News

Myth 1: "You can only publish open access through paid open journals."

Although editorial and publishing activities are not free of charge, the publication of an open access article does not always have to be associated with financial costs on the author’s side. You can publish your article in a traditional, subscription-based journal that allows you to store a version of your article in a publicly accessible repository under a license agreement (the so-called green open access). Some publishers even allow you to publish an article completely free of charge directly in a journal (the so-called platinum / diamond open access). These are often tied to universities or research institutes that are funded with public resources. In this way, you can use, for example, more than twenty journals published by the University Press Karolinum, or more than 11,000 other journals around the world. 

Myth 2: "Authors must always pay publication fees from their own pocket."

There are three ways of open access and each offers options to avoid the publication fee or at least to pay a reduced price. Green open access means storing a version of the article, free of charge, in a publicly accessible repository. When choosing the gold open access, i.e., publishing in an open or hybrid journal which requires the payment of a publication fee, it is possible to use discounts or waivers of the publication fee with the publishers that have an agreement with Charles University. The author can also choose the so-called platinum open access, when s/he publishes in an open journal, which does not require a payment of a publication fee. Publication fees are also an eligible cost for projects of most grant agencies, but it must be taken into account when preparing the grant application.

Myth 3: "Open access does not protect copyright."

Copyright protection is applied in the same way for both the traditional and the open access publishing models. The results of the author’s intellectual activity remain protected (in the Czech context by Act No. 121/2000 Coll., on the Copyright and Rights Related to Copyright and on Amendment to Certain Acts (the Copyright Act). The options for disposition of the work, including various ways of use of the work are then specifically determined by licenses (e.g., Creative Commons license)

Myth 4: "Open journals have a low, if not no impact factor."

Open access can have a positive effect on the growth of citation rate. A total of 4 672 titles of open access journals are indexed in the Journal Citation Reports database, which is an extension of the WoS citation database (as of August 2021). Out of these, 502 journals are in the 1^st quartile and 581 are in the 2^nd quartile (according to JIF). Publishing open access does not mean avoiding standard publishing and review procedures or any reduction in output quality. Therefore, it cannot be claimed that all open journals are among journals with low or no impact factor.  

Myth 5: "I don’t have any data."

Consider whether this is really true. Research data can be characterised as any information that has been collected, observed, generated, or created to validate or reproduce your research findings. Depending on the type of research you are doing, research data can take various forms such as spreadsheets, text files, audio / video recordings, questionnaire forms, lab protocols, computer code, etc. Research data can even include non-digital materials, some of which may be digitised (e.g., paper can be scanned, an object can be photographed etc.). 

Myth 6: "Data management plan is just another useless administrative formality."

A data management plan (DMP) makes it easier for researchers to navigate their data, helps them anticipate potential problems and ensures that the data are complete, accurate and reliable. A DMP also helps to ensure continuity and consistency, especially in long-term projects with multiple researchers involved, and it can help with data sharing. 

Myth 7: "My data are not useful to anyone else, there is no point sharing them."

You never know who can find your research data useful. Your data can be used not only by colleagues in your field but also by researchers from other disciplines, who may apply different methods of analysis or combine them with other research data which could lead to new findings. It is hard to predict which data may be important for future research. Apart from researchers, your data may also be useful to educators, policy makers or general public. 

Myth 8: "Open science is only relevant for the STEM disciplines."

Especially in English speaking countries, researchers in Social Sciences and Humanities may feel excluded by the use of the term “open science” as it may seem to imply that only “scientific” disciplines are included. Some of them might even see open science as a threat, as a way in which “scientific” disciplines want to dictate how knowledge should be created and what methods should be used. In fact, it is only an issue of terminology. Open science aims to encompass scientific communication as a whole and it includes a wide range of practices such as open access to publications and research data, research data management, open peer review, citizen science and a lot more. In order to avoid the terminological ambiguity, the terms open scholarship, open research, or open knowledge are sometimes being used.

Myth 9: "Open science is just a hype that will go away."

One of the frequently heard myths about open science is that it is just a hype that will go away and therefore there is no need to get involved. However, an increasing number of research funders include open science requirements in their policies, many journals are adopting open data policies requiring that authors share underlying data for their papers, and open science practices are also getting a solid ground in national and international policies. Considering these developments, it is safe to assume that open science is a trend that is going to stay.

This article was prepared by Miriam Vojtíšková (FHS), Jaroslava Kamburovová (FTVS), Ondřej Šindlář (KTF), Libuše Stupavská (LF Plzeň), Soňa Veselá (PedF), Eliška Jonášová (PF) and the Open Science Support Centre.