Publishing the Philosophical Transactions: the social, cultural and economic history of a learned journal, 1665-2015
Lead Research Organisation:
University of St Andrews
Department Name: History
Abstract
The Royal Society is the publisher of the oldest surviving scientific journal in the world: the Philosophical Transactions. The Royal Society wishes to organise a number of high-profile events for 2015, to celebrate the 350th anniversary and to stimulate public debate about the future of scholarly publishing. As part of these celebrations, funding is being sought for two linked projects on the history of the Philosophical Transactions, both based at the University of St Andrews. The current application is for two postdoctoral researchers and the appropriate support to create an anniversary history, associated articles and a set of quantitative data series derived from the Philosophical Transactions archives which can be used to investigate long-term patterns and trends in the British book trade. (A separate application for funding for two doctoral students is pending.) As well as underpinning the anniversary events, the resulting scholarship will speak to academic communities in the history of science, the history of publishing and economic history.
The significance of the Philosophical Transactions is well-known to scholars working on the history of science and on the history of scholarly publishing. Its origins and function in the newly-founded Royal Society in Restoration England have been repeatedly discussed by historians of early modern science. The literary qualities of its articles have been extensively analysed by literary and communications scholars, interested in the rhetoric of science; and its citation patterns have been studied by sociologists of science as evidence of the functioning of past communities of scientists. The key strength of our proposed project is our emphasis upon the archival materials, to investigate the commercial, economic and editorial practices which lie behind the published pages. In this, we will build upon the existing scholarship on the early years of the Philosophical Transactions, but will pursue the story into the era of industrial printing, the professionalization of science, and ultimately, electronic publishing. Our emphasis will not be on pioneering innovations, but on the gradual development, adaptation and decline of editorial practices, commercial strategies and technological processes over the long durée.
This project will use the Royal Society's publishing division to investigate the challenges and opportunities of scholarly publishing over the past 350 years. In its earliest days, Philosophical Transactions was a private venture of the Royal Society's secretary; in the eighteenth century, it became an official Society publication; in the nineteenth century, it faced new competition from commercial science journals and from the journals launched by newer, more specialised, learned societies; in the twentieth century, scholarly publishing became increasingly commercialised, and questions were asked about the ownership and reliability of research results. Neither the continuing vigour of learned society journals in general, nor of the Royal Society's journals in particular, can be taken for granted: the Royal Society itself, for instance, came under vigorous criticism in the early nineteenth century for failing to support professional scientific experts, while its journal was simultaneously under pressure from a range of new competitors. Both the Society and the Philosophical Transactions survived, but such episodes will enable us to look critically at the contingent development of the processes and practices that are now taken to be essential to the operation of modern scientific research. By the end of the project, we should better understand the origins of the processes we now use, and we may find contemporary options in some of the paths-not-taken. This project is firmly historical, but, by touching on issues at the heart of the knowledge-based economy, it has substantial contemporary relevance to a wide audience of policy makers, educators and campaigners.
The significance of the Philosophical Transactions is well-known to scholars working on the history of science and on the history of scholarly publishing. Its origins and function in the newly-founded Royal Society in Restoration England have been repeatedly discussed by historians of early modern science. The literary qualities of its articles have been extensively analysed by literary and communications scholars, interested in the rhetoric of science; and its citation patterns have been studied by sociologists of science as evidence of the functioning of past communities of scientists. The key strength of our proposed project is our emphasis upon the archival materials, to investigate the commercial, economic and editorial practices which lie behind the published pages. In this, we will build upon the existing scholarship on the early years of the Philosophical Transactions, but will pursue the story into the era of industrial printing, the professionalization of science, and ultimately, electronic publishing. Our emphasis will not be on pioneering innovations, but on the gradual development, adaptation and decline of editorial practices, commercial strategies and technological processes over the long durée.
This project will use the Royal Society's publishing division to investigate the challenges and opportunities of scholarly publishing over the past 350 years. In its earliest days, Philosophical Transactions was a private venture of the Royal Society's secretary; in the eighteenth century, it became an official Society publication; in the nineteenth century, it faced new competition from commercial science journals and from the journals launched by newer, more specialised, learned societies; in the twentieth century, scholarly publishing became increasingly commercialised, and questions were asked about the ownership and reliability of research results. Neither the continuing vigour of learned society journals in general, nor of the Royal Society's journals in particular, can be taken for granted: the Royal Society itself, for instance, came under vigorous criticism in the early nineteenth century for failing to support professional scientific experts, while its journal was simultaneously under pressure from a range of new competitors. Both the Society and the Philosophical Transactions survived, but such episodes will enable us to look critically at the contingent development of the processes and practices that are now taken to be essential to the operation of modern scientific research. By the end of the project, we should better understand the origins of the processes we now use, and we may find contemporary options in some of the paths-not-taken. This project is firmly historical, but, by touching on issues at the heart of the knowledge-based economy, it has substantial contemporary relevance to a wide audience of policy makers, educators and campaigners.
Planned Impact
The project's research questions touch on issues at the heart of the knowledge-based economy, and are thus of relevance to a wide audience of policy makers, educators and campaigners. The results of this project therefore have the potential to reach further than the natural audience of members of the public with an interest in the history of science and technology.
- Members of the public with an interest in the history of science and technology will benefit from a fuller understanding of the development of modern systems for communicating the results of scientific research. In contrast to earlier work on scientific periodicals, this project will fit science publishing into a social, cultural and economic context, and will present a human-focused history rather than a bibliographical history. The breadth of its chronological focus will enable us to incorporate the existing work on seventeenth and nineteenth century scientific periodicals into a bigger picture.
- policy-makers at a national level are already concerned about the reliability and communication of scientific research, as can be seen in the recent Commons Select Committee report on 'Peer review in scientific publications' (July 2011). By investigating the historical development of peer review, and of commercial versus learned society publishing, this project engages with these concerns. It will offer a more nuanced history of these areas to inform the preamble to any future reports; it may also reveal some 'roads not taken', which could help stimulate debate about the future of scientific publishing.
- members of the public with an interest in the accessibility of scientific research should also be interested in the results of this project, since it involves questions about who should publish, where they should publish, and how the editorial processes work. The recent campaign to gain public access to the climate change results of the team at the University of East Anglia reveals the high level of public interest in the accessibility of scientific research, and scepticism about the way in which published papers adequately reflect the research.
- educators at secondary and tertiary levels may also find the project of relevance to their work in developing students' understanding of how science works. Discussing their historical development can enable critical thinking about editorial and commercial processes that, in the contemporary context, appear as unchallengeable components of science.
The partners are keen that this project should have impact beyond the academic community. The Royal Society is itself at the forefront of debates about the future of scientific publishing, the nature of scientific openness and its abuses, plagiarism, and future formats including digital journals. Their close connection with the Royal Society will allow the postdoctoral researchers to investigate historical topics with one eye on the leading edge of a fast-moving debate on the nature of the scientific journal in the digital age.
The project team will work with the Royal Society's Exhibitions and Events Team, and with the two separately-funded doctoral students, on the organisation of a number of events in the anniversary year 2015. These are expected to include:
- a public exhibition celebrating the history of the journal
- one or more public lectures, connected to the exhibition
- at least two public engagement events, connected to the anniversary conference; perhaps structured as panel discussions focusing around the issues of peer review, and of open access vs commercial publishing
- publicity for all the events via posts on 'In verba', the Royal Society's blog
- Members of the public with an interest in the history of science and technology will benefit from a fuller understanding of the development of modern systems for communicating the results of scientific research. In contrast to earlier work on scientific periodicals, this project will fit science publishing into a social, cultural and economic context, and will present a human-focused history rather than a bibliographical history. The breadth of its chronological focus will enable us to incorporate the existing work on seventeenth and nineteenth century scientific periodicals into a bigger picture.
- policy-makers at a national level are already concerned about the reliability and communication of scientific research, as can be seen in the recent Commons Select Committee report on 'Peer review in scientific publications' (July 2011). By investigating the historical development of peer review, and of commercial versus learned society publishing, this project engages with these concerns. It will offer a more nuanced history of these areas to inform the preamble to any future reports; it may also reveal some 'roads not taken', which could help stimulate debate about the future of scientific publishing.
- members of the public with an interest in the accessibility of scientific research should also be interested in the results of this project, since it involves questions about who should publish, where they should publish, and how the editorial processes work. The recent campaign to gain public access to the climate change results of the team at the University of East Anglia reveals the high level of public interest in the accessibility of scientific research, and scepticism about the way in which published papers adequately reflect the research.
- educators at secondary and tertiary levels may also find the project of relevance to their work in developing students' understanding of how science works. Discussing their historical development can enable critical thinking about editorial and commercial processes that, in the contemporary context, appear as unchallengeable components of science.
The partners are keen that this project should have impact beyond the academic community. The Royal Society is itself at the forefront of debates about the future of scientific publishing, the nature of scientific openness and its abuses, plagiarism, and future formats including digital journals. Their close connection with the Royal Society will allow the postdoctoral researchers to investigate historical topics with one eye on the leading edge of a fast-moving debate on the nature of the scientific journal in the digital age.
The project team will work with the Royal Society's Exhibitions and Events Team, and with the two separately-funded doctoral students, on the organisation of a number of events in the anniversary year 2015. These are expected to include:
- a public exhibition celebrating the history of the journal
- one or more public lectures, connected to the exhibition
- at least two public engagement events, connected to the anniversary conference; perhaps structured as panel discussions focusing around the issues of peer review, and of open access vs commercial publishing
- publicity for all the events via posts on 'In verba', the Royal Society's blog
People |
ORCID iD |
| Aileen Fyfe (Principal Investigator) |
Publications
Fyfe A
(2022)
Self-help for learned journals: Scientific societies and the commerce of publishing in the 1950s.
in History of science
Fyfe A
(2015)
JOURNALS, LEARNED SOCIETIES AND MONEY: PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS, CA. 1750-1900.
in Notes and records of the Royal Society of London
Fyfe A
(2018)
How female fellows fared at the Royal Society.
in Nature
Fyfe A
(2017)
Who should speak for academics over the future of publishing?
in Times Higher Education
Fyfe A
(2022)
A History of Scientific Journals
Fyfe A
(2022)
From philanthropy to business: the economics of Royal Society journal publishing in the twentieth century
in Notes and Records: the Royal Society Journal of the History of Science
Fyfe A
(2016)
Making Public Ahead of Print: Meetings and Publications at The Royal Society, 1752-1892.
in Notes and records of the Royal Society of London
| Description | Everyone who produces or uses the results of scientific research has some familiarity with academic journals, but we rarely stop to consider why we use this particular form of communication, or why journals work the way they now do. My team and I have been looking at what we call the 'behind the scenes' story: how was the Philosophical Transactions actually run? How were editorial decisions made, and how was it produced and disseminated? By focusing on one journal, and taking the story right up to the current day, we are able to defamiliarise the scientific journal. The current debates about the future of scholarly communication make this a really important contribution. Three significant findings emerge from this research: 1. 'The scientific journal' is not a single, stable category, and that even though the Transactions appears to be a single, continuous, long-running periodical, it has looked and functioned very differently over time. The changes we are currently experiencing in the practices of scholarly communication should not be seen as a uniquely dramatic moment that disrupts the way journals 'have always worked': practices for communicating research have constantly changed, and will doubtless continue to do so. 2. Peer review is much newer than we all assumed. The term came into common use only in the late 1960s and 1970s. The coining of 'peer review' marks the wider recognition of a practice of research evaluation that had previously been confined to the periodicals of voluntary, gentlemanly learned societies. We have spent a lot of time investigating why a society like the Royal Society would think that requesting confidential, written reports on the merits of a submitted paper was the right form of evaluation. This is something that is taken for granted in many forms of research evaluation today - in journal publication, job appointments, and grant making - but it is not self-evident. We have found that the use of referees can also be seen as a form of collective decision-making, of spreading reputational risk, and of protecting the institutional finances. 3. Making money from the publication of scientific journals is a very new phenomenon. We are all familiar today with the high profit-margins of commercial journal publishers, and the valuable income streams that learned societies receive from their publication activities. Protecting that income is the basic assumption behind a lot of the discussions of Open Access today. Our work has shown that, until the 1950s, most scientific journal publishing (and especially that done by learned societies) did not operate on a commercial basis. For instance, in the early twentieth century, the Royal Society gave away hundreds of copies of its periodicals to universities, societies and government institutions (and some public libraries) throughout Britain, Europe, North America and the British Empire. The costs were born by the Society, for the sake of scholarship, rather than being recouped through sales. |
| Exploitation Route | For hints as to possible use by non-academic others, see the Impact Narrative statement. Fyfe has continuing research interests in the material generated by this project (both the archival material and the datasets), and further reseach papers are still in process. The big 'thing that could be taken forward' concerns the datasets (both economic, and editorial, but especially the latter). Further digital research could surely reveal more insights; and development of the online resource would enable other researchers to explore and use the data (for instance, the historical editorial dataset has huge potential for those studying the practice of peer review because, unlike contemporary editorial data, it is free of GDPR issues i.e. it doesn't concern living people). Fyfe has many ideas about how to take this further, but all would require additional funding to hire a digital humanities expert as collaborator. Our findings are already being used by other scholars, particularly in the history of science. Our papers and our website are already providing the 'go to' source for anyone who is writing about the history of someone with a Royal Society connection, or who is interested in the history of scientific journals and communication. This is most obviously the case with scholars of the early Royal Society (late 17th century), and historians of nineteenth-century science. There is also material of interest to historians of other periods; most particularly, the twentieth century data. Further exploration of this material, and making it available on our website in the coming years, should help make this more widely used. |
| Sectors | Digital/Communication/Information Technologies (including Software),Education |
| URL | https://arts.st-andrews.ac.uk/philosophicaltransactions/ |
| Description | There are three strands to the impact narrative for this project: a) public engagement with the history of academic publishing; b) stimulating debate and influencing policy regarding the future of academic publishing; and c) the co-creation of knowledge with industry practitioners. (a). The History of Scientific Journals: public engagement with history: our project provided the research base for the Royal Society's 'Publishing 350' celebrations in 2015. We were able to bring the history of scientific journals to new audiences, and to engage with scientists, editors, publishers, policy makers and campaigners over the future of scholarly publishing, the circulation of knowledge, and peer review. We curated a public exhibition on 'Philosophical Transactions: 350 years of publishing at the Royal Society (1665 - 2015)'. It ran at the Royal Society from December 2014 to June 2015. One visitor reported 'I was delighted to observe a most marvellous exhibition! It's amazing to see how much science has changed in some ways over the years, but in other ways is still much the same'. The accompanying brochure was published in print and open-access online; over 800 hard copies have now been distributed. These first outputs were crucial in generating attention among publishers, science commentators and learned societies. The exhibition was reported in Times Higher, Research Fortnight, and The Scientist; images from it were featured in a Guardian Higher Education picture gallery. Associated articles by project team members appeared on the blogs run by the Royal Society, by COPAC, and on the Guardian's 'H-word' and 'Political Science' blogs, as well as in History Today and Neue Zürcher Zeitung (Zürich). Fyfe spoke at a Café Scientifique in St Andrews, and was interviewed for Radio 4's 'Inside science'. We also ran two public evening discussion events in 2015, focused on the changes in scientific authorship, editing and publishing over the last few decades. (b). The Future of Scholarly Publishing: stimulating debate and influencing policy: Fyfe was the only humanities scholar invited to speak at the Royal Society's four-day discussion meeting on the 'Future of Scholarly Scientific Communication' in 2015; and she was also asked to give a 'Dragon's Den' pitch on potential funding models for scholarly communication. Fyfe wrote on both peer review and publishing models for the Times Higher, and it is clear from Twitter and subsequent invitations that she now has a public profile as an expert on the history of scientific journals who is willing and able to engage with contemporary debates. This has even included advising head-hunters seeking a new CEO for the Public Library of Science (2017). Fyfe have since been invited to address four scholarly publishers' trade associations: the Association of Learned and Professional Scholarly Publishers (London, 2015), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (Amsterdam, 2015), the American Association of University Presses (Philadelphia, 2016), and the UK university press gathering, University Press Redux (London, 2018). She has declined invitations from Research Libraries UK; Public Library of Science; and SpotON. Fyfe has also been interviewed on podcasts for the Royal Society of Chemistry (2015) and Public Library of Science (2016). Fyfe's addresses to the publishing industry have received direct thanks from individuals associated with Brill, PLOS, High Wire Press, Cambridge University Press, and University of Adelaide Press. The organisers of the OASPA meeting tweeted 'So @AileenFyfe was a good suggestion as a keynote then?!' 'A fantastic suggestion!' 'Yes - she needs to speak every year!' The Chief Executive of ALPSP wrote: 'I just wanted to say thank you very much for presenting such an interesting overview of the history of peer review. I received excellent feedback from delegates, many of whom were unaware of how it has developed over the years. Enlightening how changes come around again, and some things we think are innovative are certainly not!' Given the level of interest from the scholarly publishing industry and from advocates for reform of scholarly publishing, we decided to make a more direct engagement in contemporary debates and policy. This began with a workshop on 'The Politics of Academic Publishing since 1945' (held at Royal Society, 2016), to which we invited humanities and social sciences scholars with expertise on publishing and academic careers, and, particularly, the gender politics and geopolitics of those issues. There were also participants from 3 different publishing companies. From this, Fyfe chaired a group interested in writing a historically-informed policy briefing paper. That report, Fyfe et al, Untangling Academic Publishing: A history of the relationship between commercial interests, academic prestige and the circulation of research (2017) was launched in May 2017 at the British Academy, London, and again in St Andrews in October 2017 (as part of Open Access Week). Both launches involved an historical talk by Fyfe, followed by a panel discussion involving Fyfe, her co-author Stephen Curry (Imperial College, blogger and science commentator) and, in London, David Sweeney (then chair-designate of Research England) or, in St Andrews, Martin Kretschmer (University of Glasgow, academic lawyer specialising in IP). Both events were attended by a mix of publishers, librarians, and academics. The report itself was mailed to presidents of UK learned societies and to vice-chancellors of UK universities, as well as being freely available on zenodo.org. It was reported in Times Higher, Guardian HE and Research Fortnight in May 2017, and was extensively tweeted. As of March 2018, it has an altmetric score of 413. Arising from the public debates around 'Untangling Academic Publishing', Fyfe received further invitations to engage with policy work in the area of peer review, open access and the future of scholarly publishing. These include: participation as an external expert in the European Commission's RISE High Level Expert Group on Open Science (Lisbon, 2017); being invited to join the steering group of the UK Scholarly Communication Licence (UK, 2017--); and being one of the 30 'international thought-leaders' invited to be part of an initiative (funded by Open Society Foundations, and convened by the directors of MIT Press and Amherst College Press) to draft unified standards for peer review. (c). The co-creation of knowledge with industry practitioners: the Publishing Division of the Royal Society publishes 11 journals and has a turnover of around £6m. We have developed a strong and mutually-beneficial relationship with the senior management. Their interest and enthusiasm for our research has given us privileged access to information about current publishing activities (including finances), and they are a key audience for our research. Fyfe sits on the steering group overseeing the re-digitisation of the Society's entire printed journal collection, with a pilot digitisation for related archival material. The initial two-year, £1.7m project, completed in winter 2017. Fyfe advised on the selection of material, the metadata standards, the interface, and the naming and marketing of the product. The group is now overseeing the next phase of the project, which will incorporate a larger quantity of archival material. Digitisation progressed through 2021, and a supplier for the digital platform is out to tender. Fyfe's work on the Society's long history of circulating scientific knowledge at no cost to the end-user speaks directly to current debates within the Society, and has been part of the evidence enabling the Director and the Chief Executive Officer to push for a review of publishing policy. This finally took place in 2019-20, and in 2021, the Royal Society announced its plan to transition its research journals to open access. |
| First Year Of Impact | 2015 |
| Sector | Digital/Communication/Information Technologies (including Software),Education |
| Impact Types | Societal,Policy & public services |
| Description | Citation in CoalitionS report on Diamond OA journals |
| Geographic Reach | Europe |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| URL | https://www.scienceeurope.org/our-resources/oa-diamond-journals-study/#:~:text=Science%20Europe%20an... |
| Description | Citation in European Commission report (2019) |
| Geographic Reach | Europe |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| Description | Citation in European Commisson report (Leonelli 2017) |
| Geographic Reach | Europe |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| URL | http://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/library/mle-open-science-altmetrics-and-rewards-%E2%80%93-implementin... |
| Description | Citation in Swiss National Science Foundation report |
| Geographic Reach | Europe |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| Description | Citation in UUK Open Access Monographs report (2018) |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| URL | http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Documents/2018/open-access-monographs-re... |
| Description | Citatoin in Global Young Academy Report |
| Geographic Reach | Multiple continents/international |
| Policy Influence Type | Citation in other policy documents |
| Description | Research England's Post-REF research evaluation consultation (2019) |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Policy Influence Type | Contribution to a national consultation/review |
| Title | Circulation figures for Royal Society journals c1900-2010 |
| Description | This spreadsheet contains our best data on the actual circulation (including sales, but also, where known, non-commercial distribution, e.g. to fellows, and as gifts/exchanges to learned institutions) From 1955 (when the RS set up its own sales/marketing team) until 1989, the circulation figures were published each year in the Society's YearBook (or, Annual Report, 1980-89). Prior to that, circulation information is only rarely available (as far as we have found so far). After 1990, the Society stopped making its sales/circulation figures public (look at the graph in the second tab, and you'll guess why), but they do survive in internal reports. Tab2 focuses on the Philosophical Transactions and the Proceedings: the earliest data are from 1863, but the series is mostly post-1900. This data was the basis for Figure 3 in my 2022 article 'From philanthropy to business' https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2022.0021 Tab3 focuses on the so-called 'other publications': the Year Book, Biographical Memoirs, and Notes & Records (data starts 1955) Tab4 includes a snapshot of circulation c.1935. This is the most detailed pre-1955 information. It comes from a document prepared by RS staff in late 1935, to provide information to printers interested in tendering for the RS printing contract. A copy of 'Sales and Distribution of Royal Society Periodicals' survives in the archive of Cambridge University Press, held at Cambridge UL, Pr578 |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Circulation_figures_for_Royal_Society_journals_c1900-2010/2126... |
| Title | Economics of Scholarly Journal Publishing |
| Description | We are developing a dataset of the economic aspects of the publishing of the Philosophical Transactions, e.g. the production costs, and sales income. In theory, this data covers 350 years, 1665 to 2015, but it is richest for the period c.1800-1900 (we are currently working on improving our coverage of the 20th century). This enables us to assess the sustainability and/or profitability of scholarly journal publishing over time; and it will enable us to provide long term trends on print-production costs. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Provided To Others? | No |
| Impact | So far, the impact is entirely on our own research. |
| Title | Fellows of the Royal Society 1665_2010.xlsx |
| Description | This file contains the number of fellows in the Royal Society of London for each year from 1665 to 2015. It was created as part of the University of St Andrews project on the history of the Philosophical Transactions, pulling data from histories of the Royal Society, from annual reports and, in some cases, from the archive. Originally compiled by Noah Moxham (to 1847) and Julie McDougall-Waters (from 1848), and collated by Aileen Fyfe. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Fellows_of_the_Royal_Society_1665_2010_xlsx/21230762/1 |
| Title | Historical Peer Review Data |
| Description | This dataset is derived from transcription of historical ledgers at the Royal Society. It covers the period 1853 to 1965 (potentially extendable to 1990, but with data protection issues). It is focused on the editorial, refereeing and peer review process at the Royal Society's journals. It provides data on all submissions (including rejected papers), on the names of the referees and communicators, on the timescale of the process, and on the editorial decisions. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2017 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | A co-authored paper on the social networks of peer review is in development; it is multi-disciplinary, involving computer science and history. |
| Title | Pages published by Royal Society journals 1880-2010 |
| Description | This spreadsheet contains a data series for the number of pages of content in the Royal Society's two major research journals: the Philosophical Transactions (both A and B series, after 1887) & Proceedings of the Royal Society (both A and B series, after 1905). Data is derived from a spreadsheet maintained by RS staff, of the page count for each issue of each journal; which was transformed into annual counts for each journal by St Andrews IT staff. NB this is a count of editorial pages of content published, not of number of copies of pages printed (i.e. it cannot be used to estimate print production costs, unless combined with print-run data - and print-run data is very sketchy...) This is the data for Figure 2b of my 2022 paper 'From philanthropy to business' https://doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2022.0021 Fuller data - for a longer period of time, and with a breakdown by journal title - is available in a separate dataset. |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Pages_published_by_Royal_Society_journals_1880-2010/21262536/1 |
| Title | Price data for Proceedings of the Royal Society, 1831-2015 |
| Description | This spreadsheet gathers all the evidence we have to date on the pricing of the Proceedings of the Royal Society (1831-1905) and its successor series A and B (1905-2015) Any attempt to analyse price trends over a long period of time must note that: Britain used the imperial system of currency (£ s d) until 1970, and then went decimal. The amount of printed material that the Royal Society issued 'per year' or 'per volume' varied considerably, and this is often the cause of the price variation (rather than, for instance, increases in the price of paper or printing). The Royal Society did not set its prices 'per year' until 1986. Prices before 1986 may be 'per issue' or 'per volume' (and there may be multiple volumes per year, or fractional volumes per year). The first tab in this workbook collates information on the prices of the 'volumes' of the Proceedings 1831-1905. A separate pair of columns recalculate that data, where possible, into a 'price for a year's-worth of printed matter' The second and third tabs give price data for Proceedings A and Proceedings B after 1905. In each tab, there is a conversion to 'price for a year's worth of printed matter'. There is also a column showing the prices adjusted for inflation (normalised to 2010£) The final tab has the deflation adjuster data, from MeasuringWorth.com The sources from which these prices are gathered are eclectic. The Royal Society has no master list of prices. Occasionally, prices were mentioned in the Royal Society Council Minutes (RS/CMO or RS/CMP) The ledgers of the Taylor & Francis archive were useful for the period when T&F printed for the Royal Society (i.e. 1828-77) The English Catalogue of Books (ECB) was useful for the late nineteenth century |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Untitled_Item/21253956/2 |
| Title | Price data for the Philosophical Transactions 1665-2015 |
| Description | This spreadsheet gathers all the evidence we have to date on the pricing of the Philosophical Transactions (1665-1886) and its successor series A and B (1887-2015) Any attempt to analyse price trends over a long period of time must note that: Britain used the imperial system of currency (£ s d) until 1970, and then went decimal. The amount of printed material that the Royal Society issued 'per year' or 'per volume' varied considerably, and this is often the cause of the price variation (rather than, for instance, increases in the price of paper or printing). The Royal Society did not set its prices 'per year' until 1986. Prices before 1986 may be 'per issue', 'per six-monthly part' or 'per volume' (and there may be multiple volumes per year, or fractional volumes per year). The first tab in this workbook collates information on the prices of the 'parts' of the Transactions 1665-1886. The second tab recalculates that data, where possible, into a 'price for a year's-worth of printed matter' The third and fourth tabs give price data for Transactions A and Transactions B after 1887. In each tab, there is a conversion to 'price for a year's worth of printed matter'. The sources from which these prices are gathered are eclectic. The Royal Society has no master list of prices. Occasionally, prices were mentioned in the Royal Society Council Minutes (RS/CMO or RS/CMP) Other useful sources at the Royal Society were the Domestic Manuscripts series (for early modern prices) and various publishing reviews in the 20th century The ledgers of the Taylor & Francis archive were useful for the period when T&F printed for the Royal Society (i.e. 1828-77) The English Catalogue of Books (ECB) was useful for the late nineteenth century |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Price_data_for_the_Philosophical_Transactions_1665-2015/212538... |
| Title | Print run data for Royal Society journals 1665-1970 |
| Description | This spreadsheet contains all the data we have so far managed to gather on the print runs of the Philosophical Transactions and the Proceedings of the Royal Society. Philosophical Transactions was founded in 1665, and split into series A and series B in 1887: there are therefore two tabs, dealing with Transaction before and after the split . Proceedings was founded in 1831, and split into series A and series B in 1905: again, there are two tabs, dealing with Proceedings before and after the split. The data are very, very incomplete. After the Royal Society took ownership of the Transactions in 1752, one might have expected better records of printing/publishing details - but print run rarely appears in the Council Minutes. The best data come from the period in the 19th century, when the journals were printed by Richard Taylor (later Taylor & Francis) - and the archives of T&F include ledgers giving details of the print runs. For the 20th century, there are only very occasional reports/reviews that mention print run (though a minimum estimate for print runs can be based upon the known circulation figures after 1955 - see separate file) |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Print_run_data_for_Royal_Society_journals_1665-1970/21235725/1 |
| Title | Royal Society of London finances 1765-2010 |
| Description | Preamble This spreadsheet contains my transcriptions of the Royal Society's annual accounts at ten-year intervals from the 1830s to 2010 (plus an attempt to recreate equivalent data for 1765). It was created in an effort to understand the wider financial context in which the Society's publishing finances operated (i.e. the finances of publishing the Philosophical Transactions and the Proceedings of the Royal Society). I therefore purposefully separated out all the costs/income I could identify that were related to publishing the journals, even in those years when the Society's treasurers did not operate a 'publications account' separately from the 'general account' (or 'general operating budget'). There will be inconsistencies for many reasons: change of accounting practices over the years; difficulty of identifying journal-related costs/income; difficulty of separating internal paperwork costs from journal costs; difficulty of identifying staff costs for publishing journals... etc. But this is the best data I've got after 8+ years of wrestling with the Royal Society archives. Contents Tab1 README Tab2 The annual accounts, transcribed, 1765-2010. Originally in £ s d, so I've added an extra column which converts the pre-1970 values into old pennies (240d=£1). The sub-total categories are imposed by me (because accounting practices changed so much over the years), and the values shown for these categories are calculated by me, not shown in the original documents. The row title makes this clear with 'calculated'. Tab3 The long 18thC: this tab (and the next) is easier to use: it uses 'old pennies' as a consistent (Excel-friendly) currency, and was created specifically to look at changes in finances (and publishing finances) over the long 18thC. It has lots of graphs looking at various aspects of publishing finances. Tab4 The long 20thC: this tab (like the previous) is easier to use: it uses £ as its consistent currency, noting the change to decimalisation in 1970. It was created specifically to look at changes in finances (and publishing finances) over the long 20thC. It has lots of graphs looking at various aspects of publishing finances. Tab5 The long 20thC adjusted for inflation: This is a copy of Tab4, with all the values adjusted for inflation. The values are in 1970£, and were adjusted using the deflator data at MeasuringWorth.com. The trends shown in its graphs are therefore adjusted for inflation. Sources Prior to the 1830s, the Royal Society balanced its books every November 30th, but did not usually produce something that we would recognise as 'annual accounts'. The Treasurer would report to the Council on the 'cash at hand' (essentially, the bank balance) at the year end, and comment on whether it was up or down from last year. For 1765, the Treasurer reported enough detail (in the Council Minutes) for us to recreate a sketchy 'annual account'. From 1833, the annual accounts were published in Proceedings of RS (under headings such as Treasurers' Report, or 'Anniversary meeting' or similar). The Proceedings has been digitised, and is available from the RS website. Some of our data for these years, however, comes from the archival copies of the 'Balance Sheets', because these had more detail. From 1897, the Society began to publish a Year Book (essentially, a directory for the year ahead, but including reports on the previous year). Some of the pre-1910 Year Books can be found on Google Books, but for the rest of the 20thC, we had to check physical copies (which exist in university libraries across the UK). Annual accounts appear in year books from start; in addition to the general income/expenditure, there are details about assets (cash at bank, property, investments) and separate accounts for each named fund (giving the value of each, but also the holdings which represent that fund). The list of separate funds gets longer as we go further into the C20. By 1940, the accounts are rearranged into 4 categories: General Purposes Accounts, Special Funds, Research Funds and Parliamentary Grants. The latter 3 take up most space. By 2000, the annual accounts were appearing in a publication known as the 'Trustees' Report' (and these are available from the RS website) Accounting Practices There are six changes in accounting practice that affect the comparability of these data over time: 1 What is the financial year? The Society's traditional accounting year had ended on its anniversary day, 30 November. During the twentieth century, its financial year-end gradually moved earlier. This meant that, in 1939, 1968 and 1991, accounts were prepared for a period less than 12 months. Most notably, the financial 'year' 1991 was a mere 7 months. 2 Is there a separate Publications Account? Prior to the 1920s, the printing/publishing costs were presented as part of the Society's overall accounts. A separate 'Publications Account' began to be managed from the 1920s (separate from the General Account). But this disappeared again (from the public presentation of the finances) in the early 21stC 3 Decimalisation: until 1970, Britain used the imperial system, with 12 pennies (12d) = 1 shilling, and 20 shillings (20s) = 1 pound (thus, 240d = £1). In 1970, it changed to a decimal system, in which 100 pennies (100p) = £1. Excel does not cope well with imperial £sd, which is why Tabs 2 and 3 use 'old pennies'. For the long 20thC, values are all in £. 4 What counts as income? From c.1910 until 1957, the figure reported publicly for publications income included philanthropic income received to support publications (e.g. grants, donations), as well as commercial income (e.g. sales, royalties etc). 5 How are staff and overhead expenses counted? Staff costs (and overheads) were sometimes charged to the publishing account, and sometimes absorbed in the general Society account. 6 The Royal Society publishes other periodicals in addition to its scientific research journals: the Year Book, 1897; Obituary Notices, 1932 (later Biographical Memoirs); and Notes & Records, 1938. For most of the twentieth century, these periodicals had minimal circulation beyond the fellowship, and therefore minimal sales; but they did have costs. Those costs were usually (but not always) treated as part of the 'publications account'. The 1990 Accounts are the first (of the ones I've looked at) which has an explicit statement of accounting principles |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Royal_Society_of_London_finances_1765-2010/21229409/1 |
| Title | Royal Society publishing income and expenditure 1880-2010 |
| Description | This spreadsheet contains our most complete series of income/expenditure data for Royal Society publishing, 1880-2010. It shows the income from sales and from grants; the expenditure on printing, distribution and other costs, for the Transactions and for the Proceedings; it provides calculations of surplus/deficit and expense recovery rate (which, given the nature of RS publishing in this period, is a more useful measure than expressing surplus as % of sales income). A variety of graphs are included, some of which appeared in my 2022 article 'From philanthropy to business' https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rsnr.2022.0021 Sources of Data: Data for 1880-1899 come from the series of financial ledgers and annual balance sheets in the Royal Society archives. They do not distinguish between costs/income for Transactions or Proceedings From 1900 onwards, the main run of income/expenditure data comes from the published annual accounts of the Royal Society (in the Year Book until 1999; and thereafter in the separately-published Trustees' Report). For certain years, e.g. in the mid-20thC, it has been possible to supplement this with more detailed breakdowns from the archival series. The data available become less detailed over time. Cost breakdowns for paper/printing/illustrations etc are only available up to 1966. Income/expenditure breakdowns by journal (i.e. Proceedings/Transactions/other) are only availble until 2005. Salary and overhead costs are only sometimes available. Inconsistencies There are various inconsistencies to be aware of: 1. The Society changed its accounting year occasionally. This spreadsheet reports the results for whichever accounting year the Society was using at the time, and so users should be aware of moments of transition. Traditionally, the Society's accounting year had ended on its anniversary day (30 November). In 1939, it moved to a year-end of 30 Sept (so, 1939 figures are for an 11-month 'year'). In 1968, it moved to a year-end of 31 Aug (so, 1968 figures are for a 11-month 'year'). In 1991, it adopted a year-end of 31 March (so, 1991 figures are for a 7-month 'year'). And, by c.2004, the Publishing Team was reporting internally by Calendar Year, even though RS officially still kept a March financial year... 2. Decimalisation in 1971 3. Staff/overhead costs were sometimes included in the publication account, and sometimes not. Staff costs WERE included from 1936-55 inclusive; and again from 1980 (though staff costs from mid-1970s can be identified from the archives). After 2000, publishing staff costs were often included in a bigger category of 'trading costs' and can't be separated easily via the 'annual accounts' (but can be identified in JT analysis and ST spreadsheet) Grants Income From 1910 to 1957, the figure reported publicly for publications income included income from grants/donations to support publications, as well as sales income. There had been grants income supporting publications from at least 1895, but there is no consistent source showing this. In this spreadsheet, we have retrospectively created a 'publications income (excluding grants)' figure for 1910-57 to allow a more consistent longue duree comparison (though the 1895-1910 period should still be treated with caution) |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Royal_Society_publishing_income_and_expenditure_1880-2010/2126... |
| Title | RoyalSociety annual accounts 1665_1847.xlsx |
| Description | The Royal Society only began presenting 'annual accounts' in a modern sense in the 1830s. For the earlier period, from 1665, the Treasurer reported each year on the 'cash in hand' at the year end (30 November), the total income (including last year's cash in hand), and the total expenditure. This spreadsheet contains the income, expenditure and year-end balances from 1665 to 1847, transcribed from Royal Society archival sources (Account Books 1665-1740, and then from Council Minutes) . The transcription was done by Noah Moxham. We have calculated a figure for income-not-including the cash brought forward, to enable us to create a more familiar income/expenditure series, and an annual surplus/deficit calculation. Throughout this period, Britain used the imperial system of currency, in which 12 pennies (12d) = 1 shilling (1s), and 20 shillings = £1 (thus, 240d - £1). This is not very Excel-friendly, so we have used old pennies for graphing (but have included £sd for easier human-reading) |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/RoyalSociety_annual_accounts_1665_1847_xlsx/21235719/1 |
| Title | Untitled Item |
| Description | This spreadsheet gathers all the evidence we have to date on the pricing of the Proceedings of the Royal Society (1831-1905) and its successor series A and B (1905-2015) Any attempt to analyse price trends over a long period of time must note that: Britain used the imperial system of currency (£ s d) until 1970, and then went decimal. The amount of printed material that the Royal Society issued 'per year' or 'per volume' varied considerably, and this is often the cause of the price variation (rather than, for instance, increases in the price of paper or printing). The Royal Society did not set its prices 'per year' until 1986. Prices before 1986 may be 'per issue' or 'per volume' (and there may be multiple volumes per year, or fractional volumes per year). The first tab in this workbook collates information on the prices of the 'volumes' of the Proceedings 1831-1905. A separate pair of columns recalculate that data, where possible, into a 'price for a year's-worth of printed matter' The second and third tabs give price data for Proceedings A and Proceedings B after 1905. In each tab, there is a conversion to 'price for a year's worth of printed matter'. There is also a column showing the prices adjusted for inflation (normalised to 2010£) The final tab has the deflation adjuster data, from MeasuringWorth.com The sources from which these prices are gathered are eclectic. The Royal Society has no master list of prices. Occasionally, prices were mentioned in the Royal Society Council Minutes (RS/CMO or RS/CMP) The ledgers of the Taylor & Francis archive were useful for the period when T&F printed for the Royal Society (i.e. 1828-77) The English Catalogue of Books (ECB) was useful for the late nineteenth century |
| Type Of Material | Database/Collection of data |
| Year Produced | 2022 |
| Provided To Others? | Yes |
| Impact | None as yet |
| URL | https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Untitled_Item/21253956/1 |
| Description | Knowledge Exchange |
| Organisation | University of Sheffield |
| Department | Knowledge Exchange |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Academic/University |
| PI Contribution | I was invited to participate in the collaborative authoring of a book-length report for the Knowledge Exchange partners (i.e. six key national organisations within Europe tasked with developing infrastructure and services to enable the use of digital technologies to improve higher education and research: CSC in Finland, CNRS in France, DeiC in Denmark, DFG in Germany, Jisc in the UK and SURF in the Netherlands). My contribution was to provide the historical expertise for this report on Open Scholarship and the Need for Collective Action. I spent 5 days in Berlin working on this; and the report was published in October 2019. |
| Collaborator Contribution | Knowledge Exchange partners organised the writing event, provided the support, and ensured the output was published. They also brought together an exciting team of co-authors. |
| Impact | The main outcome was the publication (11 October 2019) of the book "Open Scholarship and the need for collective action", DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3454688 It was written in collaboration with practitioners from the world of funding and policy; and also a collaborator from cultural science. |
| Start Year | 2018 |
| Description | PEERE |
| Organisation | European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) |
| Country | Belgium |
| Sector | Public |
| PI Contribution | I was invited to join the EU COST action TD1306: PEERE, New Frontiers of Peer Review. I have presented the historical work of my team to this network; and our historical dataset is now being explored and analysed by other members of the network. |
| Collaborator Contribution | 1. Funding to enable me to travel to COST meetings in Sweden and Lithuania, to meet and discuss research with other members of the network 2. Funding for a STSM (Short-term scientific mission) to enable me to host a research visit from Dr Pierpaolo Dondio, a computer scientist from Dublin Institute of Technology, to research our historical dataset. |
| Impact | A preliminary paper was presented at the Vilnius PEERE meeting in March 2017: Aileen Fyfe & Pierpaolo Dondio, 'The social networks behind the Royal Society's editorial processes, 1850 to 1960' This is a multi-disciplinary output involving History of Science, and Computer Science. |
| Start Year | 2016 |
| Description | Royal Society Digitisation Project |
| Organisation | The Royal Society |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Sector | Charity/Non Profit |
| PI Contribution | I have been invited to join the steering group overseeing the design and implementation of the new digitisation of the Royal Society's historical journal content, and the pilot phase of a related digitisation of archival material. I act as an advisor/consultant to this major capital project, including advising on naming and marketing, on the technical specifications, the material to be included, and the user interface. |
| Collaborator Contribution | My research team expects to benefit from early access to the metadata associated with the digital content, which will enable us to perform certain computational analyses on trends in authorship over time. This will feed into our major academic output from this project. |
| Impact | None as yet - still ongoing |
| Start Year | 2015 |
| Description | 'Peer Review' at American Association of University Presses |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Industry/Business |
| Results and Impact | I was invited to address the delegates at the annual meeting (Philadelphia) of the American Association Association of University Presses. This took place as part of a plenary session on peer review, associated with the launch of a new set of professional practice guidelines, 'Best Practice in Peer Review' (AAUP, 2016). |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| URL | https://vimeo.com/channels/1103973/174847638 |
| Description | A blog post for the Vegan Society |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Blog post for the Vegan Society about Dame Kathleen Lonsdale's veganism on International Women's Day 2017, based on research at Royal Society during project. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| URL | https://www.vegansociety.com/whats-new/blog/dame-kathleen-lonsdale-vegan |
| Description | ALPSP 2015 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Industry/Business |
| Results and Impact | Fyfe was part of a plenary session on peer review, delivered in front of about 400 international delegates of the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers. The Chief Executive of ALPSP wrote: 'I just wanted to say thank you very much for presenting such an interesting overview of the history of peer review. I received excellent feedback from delegates, many of whom were unaware of how it has developed over the years. Enlightening how changes come around again, and some things we think are innovative are certainly not!' |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | http://www.alpsp.org/ |
| Description | Advising the Publisher at the Royal Society |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | I advised the Head of Publishing at the Royal Society on the history of subscription in the Society's journal, which led to further discussion about this topic. The information I provided informed the publisher's talk in London to The Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://www.alpsp.org/Ebusiness/ProductCatalog/1405MRO.aspx?ID=395 |
| Description | Advising the Royal Society on Anniversary Events |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | The project team have informed the working group for the Anniversary Events at the Royal Society of London, including providing advice on the most influential papers to be published in the Society's journal. The events are likely to reach a general audience nationally and members of the Society at an international scale. As a result of the working group, staff at the Royal Society have been aware of our project and have been able to contact us more easily to seek information. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | Alumni Magazine (St Andrews History) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | ? |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://standrewsschoolofhistory.wordpress.com/2014/07/04/the-st-andrews-historian-issue-2/ |
| Description | Article, Times Higher Education |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Article for Times Higher about historical examples of tired referees and peer review practices, 18 February 2016. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| URL | https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/workload-survival-guide-for-academics |
| Description | BBC Inside Science (2015) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Interviewed on BBC Radio 4 'Inside Science', about women authors in Philosophical Transactions (historically), for international women's day. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| Description | BSHS Hands on Research event at ICHSTM |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | The 'Hands on Research' event involved consisted of a stall with information and objects on our research project. It led to a number of people asking questions about what we had found to date, and it allowed us to advertise future events. We have had more contact from colleagues who visited our stall during the conference, and have been able to share more information with them. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Blog Post |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Engagement focused website, blog or social media channel |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | A bllogpost on the impact of image-making in the early history of science. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| URL | http://www.mv.crassh.cam.ac.uk/2016/09/21/an-image-interview-with-noah-moxham/ |
| Description | Blog post for the Royal Society |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Blog post about women and the history of peer review at the Royal Society since 1945. The piece was widely shared and led to some emails and Twitter conversations. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| URL | https://blogs.royalsociety.org/publishing/women-and-the-history-of-peer-review-at-the-royal-society/ |
| Description | Blog post for the Royal Society |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Engagement focused website, blog or social media channel |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | This was a blog post on the history of the Royal Society, specifically on the physicist Oliver Heaviside, drawing attention to this less famous man of science. I know that it was shared on two occasions. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| URL | https://blogs.royalsociety.org/history-of-science/2017/01/24/lesser-spotted/ |
| Description | CPD for Academia.edu |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | 45 staff of academia.edu (a leading online platform for sharing academic research) attended a continuing professional development session online in January 2021. My talk, on the history of scientific journals, was followed by a full hour of lively discussion session. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2021 |
| Description | CPD for scholarly communication practitioners via OASPA |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | 219 people from 36 countries attended an online workshop organised by the Open Access Scholarly Publishers' Association, on the topic of: How should Scholarly Societies Transition to OA? Attendees came from a variety of sectors, including University Press, Society Publisher, Professional Publisher, Academic Institution, Library, Learned Society, Service/Technology/Intermediary, Repository, Consultant, IGO, Government, Charity, Funder, Consortium, Non-profit. The presentations sparked much discussion. OASPA was pleased that this was their best-attended webinar to date. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| URL | https://oaspa.org/oaspa-webinar-how-should-scholarly-societies-transition-to-open-access/ |
| Description | Charles Lyell Papers |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Third sector organisations |
| Results and Impact | I am serving on a working group hosted by Edinburgh University library (with partners from several other heritage sector organisations) to develop a public online resource, and associated engagement activities, for the papers of nineteenth-century geologist Charles Lyell. This work is ongoing, and has not yet had its public launch. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2020,2021 |
| Description | Chemistry World podcast (2015) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Connected with the feature article in the Royal Society of Chemistry's 'Chemistry World' magazine, I was interviewed for the associated podcast. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/2015/09/podcast-september-peer-review-data-vaccines-kilogram |
| Description | Conference keynote (Banff) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | This was the keynote at an international conference of literary scholars and historians. There was substantial discussion afterwards. Several scholarly journal editors were in the audience, and were moved to reflect on their own editorial and reviewing policies. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://web.uvic.ca/vsawc/vsawc-conferences/2014-conference/ |
| Description | Conference talk (Aileen at BSHS 2014) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Lots of questions afterwards Substantial numbers of offers of assistance, and useful references, have arisen from this. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://www.bshs.org.uk/conferences/annual-conference/2014-StAndrews |
| Description | Conference talk (Aileen at HSS 2014) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Lots of questions afterwards, and reflection about modern peer review practices. Fruitful dinner-discussion afterwards with other scholars interested in peer review and editorial practices. Plans made for an interdisciplinary research network on peer review. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | Do journals need societies, and do societies need journals? |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Engagement focused website, blog or social media channel |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | This blog post was linked to the publication of our major project book A History of Scientific Journals, drawing wider attention to it. In addition to reads/shares, the blog post has generated sufficient interest internationally that it will shortly be appearing in translation in Norwegian and in Italian (in both cases, in medical journals/magazines) |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2023 |
| URL | https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2023/01/11/do-journals-need-societies-and-do-societie... |
| Description | European Commission RISE High Level Expert Group (Lisbon 2017) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | The RISE group advises the European Commissioner on Open Science and Open Data. This meeting was convened to discuss the practicalities of the move towards Open Science (or Open Research). I was invited as an external expert. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| Description | Expert panel for ACLS: A Healthy Ecosystem for Humanities Scholarship: The Evolving Role of Open Access |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Third sector organisations |
| Results and Impact | Expert participant in panel discussion on open access in the humanities, organised by the American Council of Learned Societies, for members and staff of learned societies |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| Description | Future of Scholarly Scientific Communication |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | This four-day discussion meeting was organised by the Royal Society; Fyfe was one of the invited participants. The other participants included representatives from the scholarly publishing industry (e.g. publishers), funding bodies and library associations, as well as science commentators. Judging by feedback, Fyfe's contributions sparked considerable interest in the history of scholarly publishing (especially peer review), and have led to significant further invitations. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | https://royalsociety.org/events/2015/04/future-of-scholarly-scientific-communication-part-1/ |
| Description | In conversation with.... at Society Street: Crises for Publishing Societies Are Not New |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Discussion of our major project book, 'in conversation' with a representative of 'Society Street' (for mutual help organisation for learned societies), to an audience of learned society staff/officers. Followed by an active Q&A. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| URL | https://societystreet.cadmoremedia.com/Title/e75ad82f-c1fd-4ca3-82c9-d9094f7e6858 |
| Description | Interview with Retraction Watch |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | An interview with RetractionWatch on the history of peer review, the role of replication in peer review and the making of scientific knowledge. further online discussion with readers, who reported surprise that the practice wasn't widespread, disciplinary differences in its application, and welcomed the longer historical perspective. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| URL | http://retractionwatch.com/2017/01/09/dear-peer-reviewer-also-replicate-experiments-thanks/ |
| Description | Interview with Times Higher re Elsevier-SciHub case |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Asked to provide comment on the settlement for Elsevier against SciHub and other sites; quoted in Times Higher article 'Elsevier victory over Sci-Hub 'shows research is corporate asset' on 28 June 2017. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| URL | https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/elsevier-victory-over-sci-hub-shows-research-corporate-ass... |
| Description | Interview with Times Higher, re Untangling Academic Publishing launch |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Interviewed by Times Higher, in connection with launch of our Untangling Academic Publishing report; quoted in article "Academics 'should not sign over research copyright to publishers" " on 25 May 2017. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| URL | https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/academics-should-not-sign-over-research-copyright-publishe... |
| Description | Interviewed about the project in Research Forthnight |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Interviewed about the 'Philosophical Transactions' project by Lindsay McKenzie, "Peer review: A familiar history", Research Fortnight, 25 May 2016. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| Description | Interviewed on PLOScast |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A broadcast e.g. TV/radio/film/podcast (other than news/press) |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | I did a lengthy interview with the podcast associated with the Public Library of Science (PLOS), on the topic of peer review. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| URL | https://soundcloud.com/public-library-of-science/episode-9-the-history-of-scientific-publishing-an-i... |
| Description | Invited speaker, Philosophy and History of Open Science, Helsinki, Finland |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Invited speaker at Philosophy and History of Open Science conference, 30 November - 2 December 2016, Helsinki, Finland. Also involved recording a podcast about our project for the conference organisers. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| URL | https://www.helsinki.fi/en/researchgroups/helsinki-digital-humanities/phos16-conference |
| Description | Lecture and Podcast (St Andrews Intellectual History) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Questions and discussion afterwards. Talk has since been downloaded over 600 times. This lecture is one of the most-downloaded in the series. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://www.intellectualhistory.net/lectures/2014-06.mp3 |
| Description | Lunchtime Lecture at the Royal Society of London |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Feedback was received from the audience, both in the form of questions and through a questionnaire organised by the Royal Society. The talk was well received and stimulated general discussion, as well as drawing attention to our research project on 'Publishing the Philosophical Transactions'. The talk increased people's awareness of the research project's aims. For example, some people working in publishing and outreach at the Royal Society were in attendance, and have since contacted the team for advice on events and other projects at the Society. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | https://royalsociety.org/events/2014/reinventing-science-publishing/ |
| Description | OASPA 2015 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Industry/Business |
| Results and Impact | Fyfe was invited to deliver a keynote to the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association in Amsterdam, September 2015, on the theme of what history can tell us about the future of scholarly publishing. Around 150 international delegates attended, from university presses, scholarly communications organisations, and campaigners. The organisers of the OASPA meeting tweeted 'So @AileenFyfe was a good suggestion as a keynote then?!' 'A fantastic suggestion!' 'Yes - she needs to speak every year!' |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | http://oaspa.org/conference/coasp-2015-preliminary-program/ |
| Description | Organisation of conference - The Politics of Academic Publishing since 1945 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Organisation of conference, The Politics of Academic Publishing since 1945, at the Royal Society. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| URL | https://royalsociety.org/science-events-and-lectures/2016/04/politics-academic-publishing/ |
| Description | Organised conference, Royal Society of London - Publish or Perish? |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | International conference at Royal Society of London, with participation from academics, stakeholders, graduate students and the general public interested in the history, and the future, of scholarly communication |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| Description | Panel Discussion - the experience of scientific publishing |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Oral history - panel discussion involving four senior scientists on their experience of scientific publishing early in their acreers, their perception of the changes in it, and the challenges confronting scholarly publishing today |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| Description | Panel and paper at the British Society for the History of Science annual conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | The panel led to discussion on the history of science periodicals and, specifically, on the "Philosophical Transactions", which was the topic of the papers given. The audience were made more aware of the project and its aims, and this led to some discussion and agreement with individuals doing research in similar fields on how to share information. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | Panel and paper at the European Society for the History of Science |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | Panel and talk led to discussion and questions. By organising the panel I was able to make contact with others in my field who may be a source of collaboration in the future. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | Panel and paper at the History of Science Society Annual Conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | The talk led to conversation with other working on similar topics, and increased the chances of collaboration. Plans have been made to collaborate with several individuals who attended the talk on the issue of "peer review", both its history and future. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | Part of team of authors for Knowledge Exchange report: Open Scholarship and the Need for Collective Action |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Membership of working group organised by Knowledge Exchange (a coalition of European research funders and infrastructure agencies), to co-author report on open scholarship. My contribution led to the inclusion of historical material in the finished report; as well as discussion and change of views with other participants (from the funding and infrastructure agencies). |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018,2019 |
| Description | Peer Review Transparency workshop (MIT/Amherst Press) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | I was invited as one of about 30 'international thought leaders' to participate in a workshop hosted at the American Academy for Arts & Sciences, to discuss the development of a scheme to make the peer review status of a publication more transparent. The meeting was convened by the directors of MIT Press and Amherst College Press. The attendees came from a range of backgrounds including university press staff; representatives of learned societies; representatives of funders; and staff from open access mega-journals. According to the organisers: "The Open Society Foundations recently awarded AC Press a $33,000 grant to host a conference on scholarly publishing. That conference, organized jointly with MIT Press, took place in January in Cambridge, Mass., with more than 30 participants. It was the first event of a group called Peer Review Transparency, which is now working to draft unified standards for peer review, and a system by which readers are notified of work that meets this standard." |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2018 |
| URL | https://www.prtstandards.org/ |
| Description | Peer review (Chemistry World, 2015) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | I was interviewed for a feature in the Royal Society of Chemistry's 'Chemistry World' magazine, on peer review. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| Description | Peer review: not as old as you might think (THE 2015) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Feature article by Fyfe appeared in Times Higher Education (in print, 25 June 2015). |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/peer-review-not-old-you-might-think |
| Description | Presentation Three Societies |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Talk at Three Societies conference in Edmonton, Canada, 22 - 25 June 2016. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| Description | Presentation, British Society for History of Science conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Presentation about our project, British Society for History of Science annual conference, University of York. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| Description | Public exhibition (Royal Society) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | We curated a public exhibition on 'Philosophical Transactions: 350 years of publishing at the Royal Society (1665 - 2015)'. It ran at the Royal Society from December 2014 to June 2015. Visitors included Fellows of the Royal Society (who are practitioners, from the perspective of our research); and visitors to the Society (including international representatives of other learned societies and academies). |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014,2015 |
| URL | https://arts.st-andrews.ac.uk/philosophicaltransactions/exhibition/ |
| Description | Public lecture (Royal Society) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Talk sparked discussion afterwards, both with members of the public and professionals in the sphere of scientific publishing; event live-tweeted by members of the audience. More active engagement with the project from scientific publishers; notable increase in requests for information, especially from Royal Society publishing division |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | https://royalsociety.org/events/2014/reinventing-science-publishing/ |
| Description | Public lecture - Hans Sloane as Scientific Administrator |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Local |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | A public talk, delivered as part of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea's annual Celebration of Science. Delivered as apart of a panel, to an audience chiefly of local dignitaries and councillors, addressing the local interest in the history of science associated with Imperial College, the Science Museum and the Natural History Museum, and with Hans Sloane, whose name is connected with the area. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| Description | Public lecture - the Royal Society and the City |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | A talk aimed at the general public, for London Open House Weekend, about the relationship between London and the Royal Society in the 17th century; about the public reputation of science and scientists in the seventeenth century, the Society's involvement in plans for the rebuilding of London after the fire of 1666, and the city as a site of experiments and observations. Well-attended and provoking lively questions, and people asking for similar events to be held in future. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | https://royalsociety.org/events/2015/09/society-city/ |
| Description | Public talk: After Hours with the Philosophical Transactions |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Public talk (virtually) at the Linda Hall Library, Kansas, about the Philosophical Transactions. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| URL | https://afterhoursphilosophicaltransactions.splashthat.com/ |
| Description | Radio interview (BBC Scotland 'NewsDrive' programme) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A press release, press conference or response to a media enquiry/interview |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
| Results and Impact | Press release issued at launch of project; resulted in interview on BBC Scotland. No public responses |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| Description | Robert Boyle Summer School (2015) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Keynote lecture on 'Peer review: then and now', delivered to audience of around 50. Lots of questions afterwards, and real interest in the historical development of peer review. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | http://www.robertboyle.ie/programme/RBSS%20programme-2015 |
| Description | Royal Society Blog posts |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | My blog posts for the Royal Society have led to conversations about my research via email. I have received questions about specific topics covered in my blog posts, and have contributed to readers' understanding of the history of science. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
| URL | http://blogs.royalsociety.org/history-of-science/ |
| Description | Royal Society Historic Journals Collection |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Industry/Business |
| Results and Impact | Inspired by the 2015 anniversary, the Royal Society decided to redigitise its entire printed journal collection, from 1665 to the current day (initially digitised in the very early days of JSTOR). The aim was to produce higher-resolution images, improved OCR text (including mathematical expressions), and fuller (and more reliable) metadata. As an acknowledged expert on the history of the Society's publishing, Fyfe was asked to join the steering group overseeing this £1.7m project. She met with Society staff twice a year from 2016 onwards, advising on metadata standards, and the naming and marketing of the product. The project completed in winter 2017. [The next phase is reported in a separate item.] |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016,2017 |
| URL | https://royalsociety.org/journals/publishing-activities/journal-collection-science-in-the-making/ |
| Description | Royal Society: Science in the Making |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Industry/Business |
| Results and Impact | Following the launch of the redigitised Royal Society historic journals collection in 2017, the Royal Society agreed to move forward with a pilot project digitising the archival materials related to the journals, such as the referees' reports and copies of submitted articles that were never published. Fyfe continued to be a member of the steering group for this project, called, at her suggestion, 'Science in the Making' (because it showcases the behind-the-scenes processes by which scientific knowledge reaches the printed page). She has advised on the initial selection of material, the metadata standards, the interface, and the naming of the product. The pilot interface was launched in early 2018, and was sufficiently successful that the Society's Council approved £500k of funding (June 2018) for the next phase of digitisation of historical publication-related material. Fyfe participated in a 'digital challenge' event in March 2019, that brought together digital humanities postgraduate students to explore ways of improving public access/explorability/visualisation of the digitsed archival materials. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017,2018,2019 |
| URL | https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/s/rs/page/welcome |
| Description | Sharing information on women in science for 'Science Stories' video at the Royal Society |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | The video is a five minute clip (still in the process of being produced) on women in science. Part of the content of the video is informed by a conference paper I gave at the Women in Science Conference. The impact of the video is still to be determined. But I was asked to brief the two female scientists taking part in the video about some of the manuscript sources being used, which were based on my findings at the Royal Society. The impact of the video is still to be determined. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | Speaker at Westminster Higher Education Forum workshop on 'Priorities for delivering open access' |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Spoke on funding of academic publishing to c.100 delegates, from academic publishing industry, civil service/policy, and learned society publishers. Established contact with chairman of All-Party Parliamentary Group on Publishing, and exchanged emails later. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | Speaker at closed workshop for Science Europe funders (Brussels 2019) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | Gave opening talk to meeting of European science funders, to stimulate discussion about changes in academic publishing. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2019 |
| Description | Talk (Managing Journals) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Useful discussions afterwards with library professionals. ? |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| Description | Talk on the prehistory of peer review at SpotOn London 2016 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | A talk on the early history of peer review, as part of the SpotOn event organised by BioMed Central imagining peer review's future. Generated considerable discussion among an audience of professional publishers, editors, and advocates of open access and open peer review. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| Description | Talk to ALPSP conference: How academic publishing has changed since 1972 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Participation in a panel discussion organised for the 50th anniversary of the Association of Learned and Professional Scholarly Publishers, to discuss how academic publishing has changed. The room was packed, and there was active debate and questions from the audience of publishing professionals. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2022 |
| Description | The Future of Scientific Publishing - panel discussion |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Panel discussion on the future of scientific publishing, chaired by historians and with an audience of working scientists (industry and academia), historians of science, science journalists, scientific publishers, and open access advocates. Panellists included OA advocates, learned society publishers, working scientific editors, & representatives from the professional body of scientific editors. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | https://royalsociety.org/events/2015/03/future-publishing/ |
| Description | The Politics of Academic Publishing since 1945 |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | We hosted a workshop discussion at the Royal Society in April 2016, bringing together 45 delegates: academic researchers from different disciplines (history, literature, sociology, publishing studies, science policy); and practitioners from the scholarly publishing industry, to discuss the micro- and macro-political aspects of the ways in which scholarly publishing has developed over the last 60 years. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2016 |
| Description | |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | Engagement focused website, blog or social media channel |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
| Results and Impact | Tweeting from the project's account, and from Røstvik's account. Especially to bring awareness to new publications, events or findings related to the project. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014,2015,2016,2017 |
| URL | https://twitter.com/ahrcphiltrans?lang=en-gb |
| Description | UK Scholarly Communications Licence (Steering Group) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A formal working group, expert panel or dialogue |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Policymakers/politicians |
| Results and Impact | I was invited to join the steering group for the proposed UK Scholarly Communications Licence, in summer 2017. My involvement to date has involved presenting the academic perspective to the group (of librarians and publishers), and advising on the content of the website with regard to academic users. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017,2018 |
| URL | http://ukscl.ac.uk/ |
| Description | Untangling Academic Publishing Launch (London) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | Launch at the British Academy (London) of the briefing paper Untangling Academic Publishing. Talk by A Fyfe, followed by comments by David Sweeney (HEFCE), followed by discussion between Fyfe, Sweeney and Stephen Curry. It was attended by 80 people, a mix of publishers, librarians and academics. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| URL | https://arts.st-andrews.ac.uk/philosophicaltransactions/untangling-academic-publishing1/ |
| Description | Untangling Academic Publishing Launch (Scotland) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | Regional |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | The Scottish launch of Untangling Academic Publishing took place in St Andrews in October 2017. There was a talk by Fyfe, followed by panel discussion between Fyfe, Stephen Curry (Imperial) and Martin Kretschmer (Glasgow). Audience was about 40 librarians and academics, mostly from St Andrews, but also librarians from Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Dundee. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
| URL | http://univstandrews-oaresearch.blogspot.co.uk/2017/10/untangling-academic-publishing-oa-week.html |
| Description | Video Podcast - the early modern archives of the Royal Society |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | Yes |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Schools |
| Results and Impact | Note that the reach of the podcast is difficult to assess precisely - the podcast's producer suggested in conversation that each podcast in the series averages 200,000 downloads, however. None reported yet - the podcast has only been live for a few weeks. Impact might be expected to take the form of increased use of Royal Society library and archives by younger readers and researchers. |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
| URL | http://www.history.org.uk/resources/student_resource_7382,7426_110.html |
| Description | Why journals should not forget their past (THE 2015) |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | National |
| Primary Audience | Professional Practitioners |
| Results and Impact | A. Fyfe (2015), 'Why journals should not forget their past', Times Higher Education (originally published in print as: 'Publish and be poor: journals shouldn't just be about money', 9 April) |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
| URL | https://www.timeshighereducation.com/comment/opinion/why-journals-should-not-forget-their-past/20195... |
| Description | Women in Science Conference |
| Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
| Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
| Geographic Reach | International |
| Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
| Results and Impact | My talk led to discussion on the history of women in science, and highlighted gaps in research. My talk was attended by a member of the Royal Society's outreach team who became very interested in my talk as a topic that might be used in another project for the general public (see other entry). |
| Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |