Jump to content

Elsevier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected fromElsevier Science)

Elsevier
Company typeSubsidiary
IndustryPublishing
Founded1880;144 years ago(1880)
Headquarters
Amsterdam,Netherlands
Key people
Kumsal Bayazit, Chief Executive Officer
Revenue£2.909 billion (2022)[1]
£1.078 billion (2022)[1]
£2.021 billion (2022)[2]
Number of employees
8,700[3]
ParentRELX
Websitewww.elsevier.com

Elsevier(Dutch:[ˈɛlzəviːr]) is a Dutchacademic publishingcompany specializing in scientific, technical, and medical content. Its products include journals such asThe Lancet,Cell,theScienceDirectcollection ofelectronic journals,Trends,theCurrent Opinionseries, the online citation databaseScopus,the SciVal tool for measuring research performance, the ClinicalKey search engine for clinicians, and the ClinicalPath evidence-based cancer care service. Elsevier's products and services include digital tools fordata management,instruction, research analytics, and assessment.[4][5]Elsevier is part of theRELX Group,known until 2015 as Reed Elsevier, a publicly traded company. According to RELX reports, in 2022 Elsevier published more than 600,000 articles annually in over 2,800 journals;[1]as of 2018 its archives contained over 17 million documents and 40,000e-books,with over one billion annual downloads.[6]

Researchers have criticized Elsevier for its high profit margins andcopyright practices.[7][8]The company earned £942 million in profit with an adjustedoperating marginof 37% in 2018.[9]Much of the research that Elsevier publishes is publicly funded; its high costs have led to accusations ofrent-seeking,[10]boycotts, and the rise of alternate avenues for publication and access, such aspreprintservers andshadow libraries.[11][12]

History

[edit]
The original seal of the Elsevier family is used by Elsevier company as its logo.

Elsevier was founded in 1880[13]and adopted the name and logo from theDutchpublishing houseElzevirthat was an inspiration but has no connection to the contemporary Elsevier.[13]The Elzevir family operated as booksellers and publishers in theNetherlands;the founder,Lodewijk Elzevir(1542–1617), lived inLeidenand established that business in 1580. As a company logo, Elsevier used the Elzevir family'sprinter's mark,a tree entwined with a vine and the wordsNon Solus,which isLatinfor "not alone".[14]According to Elsevier, this logo represents "the symbiotic relationship between publisher and scholar".[15]

The expansion of Elsevier in the scientific field after 1945 was funded with the profits of the newsweeklyElsevier,which published its first issue on 27 October 1945. The weekly was an instant success and very profitable.[16]The weekly was a continuation, as is stated in its first issue, of the monthlyElsevier,which was founded in 1891 to promote the name of the publishing house and had to stop publication in December 1940 because of theGerman occupation of the Netherlands.[citation needed]

In May 1939 Klautz established the Elsevier Publishing Company Ltd. in London to distribute these academic titles in theBritish Commonwealth(except Canada). When theNazis occupied the Netherlandsfor the duration of five years from May 1940, he had just founded a second international office, the Elsevier Publishing Company Inc. inNew York.[17]

In 1947, Elsevier began publishing its first English-language journal,Biochimica et Biophysica Acta.[18]

In 1971 the firm acquiredExcerpta Medica,a small medical abstract publisher based inAmsterdam.[18]As the first and only company in the world that employed a database for the production of journals, it introduced computer technology to Elsevier.[19]In 1978 Elsevier merged with Dutch newspaper publisher NDU, and devised a strategy to broadcast textual news to people's television sets throughViewdataandTeletexttechnology.[20]

In 1979 Elsevier Science Publishers launched the Article Delivery Over Network Information System (ADONIS) project in conjunction with four business partners. The project aims to find a way to deliver scientific articles to libraries electronically, and would continue for over a decade.[21]In 1991, in conjunction with nine American universities, Elsevier's The University Licensing Project (TULIP) was the first step in creating published, copyrighted material available over the Internet. It formed the basis forScienceDirect,launched six years later.[22][23]In 1997, after almost two decades of experiments, ScienceDirect was launched as the first online repository of electronic (scientific) books and articles. Though librarians and researchers were initially hesitant regarding the new technology, more and more of them switched to e-only subscriptions.[24][25]

In 2004 Elsevier launchedScopus- a multidisciplinary metadata database of scholarly publications, only the second of such kind (after theWeb of Science,although freeGoogle Scholarwas also launched in 2004).Scopuscovers journals, some conference papers and books from various publishers, and measures performance on both author and publication levels.[26]In 2009 SciVal Spotlight was released. This tool enabled research administrators to measure their institution's relative standing in terms of productivity, grants, and publications.[27][28]

In 2013, Elsevier acquiredMendeley,a UK company making software for managing and sharing research papers. Mendeley, previously an open platform for sharing of research, was greatly criticized for the sale, which users saw as acceding to the "paywall"approach to research literature. Mendeley's previously open-sharing system now allows exchange of paywalled resources only within private groups.[29]The New Yorkerdescribed Elsevier's reasons for buying Mendeley as two-fold: to acquire its user data, and to "destroy or coöpt anopen-scienceicon that threatens itsbusiness model".[30]

Company statistics

[edit]

During 2018,researchers submitted over 1.8 millionresearch papersto Elsevier-based publications. Over 20,000 editors managed the peer review and selection of these papers, resulting in the publication of more than 470,000 articles in over 2,500 journals.[6]Editors are generally unpaid volunteers who perform their duties alongside a full-time job in academic institutions,[31]although exceptions have been reported. In 2013, the five editorial groups Elsevier,Springer,Wiley-Blackwell,Taylor & Francis,andSAGE Publicationspublished more than half of all academic papers in the peer-reviewed literature.[32][33]At that time, Elsevier accounted for 16% of the world market in science, technology, and medical publishing.[34]In 2019, Elsevier accounted for the review, editing and dissemination of 18% of the world's scientific articles.[35]About 45% of revenue by geography in 2019 derived from North America, 24% from Europe, and the remaining 31% from the rest of the world. Around 84% of revenue by format came from electronic usage and 16% came from print.[6][36]

The firm employs 8,100 people.[36]The CEO is Kumsal Bayazit, who was appointed on 15 February 2019.[37]In 2018, it reported a mean 2017gender pay gapof 29.1% for its UK workforce, while the median was 40.4%, the highest yet reported by a publisher in UK. Elsevier attributed the result to the under-representation of women in its senior ranks and the prevalence of men in its technical workforce.[38]The UK workforce consists of 1,200 people in the UK, and represents 16% of Elsevier's global employee population.[38]Elsevier's parent company, RELX, has a global workforce that is 51% female to 49% male, with 43% female and 57% male managers, and 29% female and 71% male senior operational managers.[38][39]

In 2018, Elsevier accounted for 34% of the revenues of RELX group (£2.538 billion of £7.492 billion). Inoperating profits,it represented 40% (£942 million of £2,346 million). Adjusted operating profits (with constant currency) rose by 2% from 2017 to 2018.[6]Profits grew further from 2018 to 2019, to a total of £982 million.[40]the first half of 2019, RELX reported the first slowdown in revenue growth for Elsevier in several years: 1% vs. an expectation of 2% and a typical growth of at least 4% in the previous 5 years.[41]Overall for 2019, Elsevier reported revenue growth of 3.9% from 2018, with the underlying growth at constant currency at 2%.[42]In 2019, Elsevier accounted for 34% of the revenues of RELX (£2.637billion of £7.874billion). In adjustedoperating profits,it represented 39% (£982m of £2.491bn). Adjusted operating profits (with constant currency) rose by 2% from 2018 to 2019.[36]

In 2019, researchers submitted over two millionresearch papersto Elsevier-based publications. Over 22,000 editors managed the peer review and selection of these papers, resulting in the publication of about 500,000 articles in over 2,500 journals.[36]

In 2020 Elsevier was the largest academic publisher, with approximately 16% of the academic publishing market and more than 3000 journals.[43]

Market model

[edit]

Products and services

[edit]

Products and services include electronic and print versions of journals, textbooks andreference works,and cover thehealth,life, physical, andsocial sciences.

The target markets are academic and government research institutions, corporate research labs, booksellers, librarians, scientific researchers, authors, editors, physicians, nurses, allied health professionals, medical and nursing students and schools, medical researchers,pharmaceutical companies,hospitals, and research establishments. It publishes in 13 languages including English, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Polish, Japanese, Hindi, and Chinese.

Flagship products and services include VirtualE,ScienceDirect,Scopus,Scirus,EMBASE,Engineering Village,Compendex,Cell,Knovel, SciVal, Pure, and Analytical Services, The Consult series (FirstCONSULT, PathCONSULT, NursingCONSULT, MDConsult, StudentCONSULT), Virtual Clinical Excursions, and major reference works such asGray's Anatomy,Nelson Pediatrics,Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary,Netter's Atlas of Human Anatomy,and online versions of many journals[44]includingThe Lancet.

ScienceDirect is Elsevier's platform for online electronic access to its journals and over 40,000 e-books, reference works, book series, and handbooks. The articles are grouped in four main sections:Physical Sciences and Engineering,Life Sciences,Health Sciences,andSocial Sciences and Humanities.For most articles on the website, abstracts are freely available; access to the full text of the article (in PDF, and also HTML for newer publications) often requires a subscription or pay-per-view purchase.[36]

In 2019, Elsevier published 49,000 freeopen accessarticles and 370 full open access journals. Moreover, 1,900 of its journals soldhybrid open accessoptions.[36]

Pricing

[edit]

The subscription rates charged by the company for its journals have been criticized; some very large journals (with more than 5,000 articles) charge subscription prices as high as £9,634, far above average,[45]and many British universities pay more than a million pounds to Elsevier annually.[46]The company has been criticized not only by advocates of a switch to theopen-accesspublication model, but also by universities whose library budgets make it difficult for them to afford current journal prices.

For example, in 2004, a resolution byStanford University's senate singled out Elsevier's journals as being "disproportionately expensive compared to their educational and research value", which librarians should consider dropping, and encouraged its faculty "not to contribute articles or editorial or review efforts to publishers and journals that engage in exploitive or exorbitant pricing".[47]Similar guidelines and criticism of Elsevier's pricing policies have been passed by theUniversity of California,Harvard University,andDuke University.[48]

In July 2015, theAssociation of Universities in the Netherlandsthreatened to boycott Elsevier, which refused to negotiate on anyopen accesspolicy for Dutch universities.[49]After a year of negotiation, Elsevier pledged to make 30% of research published by Dutch researchers in Elsevier journals open access by 2018.[50]

In October 2018, a complaint against Elsevier was filed with the European Commission, alleging anticompetitive practices stemming from Elsevier's confidential subscription agreements and market dominance. The European Commission decided not to investigate.[51][52]

The elevated pricing of field journals in economics, most of which are published by Elsevier, was one of the motivations that moved theAmerican Economic Associationto launch theAmerican Economic Journalin 2009.[53]

Mergers and acquisitions

[edit]

RELX Group has beenactiveinmergers and acquisitions.Elsevier has incorporated other businesses that were either complementing or competing in the field of research and publishing and that reinforce itsmarket power,[54]such asMendeley(after the closure of2collab),SSRN,[55]bepress/Digital Commons,PlumX,Hivebench, Newsflo, Science-Metrix,[56]andInterfolio.[57]

Conferences

[edit]

Elsevier also conducts conferences, exhibitions, and workshops around the world, with over 50 conferences a year covering life sciences, physical sciences and engineering, social sciences, and health sciences.[58]

Shill review offer

[edit]

According to theBBC,in 2009, the firm [Elsevier] offered a £17.25 Amazon voucher to academics who contributed to the textbookClinical Psychologyif they would go onAmazon.comandBarnes & Noble(a large US books retailer) and give it five stars. Elsevier responded by stating "Encouraging interested parties to post book reviews isn't outside the norm in scholarly publishing, nor is it wrong to offer to nominally compensate people for their time. But in all instances the request should be unbiased, with no incentives for a positive review, and that's where this particular e-mail went too far", and that it was a mistake by a marketing employee.[59]

Blocking text mining research

[edit]

Elsevier seeks to regulatetext and data miningwith private licenses,[60]claiming that reading requires extra permission if automated and that the publisher holds copyright onoutput of automated processes.The conflict on research and copyright policy has often resulted in researchers being blocked from their work.[61]In November 2015, Elsevier blocked a scientist from performingtext miningresearch at scale on Elsevier papers, even though his institution already pays for access to Elsevier journal content.[60][62]The data was collected using theRpackage "statcheck".[63]

Fossil fuel company consulting and advocacy

[edit]

Elsevier is one of the most prolific publishers of books aimed at expanding the production offossil fuels.Since at least 2010 the company has worked with the fossil fuel industry to optimise fossil fuel extraction. It commissions authors, journal advisory board members and editors who are employees of the largest oil firms. In addition it markets data services and research portals directly to the fossil fuel industry to help "increase the odds of exploration success".[64]

Criticism of academic practices

[edit]

"Who's Afraid of Peer Review"

[edit]

In 2013, one of Elsevier's journals was caught in the sting set up byJohn Bohannon,published inScience,called "Who's Afraid of Peer Review?"[65]The journalDrug Invention Todayaccepted an obviously bogus paper made up by Bohannon that should have been rejected by any good peer-review system.[66]Instead,Drug Invention Todaywas among many open-access journals that accepted the fake paper for publication. As of 2014, this journal had been transferred to a different publisher.[67]

Fake journals

[edit]

At a 2009 court case in Australia whereMerck & Co.was being sued by a user ofVioxx,the plaintiff alleged that Merck had paid Elsevier to publish theAustralasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine,which had the appearance of being a peer-reviewedacademic journalbut in fact contained only articles favourable to Merck drugs.[68][69][70][71]Merck described the journal as a "complimentary publication", denied claims that articles within it wereghost writtenby Merck, and stated that the articles were all reprinted from peer-reviewed medical journals.[72]In May 2009, Elsevier Health Sciences CEO Hansen released a statement regarding Australia-based sponsored journals, conceding that they were "sponsored article compilation publications, on behalf of pharmaceutical clients, that were made to look like journals and lacked the proper disclosures." The statement acknowledged that it "was an unacceptable practice."[73]The Scientistreported that, according to an Elsevier spokesperson, six sponsored publications "were put out by their Australia office and bore theExcerpta Medicaimprint from 2000 to 2005, "namely theAustralasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine(Australas. J. Bone Joint Med.), theAustralasian Journal of General Practice(Australas. J. Gen. Pract.), theAustralasian Journal of Neurology(Australas. J. Neurol.), theAustralasian Journal of Cardiology(Australas. J. Cardiol.), theAustralasian Journal of Clinical Pharmacy(Australas. J. Clin. Pharm.), and theAustralasian Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine(Australas. J. Cardiovasc. Med.).[74]Excerpta Medica was a "strategic medical communications agency" run by Elsevier, according to the imprint's web page.[75]In October 2010, Excerpta Medica was acquired by Adelphi Worldwide.[76]

Chaos, Solitons & Fractals

[edit]

There was speculation[77]that the editor-in-chief of Elsevier journalChaos, Solitons & Fractals,Mohamed El Naschie,misused his power to publish his own work without appropriate peer review. The journal had published 322 papers with El Naschie as author since 1993. The last issue of December 2008 featured five of his papers.[78]The controversy was covered extensively in blogs.[79][80]The publisher announced in January 2009 that El Naschie had retired as editor-in-chief.[81]As of November 2011the co-Editors-in-Chief of the journal were Maurice Courbage and Paolo Grigolini.[82]In June 2011, El Naschie sued the journalNaturefor libel, claiming that his reputation had been damaged by their November 2008 article about his retirement, which included statements thatNaturehad been unable to verify his claimed affiliations with certain international institutions.[83]The suit came to trial in November 2011 and was dismissed in July 2012, with the judge ruling that the article was "substantially true", contained "honest comment", and was "the product of responsible journalism". The judgement noted that El Naschie, who represented himself in court, had failed to provide any documentary evidence that his papers had been peer-reviewed.[84]JudgeVictoria Sharpalso found "reasonable and serious grounds" for suspecting that El Naschie used a range of false names to defend his editorial practice in communications withNature,and described this behavior as "curious" and "bizarre".[85]

Plagiarism

[edit]

Elsevier's 'Duties of Authors' states that authors should ensure they have written entirely original works, and that proper acknowledgement of others' work must always be given. Elsevier claims plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behaviour.[86]Some Elsevier journals automatically screen submissions for plagiarism,[87]but not all.[88]

Albanian politician Taulant Muka claimed that Elsevier journalProcediahad plagiarized in the abstract of one of its articles. It is unclear whether or not Muka had access to the entirety of the article.[89]

Scientific racism

[edit]

Angela Sainihas criticized the two Elsevier journalsIntelligenceandPersonality and Individual Differencesfor having included on their editorial boards such well-known proponents ofscientific racismasRichard LynnandGerhard Meisenberg;in response to her inquiries, Elsevier defended their presence as editors.[90]The journalIntelligencehas been criticized for having "occasionally included papers with pseudoscientific findings about intelligence differences between races."[91]It is the official journal of theInternational Society for Intelligence Research,which organizes the controversial series of conferencesLondon Conference on Intelligence,described by theNew Statesmanas a forum for scientific racism.[92]

In response to a 2019 open letter, efforts byRetraction Watchand a petition signed by over 1000 people, on 17 June 2020 Elsevier announced it was retracting an article thatJ. Philippe RushtonandDonald Templerpublished in 2012 in the Elsevier journalPersonality and Individual Differences.[93]The article had claimed that there was scientific evidence that skin color was related to aggression and sexuality in humans.[94]

One of their journals,Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis,was involved in the manipulation of the peer review report.[95]

Manipulation of bibliometrics

[edit]

According to the signatories of theSan Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment(see alsoGoodhart's law), commercial academic publishers benefit from manipulation ofbibliometricsandscientometrics,such as thejournal impact factor.The impact factor, which is often used as aproxyofprestige,can influence revenues, subscriptions, and academics' willingness to contribute unpaid work.[96]However, there's evidence suggesting that reliability of published research works in several fields maydecreasewith increasing journal rank.[97]

Nine Elsevier journals, which exhibited unusual levels ofself-citation,had their journal impact factor of 2019 suspended fromJournal Citation Reportsin 2020, a sanction which hit 34 journals in total.[98]

In 2023, the International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, which is published by Elsevier, was criticized for desk-rejecting a submitted article for the main reason that it did not cite enough articles from the same journal.[99][100]

Control of journals

[edit]

Resignation of editorial boards

[edit]

The editorial boards of a number of journals have resigned because of disputes with Elsevier over pricing:

Editorial boards have also resigned over open access policies or other issues:

  • In 2015,Stephen Leederwas removed from his role as editor of theMedical Journal of Australiawhen its publisher decided to outsource the journal's production to Elsevier. As a consequence, all but one of the journal's editorial advisory committee members co-signed a letter of resignation.[114]
  • In 2015, the entire editorial staff of thegeneral linguisticsjournalLinguaresigned in protest of Elsevier's unwillingness to agree to their terms ofFair Open Access.Editor-in-chief Johan Rooryck also announced that theLinguastaff would establish a new journal,Glossa.[115]
  • In 2019, the entire editorial board of Elsevier'sJournal of Informetricsresigned over the open-access policies of its publisher and founded open-access journal calledQuantitative Science Studies.[116][117]
  • In 2020, Elsevier effectively severed the tie between theJournal of Asian Economicsand the academic society that founded it, the American Committee on Asian Economic Studies (ACAES), by offering the ACAES-appointed editor, Calla Wiemer, a terminal contract for 2020. As a result, a majority of the editorial board eventually resigned.[118][119]
  • In 2023, the editorial board of the journalDesign Studiesresigned over Elsevier's 1) plans to increase publications seven-fold; 2) the appointment of an external Editor-in-Chief who had not previously published in the journal; and 3) changing the scope of the journal without consulting the editorial team or the journal's parent society.[120]

"The Cost of Knowledge" boycott

[edit]

In 2003, various university librarians began coordinating with each other to complain about Elsevier's "big deal"journal bundling packages, in which the company offered a group of journal subscriptions to libraries at a certain rate, but in which librarians claimed no economical option was available to subscribe to only the popular journals at a rate comparable to the bundled rate.[121]Librarians continued to discuss the implications of the pricing schemes, many feeling pressured into buying the Elsevier packages without other options.[122]

On 21 January 2012, mathematicianTimothy Gowerspublicly announced he would boycott Elsevier, noting that others in the field have been doing so privately. The reasons for theboycottare high subscription prices for individual journals, bundling subscriptions to journals of different value and importance, and Elsevier's support forSOPA,PIPA,and theResearch Works Act,which would have prohibited open-access mandates for U.S. federally-funded research and severely restricted the sharing of scientific data.[123][124][125]

Following this, a petition advocating noncooperation with Elsevier (that is, not submitting papers to Elsevier journals, not refereeing articles in Elsevier journals, and not participating in journal editorial boards), appeared on the site "The Cost of Knowledge". By February 2012, this petition had been signed by over 5,000 academics,[123][124]growing to over 17,000 by November 2018.[126]The firm disputed the claims, claiming that their prices are below the industry average, and stating that bundling is only one of several different options available to buy access to Elsevier journals.[123]The company also claimed that its profit margins are "simply a consequence of the firm's efficient operation".[125]The academics replied that their work was funded by public money, thus should be freely available.

On 27 February 2012, Elsevier issued a statement on its website that declared that it has withdrawn support from the Research Works Act.[127]Although the Cost of Knowledge movement was not mentioned, the statement indicated the hope that the move would "help create a less heated and more productive climate" for ongoing discussions with research funders. Hours after Elsevier's statement, the sponsors of the bill,US House RepresentativesDarrell IssaandCarolyn Maloney,issued a joint statement saying that they would not push the bill in Congress.[128]

Plan S

[edit]

ThePlan Sopen-access initiative, which began in Europe and has since spread to some US research funding agencies, would require researchers receiving some grants to publish in open-access journals by 2020.[129]A spokesman for Elsevier said "If you think that information should be free of charge, go toWikipedia".[130]In September 2018,UBSadvised to sell Elsevier (RELX) stocks, noting that Plan S could affect 5-10% of scientific funding and may force Elsevier to reduce pricing.[131]

Relationship with academic institutions

[edit]

Colombia

[edit]

For 14 years, Colciencias, now Minciencias, led negotiations with Elsevier, as a practical and effective response to the informative growth of presumptive problems, allowing a greater number of Higher Education Institutions to join this project, thanks to it saves the scale that is obtained. Colombia has converted in the fourth country with the largest number of documents indexed in Scopus in Latin America (except for Brazil), growing by 57% in the last five years, a rate visibly greater in neighboring countries.[132]

The Colombian National Consortium "Consorcio Colombia"managed by Consortia S.A.S. agreed in 2016 to have better prices for the Consortium members. The current agreement is that (Colombia National Ministry of Science and Technology)Mincienciasand (Colombian National ministry of Education)Mineducaciónreintegrate money to institutions on the total payment of products, with the condition that money must be reinvested in academic and research resources.

Finland

[edit]

In 2015, Finnish research organizations paid a total of 27 million euros in subscription fees. Over one-third of the total costs went to Elsevier. The information was revealed after successful court appeal following a denied request on the subscription fees, due to confidentiality clauses in contracts with the publishers.[133]Establishing of this fact lead to creation of tiedonhinta.fi petition demanding more reasonable pricing and open access to content signed by more than 2800 members of the research community.[134]While deals with other publishers have been made, this was not the case for Elsevier, leading to the nodealnoreview.org boycott of the publisher signed more than 600 times.[135]

In January 2018, it was confirmed that a deal had been reached between those concerned.[136][137][138]

France

[edit]

The FrenchCouperin consortiumagreed in 2019 to a 4-year contract with Elsevier,[139]despite criticism from the scientific community.[140]

The FrenchÉcole Normale Supérieurehas stopped having Elsevier publish the journalAnnales Scientifiques de l'École Normale Supérieure[141](as of 2008).[142]

Effective on 1 January 2020, theFrench Academy of Sciencesstopped publishing its 7 journalsComptes rendus de l'Académie des Scienceswith Elsevier and switched toCentre Mersenne.[143]

Germany

[edit]

Since 2018 and as of 2023,[144]almost no academic institution in Germany is subscribed to Elsevier.[145][146]

Germany's DEAL project (Projekt DEAL), which includes over 60 major research institutions, has announced that all of its members are cancelling their contracts with Elsevier, effective 1 January 2017. The boycott is in response to Elsevier's refusal to adopt "transparent business models" to "make publications more openly accessible".[147][148][149][150][151][152][153]Horst Hippler, spokesperson for the DEAL consortium states that "taxpayers have a right to read what they are paying for" and that "publishers must understand that the route to open-access publishing at an affordable price is irreversible".[149]In July 2017, another 13 institutions announced that they would also be cancelling their subscriptions to Elsevier journals.[154]In August 2017, at least 185 German institutions had cancelled their contracts with Elsevier.[155]In 2018, whilst negotiations were ongoing, around 200 German universities that cancelled their subscriptions to Elsevier journals were granted complimentary open access to them until this ended in July of the year.[156][157][158]

On 19 December 2018, theMax Planck Society(MPS) announced that the existing subscription agreement with Elsevier would not be renewed after the expiration date of 31 December 2018. MPS counts 14,000 scientists in 84 research institutes, publishing 12,000 articles each year.[159][160]

In 2023 Elsevier and DEAL reached a tentative agreement on apublish and read model,which would take effect until 2028 if at least 70% of the eligible institutions opt into it.[144]

Hungary

[edit]

In March 2018, the HungarianElectronic Information Service National Programmeentered negotiations on its 2019 Elsevier subscriptions, asking for a read-and-publish deal.[161]Negotiations were ended by the Hungarian consortium in December 2018, and the subscription was not renewed.[116]

Iran

[edit]

In 2013, Elsevier changed its policies in response to sanctions announced by the USOffice of Foreign Assets Controlthat year. This included a request that all Elsevier journals avoid publishing papers by Iranian nationals who are employed by the Iranian government.[162][163]Elsevier executive Mark Seeley expressed regret on behalf of the company, but did not announce an intention to challenge this interpretation of the law.[164]

Italy

[edit]

CRUI (an association of Italian universities) sealed a 5-year-long deal for 2018–2022,[165]despite protests from the scientific community, protests focused on aspects such as the lack of prevention of cost increases by means of thedouble dipping.[166]

Netherlands

[edit]

In 2015, a consortium of all of Netherlands' 14 universities threatened to boycott Elsevier if it could not agree that articles by Dutch authors would be made open access and settled with the compromise of 30% of its Dutch papers becoming open access by 2018. Gerard Meijer, president ofRadboud UniversityinNijmegenand lead negotiator on the Dutch side noted, "it's not the 100% that I hoped for".[149][167][168][169]

Norway

[edit]

In March 2019, the Norwegian government on behalf of 44 institutions — universities, university colleges, research institutes, and hospitals — decided to break negotiations on renewal of their subscription deal with Elsevier, because of disagreement regarding open-access policy and Elsevier's unwillingness to reduce the cost of reading access.[170]

South Korea

[edit]

In 2017, over 70 university libraries confirmed a "contract boycott" movement involving three publishers including Elsevier. As of January 2018, whilst negotiations remain underway, a decision will be made as to whether or not continue the participating libraries will continue the boycott.[171]It was subsequently confirmed that an agreement had been reached.[172]

Sweden

[edit]

In May 2018, theBibsam Consortium,which negotiates license agreements on behalf of all Swedish universities and research institutes, decided not to renew their contract with Elsevier,[173][174]alleging that the publisher does not meet the demands of transition towards a more open-access model, and referring to the rapidly increasing costs for publishing.[175]Swedish universities will still have access to articles published before 30 June 2018. Astrid Söderbergh Widding, chairman of the Bibsam Consortium, said, "the current system for scholarly communication must change and our only option is to cancel deals when they don't meet our demands for a sustainable transition to open access".[176]Sweden has a goal of open access by 2026.[177]In November 2019 the negotiations concluded, with Sweden paying for reading access to Elsevier journals and open access publishing for all its researchers' articles.[178]

Taiwan

[edit]

In Taiwan, more than 75% of universities, including the country's top 11 institutions, have joined a collective boycott against Elsevier. On 7 December 2016, the Taiwanese consortium, CONCERT, which represents more than 140 institutions, announced it would not renew its contract with Elsevier.[149][179][180][181]

United States

[edit]

In March 2018,Florida State University's faculty elected to cancel its $2 million subscription to a bundle of several journals. Starting in 2019, it will instead buy access to titlesà la carte.[174]

In February 2019, theUniversity of Californiasaid it would terminate subscriptions "in [a] push for open access to publicly funded research."[182][183][14]After months of negotiations over open access to research by UC researchers and prices for subscriptions to Elsevier journals, a press release by the UC Office of the President issued Thursday, 28 February 2019 stated "Under Elsevier's proposed terms, the publisher would have charged UC authors large publishing fees on top of the university's multimillion dollar subscription, resulting in much greater cost to the university and much higher profits for Elsevier."[182][184]On 10 July 2019, Elsevier began restricting access to all new paywalled articles and approximately 5% of paywalled articles published before 2019.[185]

In April 2020, theUniversity of North Carolinaelected not to renew its bundled Elsevier package, citing a failure "to provide an affordable path".[186]Rather than extend the license, which was stated to cost $2.6 million annually, the university decided to continue subscribing to a smaller set of individual journals. TheState University of New YorkLibraries Consortium also announced similar outcome,[187][188]with the help of estimates fromUnpaywall Journals.[189]Similarly,MITannounced in June 2020 that it would no longer pay for access to new Elsevier articles.[190][191]

In 2022 Elsevier and theUniversity of Michiganestablished an agreement to support authors who wish to publish open access.[192]

Ukraine

[edit]

In June 2020 the Ukrainian government cancelled subscriptions for all universities in the country after failed negotiations. The Ministry of Education stated that Elsevier indexes journals in its register which call themselves Russian but are from occupied territories.[193]

Dissemination of research

[edit]

Lobbying efforts against open access

[edit]

Elsevier have been known to be involved in lobbying against open access.[194]These have included the likes of:

Selling open-access articles

[edit]

In 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017,[218]Elsevier was found to be selling some articles that should have been open access, but had been put behind a paywall.[219]A related case occurred in 2015, when Elsevier charged for downloading an open-access article from a journal published byJohn Wiley & Sons.However, whether Elsevier was in violation of the license under which the article was made available on their website was not clear.[220]

Action against academics posting their own articles online

[edit]

In 2013,Digimarc,a company representing Elsevier, told theUniversity of Calgaryto remove articles published by faculty authors on university web pages; although suchself-archivingof academic articles may be legal under thefair dealingprovisions in Canadiancopyright law,[221]the university complied.Harvard Universityand theUniversity of California, Irvinealso receivedtakedown noticesfor self-archived academic articles, a first for Harvard, according toPeter Suber.[222][223][224]

Months after its acquisition ofAcademia.edurivalMendeley,Elsevier sent thousands of takedown notices to Academia.edu, a practice that has since ceased following widespread complaint by academics, according to Academia.edu founder and chief executive Richard Price.[225][226]

After Elsevier acquired the repositorySSRNin May 2016, academics started complaining that some of their work has been removed without notice. The action was explained as a technical error.[227]

Sci-Hub and LibGen lawsuit

[edit]

In 2015, Elsevier filed a lawsuit against the sitesSci-HubandLibGen,which make copyright-protected articles available for free. Elsevier also claimed illegal access to institutional accounts.[228][229]

Initial rejection of the Initiative for Open Citations

[edit]

Among the major academic publishers, Elsevier alone declined to join theInitiative for Open Citations.In the context of the resignation of theJournal of Informetrics'editorial board, the firm stated: "Elsevier invests significantly in citation extraction technology. While these are made available to those who wish to license this data, Elsevier cannot make such a large corpus of data, to which it has added significant value, available for free."[230]

Elsevier finally joined the initiative in January 2021 after the data was already available with anOpen Data Commonslicense inMicrosoft Academic.[231]

ResearchGate take down

[edit]

A chamber of the Munich Regional Court has ruled that the research networking site ResearchGate has to take down articles uploaded without consent from their original publishers andResearchGatemust take down Elsevier articles. A case was brought forward in 2017 by theCoalition for Responsible Sharing,a group of publishers that includes Elsevier and theAmerican Chemical Society.[232]

Awards

[edit]

Elsevier has partnered with a number of organisations and lent its name to several awards.

Since 1987, Elsevier has partnered with the academic journalSpectrochimica Acta Part Bto award the Elsevier / Spectrochimica Acta Atomic Spectroscopy Award. This award is given each year for a jury-selected best paper of the year. The award is worth $1000.[233][234]

Starting in 1987, theIBMS Elsevier Awardwas awarded in 1992, 1995, 1998, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007 by theInternational Bone and Mineral Societyin partnership with Elsevier, "for outstanding research and teaching throughout their career by an IBMS member in the fields of bone and mineral metabolism".[235]

From 2007, theCoordenação de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior(CAPES) in Brazil partnered with Elsevier to award the CAPES Elsevier Award, the award being restricted to women from 2013 to encourage more women to pursue scientific careers. Several awards were awarded each year, as of 2014.[236]

From 2011, theOWSD-Elsevier Foundation Awards for Early-Career Women Scientists in the Developing World(OWSD-Elsevier Foundation Awards) have been awarded annually to early-career women scientists in selected developing countries in four regions:Latin Americaand theCaribbean,EastandSoutheastAsiaand thePacific,CentralandSouthAsia, andSub-Saharan Africa.TheOrganization for Women in Science for the Developing World(OWSD), the Elsevier Foundation, andThe World Academy of Sciencesfirst partnered to recognize achievements of early-career women scientists in developing countries in 2011.[237][238]

In 2016, the Elsevier Foundation awarded the Elsevier Foundation-ISC3 Green and Sustainable Chemistry Challenge. From 2021 and as of 2024,the annual award is known as the Elsevier Foundation Chemistry for Climate Action Challenge. Two prizes have been awarded each year; until 2020, the first prizewinner was awarded €50,000, and the second prize was €25,000. Since then, €25,000 has been awarded to each winner, usually an entrepreneur who has created a project or proposal that aids the fight againstclimate change.[239]

Imprints

[edit]

Elsevier uses itsimprints(that is,brand namesused in publishing) to market to different consumer segments. Many of the imprints have previously been the names of publishing companies that were purchased by Reed Elsevier.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^abc"RELX Annual Report".RELX.Archived(PDF)from the original on 20 July 2023.Retrieved20 July2023.
  2. ^"RELX Net Income 2006-2020".Macrotrends.Archived fromthe originalon 20 July 2023.Retrieved20 July2023.
  3. ^"Elsevier at a glance".Elsevier.Archivedfrom the original on 20 July 2023.Retrieved20 July2023.
  4. ^Carpenter, Todd (2 February 2017)."Plum Goes Orange – Elsevier Acquires Plum Analytics".The Scholarly Kitchen.Society for Scholarly Publishing.Archivedfrom the original on 5 August 2018.Retrieved1 January2021.
  5. ^"Elsevier's SciVal".University of British Columbia.Archivedfrom the original on 24 November 2020.Retrieved1 January2021.
  6. ^abcd"2021 RELX Group Annual Report".RELX Company Reports. RELX. March 2022.Archivedfrom the original on 9 January 2023.Retrieved16 March2022.
  7. ^Lin, Thomas (13 February 2012)."Mathematicians Organize Boycott of a Publisher".The New York Times.Archivedfrom the original on 29 March 2021.Retrieved26 February2017.
  8. ^Swoger, Bonnie (12 December 2013)."Is Elsevier really for-science? Or just for-profit?".Scientific American Blog Network.Archivedfrom the original on 13 April 2022.Retrieved13 April2022.
  9. ^RELX (21 February 2019)."RELX—Results for the year to December 2018"(PDF)(Press release). London, United Kingdom and Amsterdam, the Netherlands: RELX Group.Retrieved27 March2019.
  10. ^"Publishers increasingly in control of scholarly infrastructure and this is why we should care".The Knowledge G.A.P.20 September 2017.Archivedfrom the original on 11 May 2021.Retrieved11 May2021.
  11. ^Resnick, Brian (3 June 2019)."The war to free science".Vox.Archivedfrom the original on 11 April 2021.Retrieved13 April2022.
  12. ^Buranyi, Stephen (27 June 2017)."Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science?".The Guardian.Archivedfrom the original on 12 April 2022.Retrieved13 April2022.
  13. ^abGroen 2007,p. 217.
  14. ^abZhang, Sarah (4 March 2019)."The Real Cost of Knowledge".The Atlantic.Archivedfrom the original on 6 March 2019.Retrieved6 March2019.
  15. ^"Interesting Fact - History of the Elsevier Logo".Facebook.Archivedfrom the original on 10 August 2019.Retrieved12 June2019.
  16. ^Gerry van der List,Meer dan een weekblad. De geschiedenis van Elsevier
  17. ^Elsevier."In the shadow of the Nazis, this young executive dared to publish the work of Jewish scientists".Elsevier Connect.Archivedfrom the original on 23 February 2022.Retrieved7 March2022.
  18. ^ab"Reed Elsevier Timeline".www.ulib.niu.edu.Archived fromthe originalon 30 October 2015.Retrieved13 September2015.
  19. ^"A Short History of Elsevier"(PDF).Ask Force.Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 13 July 2022.Retrieved15 February2022.
  20. ^Boone, C.A.J.J.; van Witteloostuijn, A.; van Olffen, W.; de Brabander, B. (February 2003). The Genesis of top management team diversity: Selective turnover among top management teams in the Dutch newspaper publisher industry (1970-1994) (Report).doi:10.26481/umamet.2003006.
  21. ^Orchard, Constance (1988)."ADONIS and Electronically Stored Information: An Information Broker's Experience".The Serials Librarian.15(3–4): 85–91.doi:10.1300/J123v15n03_09.ISSN0361-526X.
  22. ^Tedd, Lucy A.; Large, J. A. (2005).Digital Libraries: Principles and Practice in a Global Environment.Walter de Gruyter.ISBN978-3-598-11627-8.
  23. ^Mackie-Mason, Jeffrey K., ed. (2008).Economics and Usage of Digital Libraries: Byting the Bullet.doi:10.3998/spobooks.5621225.0001.001.ISBN978-1-4181-6284-9.
  24. ^Giussani, Bruno (4 March 1997)."Building the World's Largest Scientific Database".Archivedfrom the original on 19 April 2021.Retrieved1 February2021.
  25. ^Stachokas, George (12 October 2019).The Role of the Electronic Resources Librarian.Chandos Publishing.ISBN978-0-08-102926-8.
  26. ^Beatty, Susannah (12 June 2017)."Content".Scopus.Archivedfrom the original on 17 January 2021.Retrieved1 February2021.
  27. ^"Welcome to SciVal".SciVal.Archivedfrom the original on 24 February 2021.Retrieved1 February2021.
  28. ^Herther, Nancy K. (8 October 2009)."Elsevier's New SciVal Products Target Academic Accountability and Strategic Planning".newsbreaks.infotoday.com.Archivedfrom the original on 16 August 2021.Retrieved30 November2020.
  29. ^Amirtha, Tina (17 April 2015)."THE OPEN PUBLISHING REVOLUTION, NOW BEHIND A BILLION-DOLLAR PAYWALL".Fast Company.Archivedfrom the original on 15 January 2016.Retrieved26 January2016.
  30. ^Dobbs, David (12 April 2013)."When the Rebel Alliance Sells Out".The New Yorker.
  31. ^Coleman, James A. (3 January 2014). "How to get published in English: Advice from the outgoing Editor-in-Chief".System.42:404–411.doi:10.1016/j.system.2014.01.004.ISSN0346-251X.Remember that editors and reviewers are unpaid, and are undertaking their tasks voluntarily, in addition to a full-time job
  32. ^"These Five Corporations Control Academic Publishing".Vocativ.com.10 June 2015.Archivedfrom the original on 14 December 2017.Retrieved31 January2018.
  33. ^Vincent Larivière; Stefanie Haustein; Philippe Mongeon (2015)."The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era".PLOS ONE.10(6): e0127502.Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1027502L.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0127502.PMC4465327.PMID26061978.
  34. ^Cookson, Robert (15 November 2015)."Elsevier leads the business the internet could not kill".Financial Times.Archived fromthe originalon 10 December 2022.Retrieved7 November2016.
  35. ^"Annual Report and Financial Statements 2019"(PDF).RELX.p. 12.Archived(PDF)from the original on 1 November 2020.Retrieved16 September2020.
  36. ^abcdef"RELX 2019 Annual Report"(PDF).RELX.Archived(PDF)from the original on 1 November 2020.Retrieved16 September2020.
  37. ^"Kumsal Bayazit".Elsevier.com.Archivedfrom the original on 22 February 2019.Retrieved22 February2019.
  38. ^abc"Elsevier reports 40% gender pay gap | The Bookseller".www.thebookseller.com.Archivedfrom the original on 24 November 2020.Retrieved21 December2020.
  39. ^"RELX Group/Elsevier Inclusion & Diversity".www.elsevier.com.Archivedfrom the original on 22 December 2020.Retrieved21 December2020.
  40. ^"RELX Annual Report and Financial Statements 2019",https://www.relx.com/investors/annual-reports/2019Archived18 April 2020 at theWayback Machine
  41. ^Nilsson, Patricia (25 July 2019)."Relx falls short of growth expectations".Financial Times.Archivedfrom the original on 26 July 2019.Retrieved26 July2019– viaYahoo Finance.
  42. ^"Elsevier sees 2019 profit and revenue lift | The Bookseller".www.thebookseller.com.Archivedfrom the original on 18 February 2021.Retrieved23 February2021.
  43. ^Hagve, Martin (17 August 2020)."The money behind academic publishing".Tidsskrift for den Norske Legeforening.140(11).doi:10.4045/tidsskr.20.0118.ISSN0029-2001.PMID32815337.S2CID225423313.Archivedfrom the original on 22 June 2022.Retrieved1 June2022.
  44. ^Health AdvanceArchived11 March 2022 at theWayback Machine.Elsevier.
  45. ^Monbiot, George (29 August 2011)."Academic publishers make Murdoch look like a socialist".Guardian.Archivedfrom the original on 7 March 2019.Retrieved11 December2016.
  46. ^"Elsevier journals — some facts".Gowers's Weblog.24 April 2014.Archivedfrom the original on 2 July 2014.Retrieved27 July2014.
  47. ^Faculty Senate minutes February 19 meetingArchived15 March 2010 at theWayback MachineStanford Report, 25 February 2004
  48. ^"Fac Sen addresses costly journals".The Stanford Daily.20 February 2004. Archived fromthe originalon 5 November 2012.
  49. ^Kingsley, Danny."Dutch boycott of Elsevier – a game changer?"Archived31 August 2017 at theWayback Machine,University of Cambridge Office of Scholarly Communication
  50. ^John Bohannon (11 December 2015)."In unique deal, Elsevier agrees to make some papers by Dutch authors free".science.org.Retrieved25 February2024.
  51. ^Kelly, Éanna (2 November 2018)."Researchers complain to Brussels over 'dominant position' of RELX Group in scientific publishing".sciencebusiness.net.Archivedfrom the original on 16 January 2019.Retrieved16 January2019.
  52. ^Price, Gary (30 October 2018)."Full Text: Complaint Filed with EU Competition Authority Regarding" Anti-Competitive Practices "of RELX/Elsevier and the Wider Scholarly Publishing Market".LJ infoDOCKET.Archivedfrom the original on 7 March 2021.Retrieved2 February2021.
  53. ^Glenn, David (25 January 2008).Chronicle.com "American Economic Association Plans 4 New Journals".Archived28 June 2022 at theWayback MachineThe Chronicle of Higher Education.
  54. ^Glyn Moody(4 August 2017)."Elsevier Continues To Build Its Monopoly Solution For All Aspects Of Scholarly Communication".Techdirt.Archivedfrom the original on 17 October 2018.Retrieved17 October2018.
  55. ^Mike Masnick(17 May 2016)."Disappointing: Elsevier Buys Open Access Academic Pre-Publisher SSRN".Techdirt.Archivedfrom the original on 17 October 2018.Retrieved17 October2018.
  56. ^Herb, Ulrich (2019).Steering science through Output Indicators & Data Capitalism.23rd Congress of the European Society of Veterinary and Comparative Nutrition.doi:10.5281/zenodo.3333395.
  57. ^Tucker, David (7 June 2022)."Elsevier closes Interfolio acquisition".Archivedfrom the original on 17 October 2022.Retrieved18 October2022.
  58. ^"Conferences".elsevier.com.Archivedfrom the original on 12 November 2019.Retrieved12 November2019.
  59. ^Finlo Rohrer, "The perils of five-star reviews",BBC News Magazine,25 June 2009.
  60. ^abBloudoff-Indelicato, Mollie (20 November 2015)."Text-mining block prompts online response".Nature.527(7579): 413.Bibcode:2015Natur.527..413B.doi:10.1038/527413f.S2CID4457698.
  61. ^Van Noorden, Richard (3 February 2014)."Elsevier opens its papers to text-mining".Nature.506(7486): 17.Bibcode:2014Natur.506...17V.doi:10.1038/506017a.ISSN0028-0836.PMID24499898."It was a legitimate criticism, that people sent text-mining requests in to publishers and they bounced around for a time without any response," admits Chris Shillum, vice-president of product management for platform and content at Elsevier.
  62. ^Moody, Glyn (18 November 2015)."Elsevier Says Downloading And Content-Mining Licensed Copies Of Research Papers 'Could Be Considered' Stealing".TechDirt.Archivedfrom the original on 21 November 2015.Retrieved21 November2015.
  63. ^Nuijten, Michèle B.; Hartgerink, Chris H. J.; van Assen, Marcel A. L. M.; Epskamp, Sacha; Wicherts, Jelte M. (23 October 2015)."The prevalence of statistical reporting errors in psychology (1985–2013)".Behavior Research Methods.48(4): 1205–1226.doi:10.3758/s13428-015-0664-2.PMC5101263.PMID26497820.
  64. ^"Revealed: leading climate research publisher helps fuel oil and gas drilling".The Guardian.24 February 2022.Archivedfrom the original on 24 February 2022.Retrieved24 February2022.
  65. ^Bohannon, John(2013)."Who's Afraid of Peer Review?".Science.342(6154): 60–65.Bibcode:2013Sci...342...60B.doi:10.1126/science.342.6154.60.PMID24092725.
  66. ^Claire Shaw (4 October 2013)."Hundreds of open access journals accept fake science paper".The Guardian.Theguardian.com.Archivedfrom the original on 27 December 2013.Retrieved26 December2013.
  67. ^"Drug Invention Today".sciencedirect.com.Archivedfrom the original on 15 June 2017.Retrieved15 February2022.
  68. ^Rout, Milanda (9 April 2009)."Doctors signed Merck's Vioxx studies".The Australian.Archived fromthe originalon 6 May 2009.Retrieved4 May2009.
  69. ^Grant, Bob (30 April 2009)."Merck published fake journal".The Scientist.Archivedfrom the original on 16 August 2011.Retrieved4 May2009.
  70. ^Hagan, Kate (23 April 2009)."Merck accused of 'ghost writing' medical article".The Age.Archivedfrom the original on 8 May 2009.Retrieved4 May2009.
  71. ^Ben Goldacre,"The danger of drugs... and data"Archived25 June 2009 at theWayback Machine,The Guardian,9 May 2009
  72. ^"Merck Responds to Questions about the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine Journal"(PDF)(Press release).Merck & Co.30 April 2009. Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 31 December 2009.
  73. ^"Statement from Michael Hansen, CEO Of Elsevier's Health Sciences Division, regarding Australia based sponsored journal practices between 2000 and 2005"(Press release). Elsevier.
  74. ^Grant, Bob (7 May 2009)."Elsevier published 6 fake journals".The Scientist.Archived fromthe originalon 18 January 2011.Retrieved8 May2009.
  75. ^""Excerpta Medica", official webpage ".Elsevier.Archivedfrom the original on 10 February 2022.Retrieved15 February2022.
  76. ^""Excerpta Medica Joins Adelphi Worldwide", press release ".Elsevier.Archivedfrom the original on 4 July 2021.Retrieved15 February2022.
  77. ^Schiermeier, Q (2008)."Self-publishing editor set to retire".Nature.456(7221): 432.doi:10.1038/456432a.PMID19037282.
  78. ^Chaos, Solitons & Fractals38(5), pp. 1229–1534 (December 2008)
  79. ^"The Scholarly Kitchen".Archivedfrom the original on 15 February 2022.Retrieved15 February2022.
  80. ^"El Naschie Watch Blog".Archived fromthe originalon 15 October 2010.
  81. ^"Publisher's note".Chaos, Solitons & Fractals.39:v–. 2009.doi:10.1016/S0960-0779(09)00060-5.
  82. ^Chaos, Solitons and Fractals.November 2011.Archivedfrom the original on 15 February 2022.Retrieved15 February2022.
  83. ^Ghosh, Pallab (11 November 2011)."Nature journal libel case begins".BBC News.Archivedfrom the original on 12 November 2011.Retrieved11 November2011.
  84. ^Sample, Ian (6 July 2012)."Nature libel verdict 'a victory for free speech'".The Guardian.Archivedfrom the original on 26 April 2020.
  85. ^Aron, Jacob (6 July 2012)."Nature Publishing Group wins libel trial".New Scientist(2873).Archivedfrom the original on 6 July 2012.Retrieved14 July2012.
  86. ^"Publishing Ethics for Editors".www.elsevier.com.Archivedfrom the original on 22 January 2021.Retrieved13 January2021.
  87. ^"Plagiarism detection".Elsevier.Archivedfrom the original on 30 August 2018.Retrieved30 August2018.
  88. ^Ivan Oransky (23 August 2018)."UPDATED: Elsevier retracts a paper on solar cells that appears to plagiarize a Nature journal. But the reason is…odd".Archivedfrom the original on 23 August 2018.Retrieved30 August2018.
  89. ^"Massive Plagiarism Scandal Hits Albanian Officials without Consequences".25 December 2018. Archived fromthe originalon 30 December 2018.Retrieved10 May2019.
  90. ^Saini, Angela (22 January 2018)."Racism is creeping back into mainstream science – we have to stop it".The Guardian.Archivedfrom the original on 8 February 2019.Retrieved19 June2020.
  91. ^Skibba, Ramin (20 May 2019)."The Disturbing Resilience of Scientific Racism".Smithsonian Magazine.Archivedfrom the original on 11 October 2022.Retrieved19 June2020.
  92. ^Van Der Merwe, Ben (19 February 2018)."It might be a pseudoscience, but students take the threat of eugenics seriously".New Statesman.Archivedfrom the original on 30 July 2019.Retrieved19 June2020.
  93. ^"Personality and Individual Differences Retracts Rushton and Templer Article".Archivedfrom the original on 18 April 2021.Retrieved19 June2020.
  94. ^"Elsevier journal to retract 2012 paper widely derided as racist".17 June 2020.Archivedfrom the original on 24 June 2021.Retrieved19 June2020.
  95. ^Raman, T. R. Shankar (4 April 2021)."Why I Won't Review or Write for Elsevier and Other Commercial Scientific Journals".The Wire.New Delhi, India.Archivedfrom the original on 8 October 2021.Retrieved5 October2021.
  96. ^McKiernan, Erin C.; Schimanski, Lesley A.; Muñoz Nieves, Carol; Matthias, Lisa; Niles, Meredith T.; Alperin, Juan P. (2019)."Use of the Journal Impact Factor in academic review, promotion, and tenure evaluations".eLife.8.doi:10.7554/eLife.47338.PMC6668985.PMID31364991.
  97. ^Brembs B (2018)."Prestigious Science Journals Struggle to Reach Even Average Reliability".Frontiers in Human Neuroscience.12:37.doi:10.3389/fnhum.2018.00037.PMC5826185.PMID29515380.
  98. ^Oransky, Ivan (29 June 2020)."Major indexing service sounds alarm on self-citations by nearly 50 journals".Archivedfrom the original on 29 June 2020.Retrieved1 July2020.
  99. ^"Elsevier journal under fire for rejecting paper that didn't cite enough of its old papers".cen.acs.org.Archivedfrom the original on 12 May 2023.Retrieved16 May2023.
  100. ^Singh Chawla, Dalmeet (3 May 2023). "Researchers who agree to manipulate citations are more likely to get their papers published".Nature.doi:10.1038/d41586-023-01532-w.ISSN0028-0836.PMID37138067.S2CID258484904.
  101. ^abBirman, Joan."Scientific publishing: a mathematician's viewpointArchived12 April 2021 at theWayback Machine".Notices of the AMS.Vol. 47, No. 7, August 2000.
  102. ^EffeDesign."The EEA's journal: a brief history".Eeassoc.org.Archivedfrom the original on 27 December 2013.Retrieved26 December2013.
  103. ^"Changes at the Journal of Algorithms"(PDF).Archived(PDF)from the original on 12 January 2013.Retrieved26 December2013.
  104. ^Donald Knuth (25 October 2003)."Letter to the editorial board of the Journal of Algorithms"(PDF).Archived(PDF)from the original on 6 April 2008.Retrieved18 February2008.
  105. ^"Journal of Algorithms page at ScienceDirect".Sciencedirect.com.Archivedfrom the original on 27 June 2013.Retrieved26 December2013.
  106. ^"Journal declarations of independence".Open Access Directory.Simmons College.Archivedfrom the original on 3 May 2012.Retrieved23 May2012.
  107. ^Kyriakides, Stelios; Hills, David A. (1 January 2006)."Editorial".International Journal of Solids and Structures.43(1): 1.doi:10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2005.11.001.Charles R. Steele succeeded Herrmann as editor-in-chief in 1985 and served in that capacity until June 2005. During his 20-year tenure, the journal grew both in size and in reputation, becoming one of the premier journals in the field. We have accepted an invitation to serve as editors of the journal as of October 1, 2005, being cognizant of the immense contributions, leadership, and high standards exercised by our two predecessors on the way to making IJSS the forum it is today.
  108. ^"Resignation letter from the editors of Topology"(PDF).10 August 2006.Archived(PDF)from the original on 11 May 2008.Retrieved18 February2008.
  109. ^Journal of Topology(pub. London Mathematical Society)Archived7 February 2007 at theWayback Machine
  110. ^Topology.elsevier.com.Archivedfrom the original on 2 April 2015.Retrieved13 March2015.
  111. ^"Topology page at ScienceDirect".Sciencedirect.com.Archivedfrom the original on 19 January 2013.Retrieved26 December2013.
  112. ^Sanderson, Katharine (21 April 2023)."Editors quit top neuroscience journal to protest against open-access charges".Nature.616(7958). Nature Publishing Group: 641.Bibcode:2023Natur.616..641S.doi:10.1038/d41586-023-01391-5.PMID37085706.S2CID258275824.
  113. ^Zahneis, Megan (21 April 2023)."'It Feels Like Things Are Breaking Open': High Publishing Charges Spur Neuroscientists to Start Own Journal ".The Chronicle of Higher Education.Archivedfrom the original on 24 April 2023.Retrieved24 April2023.
  114. ^"Medical journal editor sacked and editorial committee resigns".3 May 2015.Archivedfrom the original on 6 May 2015.Retrieved18 May2015.
  115. ^Jaschik, Scott (2 November 2015)."Language of Protest".Inside Higher Ed.Archivedfrom the original on 5 February 2017.Retrieved18 January2017.
  116. ^abMcKenzie, Lindsay (14 January 2019)."Elsevier journal editors resign, start rival open-access journal".Inside Higher Ed.Archivedfrom the original on 28 December 2021.Retrieved16 January2019.
  117. ^Chawla, Dalmeet Singh (14 January 2019)."Open-access row prompts editorial board of Elsevier journal to resign".Nature.doi:10.1038/d41586-019-00135-8.S2CID159142533.Archivedfrom the original on 15 February 2022.Retrieved15 February2022.
  118. ^"Stakeholders speak to Elsevier on the future of the Journal of Asian Economics".American Committee on Asian Economic Studies.Archivedfrom the original on 9 August 2020.Retrieved20 August2020.
  119. ^Wiemer, Calla."The state of journal publishing: Elsevier vs Academics".Asia Economics Blog.Archivedfrom the original on 9 August 2020.Retrieved20 August2020.
  120. ^The DRS Executive Board."The Future of Design Studies Update".Design Research Society.Retrieved14 July2023.
  121. ^Groen 2007,p. 177.
  122. ^Groen 2007,p. 180.
  123. ^abcFlood, Alison (2 February 2012)."Scientists sign petition to boycott academic publisher Elsevier".The Guardian.Archivedfrom the original on 5 February 2012.
  124. ^abFischman, Josh (30 January 2012)."Elsevier Publishing Boycott Gathers Steam Among Academics".The Chronicle of Higher Education.Archivedfrom the original on 10 February 2012.
  125. ^ab"Scientific publishing: The price of information".The Economist.4 February 2012.Archivedfrom the original on 17 February 2012.
  126. ^"thecostofknowledge.com".Archived fromthe originalon 4 December 2015.Retrieved12 January2013.
  127. ^"Elsevier Backs Down as Boycott Grows".Archived fromthe originalon 11 September 2014.Retrieved25 August2014.
  128. ^"Sponsors and Supporters Back Away from Research Works Act".Archived fromthe originalon 2 April 2015.Retrieved25 August2014.
  129. ^Noorden, Richard Van (5 November 2018)."Wellcome and Gates join bold European open-access plan".Nature.doi:10.1038/d41586-018-07300-5.S2CID239818967.Archivedfrom the original on 16 November 2020.Retrieved16 January2019.
  130. ^Keulemans, Maarten (4 September 2018)."11 EU-landen besluiten: vanaf 2020 moet alle wetenschappelijke literatuur gratis beschikbaar zijn".De Volkskrant(in Dutch).Archivedfrom the original on 7 September 2018.Retrieved25 September2018.Als je vindt dat informatie gratis moet zijn: ga naar Wikipedia.
  131. ^Elder, Bryce (12 September 2018)."Stocks to watch: SSE, BAT, Galápagos, RELX, Telefónica, RBS".Financial Times.Archived fromthe originalon 10 December 2022.Retrieved14 October2018.
  132. ^Consorcio Colombia (2 November 2022)."Consorcio Colombia".Archivedfrom the original on 2 November 2022.Retrieved2 November2022.
  133. ^"Scientific journal subscription costs in Finland 2010-2015: a preliminary analysis".rOpenGov.Archived fromthe originalon 15 October 2017.Retrieved15 October2017.
  134. ^"The Cost of Scientific Publications Must Not Get Out of Hand".Archived fromthe originalon 15 October 2017.Retrieved3 March2021.
  135. ^"No Deal, No Review".No Deal No Review.Archivedfrom the original on 28 January 2021.Retrieved27 January2021.
  136. ^Kukkonen, Suvi (17 January 2018)."FinELib and Elsevier Reach Agreement for Subscription Access and Open Access Publishing".National Library.Archivedfrom the original on 17 January 2018.Retrieved17 January2018.
  137. ^"Finland takes steps in the openness of academic journal pricing".Mostly Physics.25 January 2018.Archivedfrom the original on 1 May 2018.Retrieved3 March2021.
  138. ^Transition vers l'Accès Libre: le piège des accords globaux avec les éditeurs[Transition to Open Access: the Trap of Global Agreements with Publishers] (in French). 13 April 2018.Archivedfrom the original on 8 April 2022.Retrieved3 March2021.{{cite book}}:|website=ignored (help)
  139. ^Consortium Couperin (11 June 2019)."Communiqué sur la négociation Elsevier"(PDF).Archived(PDF)from the original on 26 August 2019.Retrieved26 August2019.
  140. ^Larousserie, David (13 May 2019)."Embrouilles à propos de l'accès aux revues scientifiques"[Confusion over access to scientific journals] (in French).Archivedfrom the original on 18 January 2021.Retrieved27 January2021.
  141. ^Baez, John (24 January 2011)."What We Can Do About Science Journals".Archivedfrom the original on 23 November 2020.Retrieved27 January2021.
  142. ^"Annales Scientifiques de l'École Normale Supérieure".Elsevier. Archived fromthe originalon 12 April 2008.Retrieved3 March2021.
  143. ^"Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences".Archivedfrom the original on 9 January 2021.Retrieved7 January2021.
  144. ^abGretchen Vogel (6 September 2023)."German science organizations strike open-access deal with Elsevier".
  145. ^Haufe, Gottfried (20 November 2018)."Vertragskündigungen Elsevier 2018".www.projekt-deal.de.Archivedfrom the original on 6 March 2019.Retrieved6 March2019.
  146. ^Else, Holly (5 February 2019)."Thousands of scientists run up against Elsevier's paywall".Nature.doi:10.1038/d41586-019-00492-4.S2CID86526472.Archivedfrom the original on 8 March 2021.Retrieved6 March2019.
  147. ^Doctorow, Cory (15 December 2016)."Germany-wide consortium of research libraries announce boycott of Elsevier journals over open access".Boing Boing.Archivedfrom the original on 27 December 2016.Retrieved27 December2016.
  148. ^"No full-text access to Elsevier journals to be expected from 1 January 2017 on".Göttingen State and University Library. Archived fromthe originalon 27 December 2016.Retrieved27 December2016.
  149. ^abcdSchiermeier, Quirin; Mega, Emiliano Rodríguez (2016)."Scientists in Germany, Peru and Taiwan to lose access to Elsevier journals".Nature.541(7635): 13.Bibcode:2017Natur.541...13S.doi:10.1038/nature.2016.21223.PMID28054621.
  150. ^"Pressemitteilungen"[Press Releases].Lrk-bw.de(in German).Archivedfrom the original on 11 July 2017.Retrieved11 July2017.
  151. ^Kwon, Diana (17 July 2017)."Major German Universities Cancel Elsevier Contracts".The Scientist.Archivedfrom the original on 28 October 2017.Retrieved27 January2021.
  152. ^Kupferschmidt, Kai; Vogel, Gretchen (23 August 2017)."A bold open-access push in Germany could change the future of academic publishing".Science.Archivedfrom the original on 6 November 2021.Retrieved27 January2021.
  153. ^"Researchers resign editorship of Elsevier journals".German Rectors' Conference.12 October 2017.Archivedfrom the original on 17 October 2017.Retrieved27 January2021.
  154. ^"German universities to let Elsevier contracts lapse | Books+Publishing".Booksandpublishing.com.au.Archivedfrom the original on 29 July 2017.Retrieved29 July2017.
  155. ^"Vertragskündigungen Elsevier 2017 – Projekt DEAL".Projekt-deal.de.Archivedfrom the original on 12 September 2017.Retrieved12 September2017.
  156. ^Matthews, David (4 January 2018)."Elsevier maintains German access despite failure to strike deal".Times Higher Education (THE).London, United Kingdom.ISSN0049-3929.Archivedfrom the original on 5 January 2018.Retrieved5 January2018.
  157. ^Kwon, Diana (19 July 2018)."Universities in Germany and Sweden Lose Access to Elsevier Journals".The Scientist.Archivedfrom the original on 8 March 2021.Retrieved3 March2021.
  158. ^Schiermeier, Quirin (4 January 2018)."Germany vs Elsevier: universities win temporary journal access after refusing to pay fees".Nature News.553(7687): 137.Bibcode:2018Natur.553..137S.doi:10.1038/d41586-018-00093-7.ISSN1476-4687.PMID29323311.
  159. ^"Max Planck Society discontinues agreement with Elsevier; stands firm with Projekt DEAL negotiations".Max Planck Digital Library.Archivedfrom the original on 11 January 2022.Retrieved3 March2021.
  160. ^Price, Gary (19 December 2018)."Max Planck Society Discontinues Agreement with Elsevier. Affirms Support for Projekt Deal".infodocket.com Library Journal.Archivedfrom the original on 20 December 2018.Retrieved19 December2018.
  161. ^"Hungarian Consortium terminates negotiations with Elsevier".eisz.mtak.hu.Archivedfrom the original on 16 January 2019.Retrieved16 January2019.
  162. ^Baghianimoghadam, Behnam (9 February 2014)."Scientific sanctions: A catastrophe for the civilized world".Indian Journal of Medical Ethics.11(2): 130.PMID24727630.Archivedfrom the original on 14 March 2022.Retrieved25 December2018.
  163. ^"Taylor & Francis group bans publication of articles by Iranian authors".Fars News.5 November 2013. Archived fromthe originalon 26 December 2018.Retrieved3 March2021.
  164. ^Seeley, Mark (9 May 2013)."Trade sanctions against Iran affect publishers".Elsevier.Archivedfrom the original on 26 December 2018.Retrieved25 December2018.
  165. ^"I ricercatori italiani potranno beneficiare dell'accesso continuo al database ScienceDirect di Elsevier"[Italian researchers will benefit from continuous access to Elsevier's ScienceDirect database].Conferenza dei Rettori delle Università italiane(in Italian).Archivedfrom the original on 26 January 2021.Retrieved3 March2021.
  166. ^Galimberti, Paola (10 December 2018)."Svezia-Italia 1-0. Berlino 2018: Italia fanalino di coda nell'Open Science"[Sweden-Italy 1-0. Berlin 2018: Italy lagging behind in Open Science].Roars: Returns on Academic Research(in Italian).Archivedfrom the original on 16 January 2021.Retrieved3 March2021.
  167. ^Bohannon, John (11 December 2015)."In unique deal, Elsevier agrees to make some papers by Dutch authors free".Science.doi:10.1126/science.aad7565.Archivedfrom the original on 20 January 2022.Retrieved27 December2016.
  168. ^"Dutch Universities and Elsevier reach agreement in principle - Library UvA - University of Amsterdam".Universiteit van Amsterdam. 12 October 2015. Archived fromthe originalon 27 December 2016.Retrieved27 December2016.
  169. ^De Knecht, Sicco (25 March 2017)."How Elsevier plans to sabotage Open Access".Medium.Archivedfrom the original on 28 March 2017.Retrieved3 March2021.
  170. ^"Norwegian research institutions have decided not to renew their agreement with Elsevier".UNIT.12 March 2019.Archivedfrom the original on 12 March 2019.Retrieved12 March2019.
  171. ^Kim Jung-hyun (29 December 2017)."70여개 대학 도서관, 새해 첫 날부터 일부 논문 못 봐 - 한국대학신문"[70 University Libraries Can't See Some Papers From New Year's Day] (in Korean).Archivedfrom the original on 9 November 2020.Retrieved3 March2021.
  172. ^"South Korean universities reach agreement with Elsevier after long standoff".Science.15 January 2018.Archivedfrom the original on 15 February 2022.Retrieved16 January2018.
  173. ^"Sweden cancels Elsevier contract as open-access dispute spreads".www.timeshighereducation.com.16 May 2018.Archivedfrom the original on 6 March 2019.Retrieved5 March2019.
  174. ^ab"Big Deal Cancellation Tracking",Sparcopen.org,US:Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition,archivedfrom the original on 30 June 2018,retrieved30 June2018
  175. ^annwen."Bibsamkonsortiet - Kungliga biblioteket".www.kb.se(in Swedish).Archivedfrom the original on 30 June 2018.Retrieved31 May2018.
  176. ^"Sweden stands up for open access – cancels agreement with Elsevier".OpenAccess.se(in Swedish). 16 May 2018.Archivedfrom the original on 22 May 2018.Retrieved30 May2018.
  177. ^Wentzel, Annica (16 May 2018)."Sweden stands up for open access – cancels agreement with Elsevier".openaccess.blogg.kb.se.Archivedfrom the original on 3 April 2019.Retrieved6 March2019.
  178. ^"New transformative agreement with Elsevier enables unlimited open access to Swedish research".Kungliga Biblioteket.Archivedfrom the original on 3 July 2020.Retrieved3 July2020.
  179. ^"Quan ô Elsevier tư liêu khố hợp ước đàm phán CONCERT thanh minh".Archivedfrom the original on 27 December 2016.Retrieved27 December2016.
  180. ^"Taiwan Tech to Discontinue Subscription to Elsevier ScienceDirect Starting 2017 - NTUST Library".Archived fromthe originalon 27 December 2016.Retrieved27 December2016.
  181. ^Schmitt, Jason (30 March 2017)."Asia Advances Open Access Research".Huffington Post.Archivedfrom the original on 25 April 2017.Retrieved29 April2017.
  182. ^ab"UC terminates subscriptions with world's largest scientific publisher in push for open access to publicly funded research".www.universityofcalifornia.edu.28 February 2019.Archivedfrom the original on 5 March 2019.Retrieved6 March2019.
  183. ^Yirka, Bob (4 March 2019)."University of California terminates subscriptions to Elsevier".phys.org.Archivedfrom the original on 6 March 2019.Retrieved6 March2019.
  184. ^Kell, Gretchen; Berkeley, U. C. (6 March 2019)."Why UC split with publishing giant Elsevier".University of California.Archivedfrom the original on 28 May 2019.Retrieved12 June2019.
  185. ^"University of California loses access to new journal articles published by Elsevier after research access fight".statnews.com.10 July 2019.Archivedfrom the original on 10 July 2019.Retrieved10 July2019.
  186. ^"Upcoming Elsevier Cancellations".University of North Carolina. 9 April 2020.Archivedfrom the original on 10 April 2020.Retrieved9 April2020.
  187. ^"SUNY Cancels Big Deal With Elsevier".Inside Highered. 13 April 2020.Archivedfrom the original on 21 September 2021.Retrieved16 April2020.
  188. ^"State University of New York Steps Away From the" Big Deal "with Elsevier".SUNY Libraries Consortium (SLC). 7 April 2020.Archivedfrom the original on 18 April 2020.Retrieved16 April2020.
  189. ^"SUNY Negotiates New, Modified Agreement with Elsevier - Libraries News Center University at Buffalo Libraries".library.buffalo.edu.Archivedfrom the original on 6 December 2020.Retrieved18 April2020.
  190. ^"MIT, guided by open access principles, ends Elsevier negotiations".11 June 2020.Archivedfrom the original on 22 September 2021.Retrieved11 June2020.
  191. ^McKenzie, Lindsay (12 June 2020)."MIT Ends Negotiations with Elsevier".Inside Higher Ed.Archivedfrom the original on 12 June 2020.Retrieved12 June2020.
  192. ^"University of Michigan".www.elsevier.com.Archivedfrom the original on 16 February 2022.Retrieved16 February2022.
  193. ^"Індексація наукових журналів, що видаються на тимчасово окупованих територіях україни, є грубим порушенням законодавства України і міжнародного права – позиція МОН".mon.gov.ua.Ministry of Education of Ukraine. 22 July 2020.Archivedfrom the original on 12 August 2020.Retrieved4 September2020.
  194. ^"Lobbying Spending Database - RELX Group, 2017".Opensecrets.org.Archivedfrom the original on 30 August 2017.Retrieved30 August2017.
  195. ^"Federal Research Public Access Act (Alliance for Taxpayer Access)".Taxpayeraccess.org.Archived fromthe originalon 24 March 2017.Retrieved25 March2017.
  196. ^"Legislation to Bar Public-Access Requirement on Federal Research Is Dead".The Chronicle of Higher Education.27 February 2012.Archivedfrom the original on 26 March 2017.Retrieved25 March2017.
  197. ^"How Corporations Score Big Profits By Limiting Access To Publicly Funded Academic Research".ThinkProgress.3 March 2013.Archivedfrom the original on 1 February 2018.Retrieved25 March2017.
  198. ^Price, Richard (15 February 2012)."The Dangerous" Research Works Act "".TechCrunch.Archivedfrom the original on 12 March 2013.Retrieved25 March2017.
  199. ^Hu, Jane C."Academics Want You to Read Their Work for Free".The Atlantic.Archivedfrom the original on 26 March 2017.Retrieved25 March2017.
  200. ^Elsevier."Message on the Research Works Act".Elsevier.com.Archivedfrom the original on 26 March 2017.Retrieved25 March2017.
  201. ^Kakaes, Konstantin (28 February 2012)."Scientists' Victory Over the Research Works Act Is Like the SOPA Defeat".Slate.ISSN1091-2339.Archivedfrom the original on 30 March 2017.Retrieved25 March2017.
  202. ^"Elsevier withdraws support from Research Works Act, bill collapses".Boing Boing.28 February 2012.Archivedfrom the original on 26 February 2017.Retrieved25 March2017.
  203. ^"Academic publishers have become the enemies of science".The Guardian.16 January 2012.ISSN0261-3077.Archivedfrom the original on 18 August 2021.Retrieved26 March2017.
  204. ^"Elsevier, Wiley are getting PR advice from Eric Dezenhall".Transcription and Translation.Archivedfrom the original on 26 March 2017.Retrieved25 March2017.
  205. ^Dyer, Owen (3 February 2007)."Publishers hire PR heavyweight to defend themselves against open access".BMJ: British Medical Journal.334(7587): 227.doi:10.1136/bmj.39112.439051.DB.ISSN0959-8138.PMC1790741.PMID17272546.
  206. ^"Scientific Publishers Offer Solution to White House's Public Access Mandate".Science.4 June 2013.Archivedfrom the original on 15 February 2022.Retrieved25 March2017.
  207. ^""The Pit Bull Of Public Relations" - Bloomberg ".Bloomberg.com.17 April 2006.Archivedfrom the original on 7 April 2017.Retrieved25 March2017.
  208. ^"Muscle from Brussels as open access gets an €80bn boost".Times Higher Education (THE).17 May 2012.Archivedfrom the original on 27 March 2017.Retrieved26 March2017.
  209. ^"Horizon 2020 to promote open access".Gowers's Weblog.17 May 2012.Archivedfrom the original on 27 March 2017.Retrieved26 March2017.
  210. ^"Horizon 2020: A €80 Billion Battlefield for Open Access".Science.24 May 2012.Archivedfrom the original on 29 June 2022.Retrieved26 March2017.
  211. ^"European Union links research grants to open access".Archivedfrom the original on 27 March 2017.Retrieved26 March2017.
  212. ^"Inside Higher Ed: Big push for open access".Times Higher Education (THE).26 February 2013.Archivedfrom the original on 27 March 2017.Retrieved26 March2017.
  213. ^"Elsevier distances itself from open-access article".Times Higher Education (THE).22 May 2013.Archivedfrom the original on 27 March 2017.Retrieved26 March2017.
  214. ^"How Corporations Score Big Profits By Limiting Access To Publicly Funded Academic Research".ThinkProgress.3 March 2013.Archivedfrom the original on 1 February 2018.Retrieved26 March2017.
  215. ^"Hated Science Publisher Elsevier To Help EU Monitor Open Science - Including Open Access".Techdirt.Archivedfrom the original on 5 April 2018.Retrieved5 April2018.
  216. ^Lykkja, Pål Magnus; Myklebust, Jan Petter (17 March 2018)."Open science in the EU – Will the astroturfers take over?".University World News.Archivedfrom the original on 18 March 2018.Retrieved13 April2018.
  217. ^"Elsevier lobbying UKRI last minute over funder's OA policy".Research Professional News.5 August 2021.Archivedfrom the original on 5 August 2021.Retrieved5 August2021.
  218. ^Ross Mounce (20 February 2017)."Hybrid open access is unreliable".Archivedfrom the original on 20 June 2018.Retrieved30 April2018.
  219. ^Jump, Paul (27 March 2014)."Elsevier: bumps on road to open access".Times Higher Education.Archivedfrom the original on 10 March 2015.Retrieved9 March2015.
  220. ^Vollmer, Timothy (13 March 2015)."Are commercial publishers wrongly selling access to openly licensed scholarly articles?".Creative Commons News.Archivedfrom the original on 15 March 2015.Retrieved14 March2015.
  221. ^Mike Masnick."Elsevier Ramps Up Its War On Access To Knowledge".Techdirt.Archivedfrom the original on 12 April 2018.Retrieved1 May2018.
  222. ^Peterson, Andrea (19 December 2013)."How one publisher is stopping academics from sharing their research".The Washington Post.Archivedfrom the original on 6 January 2015.Retrieved6 January2015.
  223. ^Masnick, Mike (20 December 2013)."Elsevier Ramps Up Its War On Access To Knowledge".Techdirt.Archivedfrom the original on 12 April 2018.Retrieved6 January2015.
  224. ^"How one publisher is stopping academics from sharing their research".Washington Post.Archivedfrom the original on 19 November 2016.Retrieved26 March2017.
  225. ^Parr, Chris (12 June 2014)."Sharing is a way of life for millions on Academia.edu".Times Higher Education.Archivedfrom the original on 8 February 2023.Retrieved14 September2015.
  226. ^Howard, Jennifer (6 December 2013)."Posting Your Latest Article? You Might Have to Take It Down".The Chronicle of Higher Education.Archivedfrom the original on 8 September 2015.Retrieved14 September2015.
  227. ^Mike MasnickSSRN accused of copyright crackdownArchived25 June 2018 at theWayback Machine,Techdirt.
  228. ^McLaughlin, Stephen Reid (18 March 2016)."Elsevier v. Sci-Hub on the docket".Archivedfrom the original on 27 June 2016.Retrieved28 June2016.
  229. ^"Simba Information: Five Professional Publishing News Events of 2015 Signal Times Are A-Changin'".PR Newswire.17 December 2015.Archivedfrom the original on 20 May 2016.Retrieved28 June2016.
  230. ^Reller, Tom (15 January 2019)."About the resignation of the Journal of Informetrics Editorial Board".Elsevier Connect.Archivedfrom the original on 10 August 2019.Retrieved15 March2019.
  231. ^Waltman, Ludo (22 December 2020)."Q&A about Elsevier's decision to open its citations".Leiden Madtrics.Universiteit Leiden.Archivedfrom the original on 10 June 2021.Retrieved11 June2021.
  232. ^"ResearchGate must take down Elsevier articles, court rules".Research Professional News.15 February 2022.Archivedfrom the original on 15 February 2022.Retrieved15 February2022.
  233. ^"Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy".ScienceDirect.com by Elsevier.Retrieved2 April2024.
  234. ^Nicolò Omenetto; Greet de Loos (20 September 2004). "Elsevier/Spectrochimica Acta Atomic Spectroscopy Award 2002".Spectrochimica Acta Part B: Atomic Spectroscopy.59(9): 1335.Bibcode:2004AcSpe..59.1335O.doi:10.1016/j.sab.2004.08.002.
  235. ^"IBMS Society Awards".IBMS.Retrieved2 April2024.
  236. ^Lins, Ana Luisa Maia (24 May 2014)."Awards recognize women scientists in Brazil".elsevier.com.Archived fromthe originalon 24 May 2014.Retrieved2 April2024.
  237. ^"OWSD-Elsevier Foundation Awards for Early-Career Women Scientists in the Developing World".The Elsevier Foundation.20 February 2020.Retrieved2 April2024.
  238. ^"Awards".OWSD.23 May 2014.Retrieved2 April2024.
  239. ^"Our winners".The Elsevier Foundation.22 March 2024.Retrieved2 April2024.
  240. ^"Elsevier Acquires Syngress Publishing".Archivedfrom the original on 14 June 2021.Retrieved14 June2021.

Sources

[edit]
  • Groen, Frances K. (2007).Access to medical knowledge: libraries, digitization, and the public good.Lanham, Mar.: Scarecrow Press. p. 217.ISBN978-0-8108-52723.
[edit]