Open Access in Geochemistry from Preprints to Data Sharing: Past, Present, and Future

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Inna Biryukova (0000-0003-0701-2808), Pooja Mandke, & Jessica Polka (0000-0001-6610-9293)

In “Open access in geochemistry from preprints to datasharing: past, present and future,” the authors discuss the latest advances regarding Open Access in the geochemistry community from non-peer reviewed preprints to findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable data. The authors provide their opinions on the most OA-friendly models from the existing publishing system and the future of preprints/postprints in geochemistry. They also point to the most interesting publicly available resources for research data and software sharing in geochemistry, giving the reader insight on accessibility of community resources. This paper offers a useful summary of current trends important to all fields, not just geochemistry, and poses some interesting questions in the final section.

In our review of the paper, we are limited by a lack of specific expertise in geochemistry. Nevertheless, we offer the following points that the authors may consider in improving the legibility of their manuscript. We acknowledge that some of the suggestions may expand the paper to introduce content that was not discussed at the conference session, which may conflict with the intentions of the authors.

Major points

• The introduction covers only OA journals, but the paper covers preprints & data sharing as well. A revised introduction might briefly touch on all these topics to better orient readers.
• Throughout the paper, it would be helpful to clarify whether the authors refer to a specific discipline or scholarship as a whole.

Minor points

• The illustration is wonderful. If it would be possible to process the image to make the background even, it could be more easily reused.
• In the section about OA trends on page 6, it may be helpful to provide general background first, then move to specific issues in geochemistry.
• What fraction of geochemistry articles are coming from China? A geographic breakdown would be helpful to understand the significance of trends relating, for example, to the move away from using JIF.
• Related to the point above, some European organizations are already not using impact factors - can anything be extrapolated from trends seen in those countries?
• Names of speakers could be explicitly mentioned in the acknowledgements.
• The preprint and scientific community would benefit if authors expressed their opinions on the prevalence of journal embargoes to free-to-read access and the relevance of the recent Plan S initiative for geochemistry.
• It might be worth including a line on research dissemination by promoting hybrid meetings and conferences (in parallel onsite and online).

Author Response

We are thankful for the careful reviews, and have included virtually every single recommendation. 

The introduction covers only OA journals, but the paper covers preprints & data sharing as well. A revised introduction might briefly touch on all these topics to better orient readers.

We have added the following paragraph in the introduction

Moreover, preprints, early versions of scholarly publications, made openly available prior to peer review, that enable faster dissemination of results, increase the attention given to a study, and allow researchers to establish the primacy of their findings⁷, are now more widely considered. Eventually, OA means accessible documents and accessible language⁸ as well as the openness of all research outputs, Data, samples, and code must be handled in such a way that they are Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR)⁹.

Throughout the paper, it would be helpful to clarify whether the authors refer to a specific discipline or scholarship as a whole.

We have specified when necessary by adding specificity to geochemistry.

The illustration is wonderful. If it would be possible to process the image to make the background even, it could be more easily reused.

Thank you again, we have reworked the figure accordingly.

In the section about OA trends on page 6, it may be helpful to provide general background first, then move to specific issues in geochemistry.

We have added this sentence:

. In 2020, according to the Directory of Open Access Journals²⁵, 70% of fully OA journals in Earth Sciences do not levy APCs; although, 62% of articles published OA are published in journals with APCs⁴. Indeed, supra-national initiatives such as Plan S are seemingly showing a strong financial preference towards APC-driven gold models, while simultaneously appearing to neglect more equitable and financially sustainable green (self-archived OA) and diamond (gold, but no-APC) routes²⁴.

What fraction of geochemistry articles are coming from China? A geographic breakdown would be helpful to understand the significance of trends relating, for example, to the move away from using JIF.

We have added details

as highlighted by distribution in GCA articles (19% of article in 2021 but only 5% OA)²⁷

Related to the point above, some European organizations are already not using impact factors - can anything be extrapolated from trends seen in those countries?

We have added some words

like many organizations Worldwide (see signatories of DORA⁴³)

Names of speakers could be explicitly mentioned in the acknowledgements.

We have now named them all:

Tom Narock, Jeroen Bosman, Alain Queffelec, Jannick Ingrin, Jeffrey G Catalano, Shelley Stall, Lesley Anne I Wyborn, and Marthe Klöcking.

The preprint and scientific community would benefit if authors expressed their opinions on the prevalence of journal embargoes to free-to-read access and the relevance of the recent Plan S initiative for geochemistry.

We have added some words:

Indeed, supra-national initiatives such as Plan S are seemingly showing a strong financial preference towards APC-driven gold models, while simultaneously appearing to neglect more equitable and financially sustainable green (self-archived OA) and diamond (gold, but no-APC) routes²⁴.

It might be worth including a line on research dissemination by promoting hybrid meetings and conferences (in parallel onsite and online).

We have added a sentence:

In-person meetings have always been seen as the best way to communicate with each other, but virtual conferences have shown undeniable advantages (including accessibility) and we are convinced that the future of events will be hybrid.

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper gives an overview of the state of open access in the field of geochemistry, which is useful. However, in the concluding remarks a new subject is described: accessibility of language (including translation). Furthermore, it discusses outreach and the role of journals.

While the discussion on accessibility and the role of journals is certainly important, these subjects should not 'pop up' as a surprise in the conclusion. I would suggest the authors mention these issues in the introduction, and describe whether preprints, the move to open access and the adoption of FAIR affect them.

Also, the paragraph starting on line 193 seems to be more suitable for the concluding remarks.

With some relatively minor updates, this paper would make its case in a more compelling way.

Author Response

We are thankful for the careful reviews, and have included all but one recommendation.

The paper gives an overview of the state of open access in the field of geochemistry, which is useful. However, in the concluding remarks a new subject is described: accessibility of language (including translation). Furthermore, it discusses outreach and the role of journals.

While the discussion on accessibility and the role of journals is certainly important, these subjects should not 'pop up' as a surprise in the conclusion. I would suggest the authors mention these issues in the introduction, and describe whether preprints, the move to open access and the adoption of FAIR affect them.

We have added a paragraph in introduction:

Moreover, preprints, early versions of scholarly publications, made openly available prior to peer review, that enable faster dissemination of results, increase the attention given to a study, and allow researchers to establish the primacy of their findings⁷, are now more widely considered. Eventually, OA means accessible documents and accessible language⁸ as well as the openness of all research outputs, Data, samples, and code must be handled in such a way that they are Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR)⁹.

Also, the paragraph starting on line 193 seems to be more suitable for the concluding remarks.

We have left this paragraph as it because it set the issue of language.