. One thing to that question, because you have

734
00:42:37.539 --> 00:42:39.480 A:middle L:90%
to obstruct student. So most of them have grown

735
00:42:39.480 --> 00:42:43.110 A:middle L:90%
up Google age, where everything has been online and

736
00:42:43.110 --> 00:42:46.130 A:middle L:90%
everything's been free and they don't understand the paywall you

737
00:42:46.159 --> 00:42:50.820 A:middle L:90%
don't understand. The good information is subscription based.

738
00:42:51.300 --> 00:42:54.230 A:middle L:90%
Now these predatory publishers who make everything open students have

739
00:42:54.230 --> 00:42:57.349 A:middle L:90%
no idea. So many paid$5000 to get the

740
00:42:57.349 --> 00:42:59.619 A:middle L:90%
article published, but they just come across well.

741
00:42:59.619 --> 00:43:01.769 A:middle L:90%
Here's a research article that meets the abstract and citation

742
00:43:01.880 --> 00:43:06.489 A:middle L:90%
. It's got affiliation, meeting all of that good

743
00:43:06.489 --> 00:43:09.300 A:middle L:90%
solidly period you criteria. But because again they're not

744
00:43:09.300 --> 00:43:12.639 A:middle L:90%
aware of there. There is a reason why we

745
00:43:12.650 --> 00:43:15.639 A:middle L:90%
pay Walls weren't originally their way to some knowledge in

746
00:43:15.639 --> 00:43:16.949 A:middle L:90%
the first place. But how do you guys teach

747
00:43:16.949 --> 00:43:20.280 A:middle L:90%
your students about? Okay, now that you find

748
00:43:20.280 --> 00:43:22.639 A:middle L:90%
information and you found in the journal, how do

749
00:43:22.639 --> 00:43:27.820 A:middle L:90%
you know this is a reputable scholastic source. And

750
00:43:27.829 --> 00:43:29.900 A:middle L:90%
how do you guys address that in their classes without

751
00:43:29.909 --> 00:43:31.599 A:middle L:90%
going to open again? They say I'm at Oxbridge

752
00:43:31.610 --> 00:43:34.059 A:middle L:90%
. I can get this article. The other ones

753
00:43:34.059 --> 00:43:36.780 A:middle L:90%
asking me to pay, not remembering the time in

754
00:43:36.780 --> 00:43:39.019 A:middle L:90%
which we teach a lot. You know, um

755
00:43:39.400 --> 00:43:40.829 A:middle L:90%
, how do you guys think you can get their

756
00:43:40.829 --> 00:43:45.320 A:middle L:90%
papers? You see this stuff coming through? I

757
00:43:45.320 --> 00:43:46.550 A:middle L:90%
mean, I I teach a senior seminar, and

758
00:43:46.550 --> 00:43:49.070 A:middle L:90%
I mean, it's almost too late at that point

759
00:43:49.070 --> 00:43:52.239 A:middle L:90%
, but they actually haven't had, um that kind

760
00:43:52.239 --> 00:43:53.909 A:middle L:90%
of information as to how to critique a journal article

761
00:43:53.909 --> 00:43:55.639 A:middle L:90%
. Unfortunately, they've had to read a lot of

762
00:43:55.639 --> 00:43:58.070 A:middle L:90%
them, so I think a lot of things that

763
00:43:58.070 --> 00:44:00.989 A:middle L:90%
they've read is not necessarily, uh they have not

764
00:44:00.989 --> 00:44:04.449 A:middle L:90%
done the critique themselves. They just sort of read

765
00:44:04.449 --> 00:44:07.400 A:middle L:90%
it. Summarized it believed the data. Um I

766
00:44:07.400 --> 00:44:10.679 A:middle L:90%
mean, we spend a lot of time going over

767
00:44:10.690 --> 00:44:14.059 A:middle L:90%
looking at the author's names, looking at where they're

768
00:44:14.059 --> 00:44:16.280 A:middle L:90%
affiliated, doing a search on the author. So

769
00:44:16.280 --> 00:44:20.809 A:middle L:90%
in addition to the impact factor, how many citations

770
00:44:20.809 --> 00:44:22.760 A:middle L:90%
of that article get? Um, you know,

771
00:44:22.760 --> 00:44:27.769 A:middle L:90%
And if they found an open access journal that they

772
00:44:27.769 --> 00:44:29.800 A:middle L:90%
looked at the day and then looking at the data

773
00:44:29.800 --> 00:44:31.349 A:middle L:90%
. So really looking and digging in and not just

774
00:44:31.349 --> 00:44:34.369 A:middle L:90%
reading the abstract. I tell them, Don't even

775
00:44:34.380 --> 00:44:36.559 A:middle L:90%
you read the abstract really quickly to see if it's

776
00:44:36.559 --> 00:44:37.829 A:middle L:90%
something you want to read further and then you don't

777
00:44:37.829 --> 00:44:40.349 A:middle L:90%
actually read the results section? You look at the

778
00:44:40.349 --> 00:44:43.460 A:middle L:90%
results and you make your own conclusions, and if

779
00:44:43.460 --> 00:44:45.570 A:middle L:90%
you want to go back and read the results,

780
00:44:45.570 --> 00:44:47.000 A:middle L:90%
you can. But that's how I go about telling

781
00:44:47.000 --> 00:44:50.059 A:middle L:90%
my students to do that, Um, and then

782
00:44:50.059 --> 00:44:52.559 A:middle L:90%
we as part of this class, we have four

783
00:44:52.570 --> 00:44:55.289 A:middle L:90%
journal clubs that I oversee, where we pull apart

784
00:44:55.289 --> 00:44:58.440 A:middle L:90%
papers and critique them just like I would as a

785
00:44:58.440 --> 00:45:00.070 A:middle L:90%
reviewer. Um, and then they all have to

786
00:45:00.070 --> 00:45:02.199 A:middle L:90%
do their own. Each week they have to do

787
00:45:02.199 --> 00:45:04.880 A:middle L:90%
the paper. But then as a group, they

788
00:45:04.880 --> 00:45:07.349 A:middle L:90%
actually come up and give a presentation where they have

789
00:45:07.349 --> 00:45:08.989 A:middle L:90%
now pulled apart of paper. And I know that

790
00:45:08.989 --> 00:45:10.880 A:middle L:90%
I've been doing this for several years, and the

791
00:45:10.880 --> 00:45:15.269 A:middle L:90%
students say that they never realized you know, how

792
00:45:15.269 --> 00:45:17.409 A:middle L:90%
many flaws are in just the average paper. I

793
00:45:17.409 --> 00:45:20.690 A:middle L:90%
mean, any paper you can find a flaw,

794
00:45:20.699 --> 00:45:22.630 A:middle L:90%
or you can find a conflict of interest. Um

795
00:45:22.639 --> 00:45:24.530 A:middle L:90%
, you know, there's one I love to do

796
00:45:24.539 --> 00:45:29.650 A:middle L:90%
where Nestle is sponsoring this research on how great chocolate

797
00:45:29.650 --> 00:45:30.409 A:middle L:90%
is, you know, and and the data is

798
00:45:30.409 --> 00:45:34.730 A:middle L:90%
not bad, but it's over exaggerated. So if

799
00:45:34.730 --> 00:45:36.940 A:middle L:90%
you look at the figures, but then you read

800
00:45:36.940 --> 00:45:38.000 A:middle L:90%
what the authors are saying in the results, there's

801
00:45:38.000 --> 00:45:40.210 A:middle L:90%
a lot of over over exaggeration and then go to

802
00:45:40.210 --> 00:45:43.889 A:middle L:90%
the press releases. So that's another thing I tell

803
00:45:43.889 --> 00:45:45.489 A:middle L:90%
them to look at is you know what I'm hoping

804
00:45:45.489 --> 00:45:47.849 A:middle L:90%
that they leave with what my objective is is that

805
00:45:47.849 --> 00:45:52.289 A:middle L:90%
they will go out into the world on their own

806
00:45:52.300 --> 00:45:53.789 A:middle L:90%
and see a press release that they might be interested

807
00:45:53.789 --> 00:45:55.800 A:middle L:90%
in. But then actually look at the data and

808
00:45:55.800 --> 00:46:00.409 A:middle L:90%
not believe what the publisher, what the press says

809
00:46:00.780 --> 00:46:02.500 A:middle L:90%
and not actually believe what the scientist says either,

810
00:46:04.079 --> 00:46:07.409 A:middle L:90%
but actually believe what they can interpret from that data

811
00:46:07.380 --> 00:46:09.159 A:middle L:90%
. Um, and and, you know, I

812
00:46:09.159 --> 00:46:13.219 A:middle L:90%
guess that's that's my Hopefully, that's that's good for

813
00:46:13.219 --> 00:46:15.030 A:middle L:90%
them and that they all learn that in some way

814
00:46:15.039 --> 00:46:17.099 A:middle L:90%
. Um, and I guess I would only hope

815
00:46:17.099 --> 00:46:21.010 A:middle L:90%
that when someone's reviewing papers, that's what they're doing

816
00:46:21.010 --> 00:46:22.909 A:middle L:90%
is that they're not reading necessarily the result, I

817
00:46:22.909 --> 00:46:25.300 A:middle L:90%
don't almost never. When I review a paper,

818
00:46:25.300 --> 00:46:29.090 A:middle L:90%
read what the person says until after I've looked at

819
00:46:29.090 --> 00:46:30.460 A:middle L:90%
the data. Then I read the results because part

820
00:46:30.460 --> 00:46:34.460 A:middle L:90%
of my work as a reviewer is to make sure

821
00:46:34.460 --> 00:46:37.280 A:middle L:90%
that they are interpreting their data correctly in that in

822
00:46:37.280 --> 00:46:38.769 A:middle L:90%
that way, and I will, I will let

823
00:46:38.769 --> 00:46:42.230 A:middle L:90%
them know if I think they're over interpreting. And

824
00:46:42.239 --> 00:46:44.119 A:middle L:90%
I would say most of the time when I'm doing

825
00:46:44.119 --> 00:46:46.420 A:middle L:90%
a review probably eight times out of 10, I

826
00:46:46.420 --> 00:46:49.760 A:middle L:90%
have somebody where I say, you know, in

827
00:46:49.760 --> 00:46:52.750 A:middle L:90%
figure for you say this is a This is a

828
00:46:52.750 --> 00:46:54.710 A:middle L:90%
big difference It's not even significant. So you need

829
00:46:54.710 --> 00:47:00.750 A:middle L:90%
to probably modify line to 37 in your results section

830
00:47:00.750 --> 00:47:02.550 A:middle L:90%
because if it's not a significant difference, you should

831
00:47:02.550 --> 00:47:05.090 A:middle L:90%
not be making a big deal out of it.

832
00:47:05.099 --> 00:47:07.300 A:middle L:90%
You can in the discussion and say there's a trend

833
00:47:07.300 --> 00:47:09.780 A:middle L:90%
towards something or whatever but down the results. But

834
00:47:09.780 --> 00:47:14.199 A:middle L:90%
your question is really not a new one. It

835
00:47:14.199 --> 00:47:17.869 A:middle L:90%
may be complicated by a proliferation of open access,

836
00:47:17.880 --> 00:47:22.380 A:middle L:90%
but the first question and an issue I have with

837
00:47:22.380 --> 00:47:27.210 A:middle L:90%
the students is don't believe. Has she said anything

838
00:47:27.210 --> 00:47:29.969 A:middle L:90%
? Anything I don't care. If it's a traditional

839
00:47:29.969 --> 00:47:31.550 A:middle L:90%
journal, you know they and and even if it's

840
00:47:31.550 --> 00:47:35.380 A:middle L:90%
some big name in the field, cell metabolism impact

841
00:47:35.380 --> 00:47:38.420 A:middle L:90%
factor 35 you know, But you still need to

842
00:47:38.420 --> 00:47:42.630 A:middle L:90%
look at that data with your own critical I There

843
00:47:42.630 --> 00:47:45.139 A:middle L:90%
is something of hero worship that that shows up sometimes

844
00:47:45.150 --> 00:47:47.860 A:middle L:90%
with students that they say, Oh, but this

845
00:47:47.860 --> 00:47:52.090 A:middle L:90%
guy won the Nobel Prize. Well, okay,

846
00:47:52.090 --> 00:47:54.010 A:middle L:90%
fine. But read the paper Stop, you know

847
00:47:54.019 --> 00:47:57.880 A:middle L:90%
, critical. Be critical. Don't take it as

848
00:47:57.880 --> 00:48:01.110 A:middle L:90%
though you know this was written on golden tablets because

849
00:48:01.110 --> 00:48:05.429 A:middle L:90%
that's sometimes that's one of the issues with some new

850
00:48:05.429 --> 00:48:07.989 A:middle L:90%
graduate students. I often do have, and it's

851
00:48:07.989 --> 00:48:09.750 A:middle L:90%
not. It doesn't have to do with the new

852
00:48:09.760 --> 00:48:13.750 A:middle L:90%
journals. It has to do with just They see

853
00:48:13.750 --> 00:48:16.110 A:middle L:90%
it in print. You know, textbooks textbooks can

854
00:48:16.119 --> 00:48:20.579 A:middle L:90%
be wrong. Um, journal articles. They can

855
00:48:20.590 --> 00:48:22.550 A:middle L:90%
be wrong just because it's nicely polished and bound and

856
00:48:22.559 --> 00:48:25.980 A:middle L:90%
everything like that. So it's just a new twist

857
00:48:25.989 --> 00:48:30.409 A:middle L:90%
on the old question of of question, everything and

858
00:48:30.409 --> 00:48:34.889 A:middle L:90%
interpret it yourself. And obviously, if they're at

859
00:48:34.889 --> 00:48:37.829 A:middle L:90%
an early stage, they don't have the practice and

860
00:48:37.829 --> 00:48:38.739 A:middle L:90%
the skills, and that's where we come in to

861
00:48:38.739 --> 00:48:42.449 A:middle L:90%
try to help them to do that with a lot

862
00:48:42.449 --> 00:48:44.510 A:middle L:90%
of the same techniques that she and and the open

863
00:48:44.510 --> 00:48:47.900 A:middle L:90%
access complicates everything that's essentially, It's not that it's

864
00:48:49.570 --> 00:48:52.079 A:middle L:90%
vastly different practice. It's that now there's more of

865
00:48:52.079 --> 00:48:57.090 A:middle L:90%
the non non rigorously peer reviewed material out there.

866
00:48:57.570 --> 00:49:04.269 A:middle L:90%
Yeah, I mean, when I So now I'm

867
00:49:04.280 --> 00:49:06.789 A:middle L:90%
just teaching intro classes and don't deal with this problem

868
00:49:06.800 --> 00:49:08.639 A:middle L:90%
because I'm not asking him to evaluate and find the

869
00:49:08.650 --> 00:49:09.889 A:middle L:90%
stuff in the room. But when I was teaching

870
00:49:09.900 --> 00:49:12.420 A:middle L:90%
history, I mean, it's enough of a burden

871
00:49:12.429 --> 00:49:15.570 A:middle L:90%
to communicate that there's a difference between the first thing

872
00:49:15.570 --> 00:49:17.789 A:middle L:90%
that pops up on Google and something that's been published

873
00:49:19.269 --> 00:49:21.219 A:middle L:90%
. So that's what I have to worry about.

874
00:49:21.230 --> 00:49:22.449 A:middle L:90%
First and foremost not, I guess, that level

875
00:49:22.449 --> 00:49:25.300 A:middle L:90%
of quality between journals or anything like that. It's

876
00:49:25.300 --> 00:49:28.559 A:middle L:90%
getting people to think that, you know, Confederate

877
00:49:28.570 --> 00:49:30.230 A:middle L:90%
history dot com or something like that might have a

878
00:49:30.239 --> 00:49:37.420 A:middle L:90%
biased perspective. So that's what I'm worried about,

879
00:49:37.420 --> 00:49:39.190 A:middle L:90%
making people think that everything it's not just that everything

880
00:49:39.190 --> 00:49:42.929 A:middle L:90%
that's published is true. It's everything that is written

881
00:49:42.929 --> 00:49:45.849 A:middle L:90%
down somewhere digitally or print is true, right.

882
00:49:45.849 --> 00:49:49.250 A:middle L:90%
That assumption is the tough thing to get over in

883
00:49:49.250 --> 00:49:52.690 A:middle L:90%
teaching history. so again, an old issue.

884
00:49:52.909 --> 00:49:55.780 A:middle L:90%
All right, that's more complicated than open access.

885
00:50:00.260 --> 00:50:02.750 A:middle L:90%
Have a question. You said earlier that, like

886
00:50:02.750 --> 00:50:07.389 A:middle L:90%
, for your publishing right now, you'd probably focus

887
00:50:07.389 --> 00:50:09.420 A:middle L:90%
on those traditional journalists. Perhaps in the open access

888
00:50:09.420 --> 00:50:13.449 A:middle L:90%
one is that strictly based on, you know,

889
00:50:13.460 --> 00:50:15.389 A:middle L:90%
the impact and how well they're known. You see

890
00:50:15.389 --> 00:50:16.369 A:middle L:90%
, that may be changing. 5, 10 years

891
00:50:16.369 --> 00:50:19.340 A:middle L:90%
from now, it will be a big, open

892
00:50:19.340 --> 00:50:22.809 A:middle L:90%
access to history and maybe everyone that'd be nice.

893
00:50:23.050 --> 00:50:27.130 A:middle L:90%
But what I'm seeing is so, for instance,

894
00:50:27.130 --> 00:50:30.219 A:middle L:90%
one new journal just popped up. Uh, two

895
00:50:30.219 --> 00:50:31.219 A:middle L:90%
years ago, just got started off the ground in

896
00:50:31.219 --> 00:50:36.079 A:middle L:90%
19th century American history and two years ago, perfect

897
00:50:36.090 --> 00:50:39.099 A:middle L:90%
time to make this journal revolutionary in other ways instead

898
00:50:39.099 --> 00:50:43.210 A:middle L:90%
of just another respected name. And they did nothing

899
00:50:43.210 --> 00:50:46.070 A:middle L:90%
new right there. They're just the journal of the

900
00:50:46.070 --> 00:50:49.590 A:middle L:90%
Civil War era, which is going to be this

901
00:50:49.590 --> 00:50:52.369 A:middle L:90%
new 19th century studies, uh, in American history

902
00:50:52.380 --> 00:50:55.980 A:middle L:90%
. And it's the same stuff, so it would

903
00:50:55.980 --> 00:50:58.739 A:middle L:90%
be nice. I know that the AJ has issued

904
00:50:58.739 --> 00:51:00.489 A:middle L:90%
a statement. American Historical Association has issued a statement

905
00:51:00.489 --> 00:51:04.130 A:middle L:90%
saying we would like for there to be a well

906
00:51:04.130 --> 00:51:07.039 A:middle L:90%
respected open access venue, but no one really has

907
00:51:07.039 --> 00:51:10.469 A:middle L:90%
followed up on that. And I think there's plenty

908
00:51:10.469 --> 00:51:14.250 A:middle L:90%
of, you know, rising voices, plenty of

909
00:51:14.260 --> 00:51:15.820 A:middle L:90%
people who are making a fuss saying this should happen

910
00:51:15.929 --> 00:51:20.250 A:middle L:90%
. Um, but it's just a matter of getting

911
00:51:20.250 --> 00:51:22.300 A:middle L:90%
enough steam behind that. One of the interesting things

912
00:51:22.300 --> 00:51:24.309 A:middle L:90%
that I've wanted to bring up along the way is

913
00:51:24.309 --> 00:51:27.480 A:middle L:90%
that one of the discussions earlier I want to bring

914
00:51:27.480 --> 00:51:31.739 A:middle L:90%
up one of my dissertation committee members is doing his

915
00:51:31.739 --> 00:51:37.000 A:middle L:90%
current project open access from start to finish. And

916
00:51:37.000 --> 00:51:40.110 A:middle L:90%
so, you know, from the disinterested observers perspective

917
00:51:40.119 --> 00:51:42.559 A:middle L:90%
, the question is, why would I want to

918
00:51:42.570 --> 00:51:45.070 A:middle L:90%
look at that? But this is his objective is

919
00:51:45.070 --> 00:51:50.210 A:middle L:90%
that historians shouldn't be competing with each other. They

920
00:51:50.210 --> 00:51:51.960 A:middle L:90%
should be sharing along every step of the way.

921
00:51:51.960 --> 00:51:54.210 A:middle L:90%
And so he's reading something that affects his project in

922
00:51:54.219 --> 00:51:58.059 A:middle L:90%
one way and taking notes on it and putting his

923
00:51:58.059 --> 00:51:59.750 A:middle L:90%
notes out there and letting people know what's in a

924
00:51:59.750 --> 00:52:01.989 A:middle L:90%
certain source. Mm, and other people can come

925
00:52:01.989 --> 00:52:05.789 A:middle L:90%
to that is the hope. And so I guess

926
00:52:05.800 --> 00:52:07.110 A:middle L:90%
getting back to your question is, there's all sorts

927
00:52:07.110 --> 00:52:10.679 A:middle L:90%
of efforts from on every level of the, I

928
00:52:10.679 --> 00:52:15.280 A:middle L:90%
guess, the scholarly enterprise from taking notes on sources

929
00:52:15.280 --> 00:52:16.469 A:middle L:90%
to this textbook that I'm kind of a part of

930
00:52:16.949 --> 00:52:21.900 A:middle L:90%
. And hopefully with enough of that stuff, eventually

931
00:52:21.969 --> 00:52:25.449 A:middle L:90%
big changes like you're talking about what happened, actually

932
00:52:25.460 --> 00:52:27.619 A:middle L:90%
, get somewhere to my point. I was going

933
00:52:27.619 --> 00:52:29.610 A:middle L:90%
to ask a little bit about the public historians and

934
00:52:29.610 --> 00:52:31.480 A:middle L:90%
some of the digital research projects that are not necessarily

935
00:52:32.150 --> 00:52:37.530 A:middle L:90%
the workers. How strong I've been influenced are those

936
00:52:37.530 --> 00:52:42.889 A:middle L:90%
voices, particularly that intersection of digital humanities and in

937
00:52:42.889 --> 00:52:49.630 A:middle L:90%
public history, where very complicated digital research with layers

938
00:52:49.630 --> 00:52:52.849 A:middle L:90%
of math and interpretation of the topic maps, census

939
00:52:52.849 --> 00:52:55.610 A:middle L:90%
data, all of the complexity of those kinds of

940
00:52:55.610 --> 00:53:00.860 A:middle L:90%
research fighters and the mechanisms for your review within that

941
00:53:00.860 --> 00:53:05.599 A:middle L:90%
kind of hi. Uh huh. Being shaped now

942
00:53:05.610 --> 00:53:07.780 A:middle L:90%
, but they're not fully shaped. I was wondering

943
00:53:07.780 --> 00:53:09.780 A:middle L:90%
if you had thoughts on through the weight of those

944
00:53:09.780 --> 00:53:21.380 A:middle L:90%
voices. What do you mean, the way?

945
00:53:21.849 --> 00:53:25.260 A:middle L:90%
Yeah. Are people getting to engage with them?

946
00:53:27.250 --> 00:53:29.690 A:middle L:90%
How strong of a voice for that kind of openness

947
00:53:29.690 --> 00:53:31.469 A:middle L:90%
or transparency process. Yeah, well, I mean

948
00:53:31.469 --> 00:53:35.110 A:middle L:90%
, I know that there are history departments, for

949
00:53:35.110 --> 00:53:37.860 A:middle L:90%
instance, that are accepting G i s as a

950
00:53:37.860 --> 00:53:40.469 A:middle L:90%
language instead of French or German. Um, and

951
00:53:40.469 --> 00:53:44.300 A:middle L:90%
so there's there's little things like that that are starting

952
00:53:44.300 --> 00:53:49.730 A:middle L:90%
to show that the digital skills are being accepted in

953
00:53:49.730 --> 00:53:52.789 A:middle L:90%
replacement of some of the older stuff. You know

954
00:53:52.789 --> 00:53:53.639 A:middle L:90%
, in one of the discussions we've been having is

955
00:53:53.639 --> 00:53:58.210 A:middle L:90%
about tenure requirements. I know in some departments it

956
00:53:58.210 --> 00:54:00.400 A:middle L:90%
varies by department. Some departments see really complicated digital

957
00:54:00.400 --> 00:54:05.710 A:middle L:90%
projects as something that's on par with a book or

958
00:54:05.710 --> 00:54:08.010 A:middle L:90%
somewhere near that. Other departments just don't get it

959
00:54:08.039 --> 00:54:09.690 A:middle L:90%
. So it's just it just depends on where you

960
00:54:09.690 --> 00:54:13.059 A:middle L:90%
are. I know the department here in history,

961
00:54:13.070 --> 00:54:15.659 A:middle L:90%
for instance, has this new, relatively new public

962
00:54:15.659 --> 00:54:20.980 A:middle L:90%
history digital history certification, and so obviously they care

963
00:54:20.980 --> 00:54:23.800 A:middle L:90%
about it. But it's the again. It's it's

964
00:54:23.800 --> 00:54:27.050 A:middle L:90%
not everywhere. It's an evolving practice. And so

965
00:54:27.050 --> 00:54:29.789 A:middle L:90%
I think that there's no really one answer to that

966
00:54:29.789 --> 00:54:37.900 A:middle L:90%
question. Fine. Before I. The library has

967
00:54:37.539 --> 00:54:42.130 A:middle L:90%
has posted electronic journals for many years, but we

968
00:54:42.130 --> 00:54:45.829 A:middle L:90%
now hosts some software whole editorial process of the foods

969
00:54:45.829 --> 00:54:49.860 A:middle L:90%
we want you thinking about journal. I want to

970
00:54:49.860 --> 00:54:54.119 A:middle L:90%
convert a traditional drink too electronic. We have services

971
00:54:54.119 --> 00:54:58.969 A:middle L:90%
and staff, so even if you're not interested,

972
00:54:59.340 --> 00:55:01.079 A:middle L:90%
but there's no doubt that they will never be happy

973
00:55:01.079 --> 00:55:07.670 A:middle L:90%
to help. You're fine. I'm thinking mind I

974
00:55:07.679 --> 00:55:13.559 A:middle L:90%
can have one too Well, we can make our

975
00:55:13.570 --> 00:55:16.670 A:middle L:90%
camels. Thank you.