Fair Use Week 2017


Modified from the Fair Use Week Infographic, http://fairuseweek.org/resources/

Last week was brought to us by the “Love Your Data Week” celebration, and we learned through a series of posts how to better provide for the care and feeding of our data. This week is brought to us by the “Fair Use/Fair Dealing Week” celebration, where we revisit the significance of fair use in research, learning, work, and life.

What is fair use and how does it impact you? 

Fair use is a legal exception within copyright law that allows a person to use copyrighted materials without permission for specific circumstances.  You or I can make a fair use determination at any day or time, but the factors that must be considered are the same as if a judge were making a determination in a court of law.  These factors are:

  1. the purpose and character of the use
  2. the nature of the copyrighted work
  3. the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
  4. the effect of the use upon the potential market

Stanford has a great resource to review the definitions and details of fair use: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/

Academics often think of fair use within the context of teaching, research, and scholarship in that fair use allows them to use portions of copyrighted materials for the purpose of teaching concepts within their classrooms and incorporating critical works of others that help support new innovations, creativity, and ideas. But, there are other circumstances where fair use applies within everyday life. Circumstances that enrich us culturally, intellectually, socially, and personally. Some examples of ways that copyrighted content might be used under the umbrella of fair use are:

  • reporting the news
  • making fun of the news through parody
  • making art from someone else’s art
  • reproducing a book in large print or braille

One infographic from fairuse.org helps illustrate this point:

Fair Use Examples

Fair Use Week Website at http://fairuseweek.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/ARL-FUW-Infographic-r5.pdf

..and here is what fair use looks like in a day in the life of a college student…

Fair use in a day in the life of a college student

Fair use in a day in the life of a college student http://fairuseweek.org/

If you are new to the concept of fair use, it can be complicated to understand and difficult to determine whether fair use applies to your specific need.  Barbara and I teach multiple workshops through the academic year on fair use.  We also visit individually with students, faculty, and staff to help them make a fair use determination.  If you have questions about fair use or other copyright issues, please don’t hesitate to contact us!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Love Your Data Week Feb 13th – 17th 2017

February 17th: Rescuing Unloved Data

Post authored by Lora Leligdon


We are wrapping up Love Your Data week with rescuing unloved data.

As always, please join in the conversation on Twitter (#LYD17 #loveyourdata) or share your insights on Facebook (#LYD17 #loveyourdata).

And while today is the last day of our event, there is still time to register for workshops on data management at Dartmouth. Starting on February 20th, the library will host six data management workshops exploring different stages of the research data life cycle, including data management planning, cleaning, visualizing, storing, sharing, and preserving. Please visit dartgo.org/data_management_workshops for more information and to register to attend.

Our daily blog posts are courtesy of the 2017 LYD Week Planning Committee. Learn more at https://loveyourdata.wordpress.com/lydw-2017/!

“Data that is mobile, visible and well-loved stands a better chance of surviving” ~ Kurt Bollacker

Things to consider:

Legacy, heritage and at-risk data share one common theme: barrier to access. Data that has been recorded by hand (field notes, lab notebooks, handwritten transcripts, measurements or ledgers) or on outdated technology or using proprietary formats are at risk.

Securing legacy data takes time, resources, and expertise but is well worth the effort as old data can enable new research and the loss of data could impede future research. So how to approach reviving legacy or at-risk data?

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.

  1. Recover and inventory the data
    • Format, type
    • Accompanying material–codebooks, notes, marginalia
  2. Organize the data
    • Depending on discipline/subject: date, variable, content/subject
  3. Assess the data
    • Are there any gaps or missing information?
    • Triage–consider nature of data along with ease of recovery
  4. Describe the data
    • Assign metadata at the collection/file level
  5. Digitize/normalize the data:
    • Digitization is not preservation. Choose a file format that will retain its functionality (and accessibility!) over time: “Which file formats should I use?”
  6. Review
    • Confirm there are no gaps or indicate where gaps exist
  7. Deposit and disseminate
    • Make the data open and available for re-use



That’s a wrap for our Love Your Data week posts on data quality! Thanks for reading along, and we hope you’ve learned to love your data. 

If you have any questions on data management, please contact Lora Leligdon.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Love Your Data Week Feb 13th – 17th 2017

February 16th: Finding the Right Data

Post authored by Lora Leligdon


Thursday bring us to finding the right data for your project.

Need help finding the right data? Check out the Library’s Research Guides on data or contact your subject librarian for personal assistance.

To find the right data, have a clear question and locate quality data sources.

Things to consider

In a 2004 Science Daily News article, the National Science Foundation used the phrase “here there be data” to highlight the exploratory nature of traversing the “untamed” scientific data landscape. The use of that phrase harkens to older maps of the world where unexplored territories or areas on maps bore the warning ‘here, there be [insert mythical/fantastical creatures]’ to alert explorers of the dangers of the unknown. While the research data landscape is (slightly) less foreboding, there’s still an adventurous quality to looking for research data.



  1. Formulate a question

The data you find is only as good as the question you ask. Think of the age-old “who, what, where, when” criteria when putting together a question – specifying these elements helps to narrow the map of data available and can help direct where to look!

  • WHO (population)
  • WHAT (subject, discipline)
  • WHERE (location, place)
  • WHEN (longitudinal, snapshot)

This page from Michigan State University Libraries’ “How to find data & statistics” guide does a great job of further articulating these key elements to forming a question and putting together a data search strategy.

  1. Locate data source(s)

After you’ve identified the question, you can begin the scavenger hunt that is locating relevant source(s) of research data. One way to find data is to think about what organization, industry, discipline, etc. might gather and/or disseminate data relevant to your question.

Thinking about your source can also help with evaluating whether or not you have relevant, quality data to use.

  • There is an increasing number of city or statewide data portals – some examples: New York City, Hawaii, and Illinois – that provide access to regional data on everything from traffic patterns to restaurant inspection results.

Check out this post from Nathan Yau, data viz whiz and creator of FlowingData — his post includes some of the sources listed above, but also highlights tips like scraping data from websites and using APIs to access data.

  1. Cite accordingly 

The ability to reuse data is only as good as its quality; the ability to find relevant data is only possible if it’s discoverable. As a producer of data, that means following many of the practices articulated in earlier posts. As a consumer of data, that means being a good researcher and citing your data sources.

In general, citing data follows the same template as any other citation — include information such as author, title, year of publication, edition/version, and persistent identifier (e.g., Digital Object Identifier, Uniform Resource Name). Check with your data source as well – they may provide guidance on how they want to be cited!

See DataONE and ICPSR pages on data citation for examples and more guidance.


BYODM — build your own (research) data map! Ask yourself:

  • What data sources are most relevant to my research?
  • Are there relevant data sets generated or held locally that I have access to?
  • What information do I need to retrace my steps back to these data (e.g., contact information, URLs, etc.)?

Where have you found the right data? Join us on Twitter or Facebook (#LYD17 #loveyourdata) to share your stories! Our daily blog posts are courtesy of the 2017 LYD Week Planning Committee. Learn more at https://loveyourdata.wordpress.com/lydw-2017/!

Tomorrow we are going to wrap up the week with rescuing unloved data.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Love Your Data Week Feb 13th – 17th 2017

February 15th: Good Data Examples

Post authored by Lora Leligdon


Day three of Love Your Data week brings us to some examples of good data! What are good data?

Good data are FAIR – Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Re-usable

Things to consider:

What makes data good?

  • Data has to be readable and well-documented enough for others (and a future you) to understand.
  • Data has to be findable to keep it from being lost. Information scientists have started to call such data FAIR — Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Re-usable. One of the most important things you can do to keep your data FAIR is to deposit it in a trusted digital repository. Do not use your personal website as your data archive.
  • Tidy data are good data. Messy data are hard to work with.
  • Data quality is a process, starting with planning through to curation of the data for deposit.


Example: This dataset is still around and usable more than 50 years after the data were collected and more than 40 years after it was last used in a publication.

Counterexample: This article: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157709000881 promises:

“Statistical scripts and the raw dataset are included as supplemental data and are also available at http://www.researchremix.org.”



(Used by recommendation of the author who has long since become enlightened. The data have made it into a trusted repository too.)

Hadley Wickham tells you how to tidy your data: http://vita.had.co.nz/papers/tidy-data.pdf


Example: Data can take many forms. This compilation of “Morale and Intelligence Reports” collected by the UK Government during and after the war is a great example of qualitative historical data: https://discover.ukdataservice.ac.uk/catalogue/?sn=7465


  • Want to learn more? Register and attend a Dartmouth research data management workshop to learn more about planning, cleaning, visualizing, storing, sharing, and preserving your data at Dartmouth.
  • What is your favorite data set? How/why is it good for your project? Try out the FAIR Principles to describe and share examples of good data for your discipline. Tell us on Twitter or Facebook (#LYD 2017 #loveyourdata)

Our daily blog posts are courtesy of the 2017 LYD Week Planning Committee. Learn more at https://loveyourdata.wordpress.com/lydw-2017/!

We’re getting close to the end of our quality data posts! But stay tuned – tomorrow we will be discussing how to find the right data for your project.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Love Your Data Week Feb 13th – 17th 2017

February 14th: Documenting, Describing, Defining

Post authored by Lora Leligdon


For the second day of Love Your Data week, we will be discussing good data documentation!

Good documentation tells people they can trust your data by enabling validation, replication, and reuse.

Things to consider:

Why does having good documentation matter?

  • It contributes to the quality and usefulness of your research and the data itself – for yourself, colleagues, students, and others.
  • It makes the analysis and write-up stages of your project easier and less stressful.
  • It helps your teammates, colleagues, and students understand and build on your work.
  • It helps to build trust in your research by allowing others to validate your data or methods.
  • It can help you answer questions about your work during pre-publication peer review and after publication.
  • It can make it easier for others to replicate or reuse your data. When they cite the data, you get credit! Include these citations in your CV, funding proposal, or promotion and tenure package.
  • It improves the integrity of the scholarly record by providing a more complete picture of how your research was conducted. This promotes public trust and support of research!
  • Some communities and fields have been talking about documentation for decades and have well-developed standards for documentation (e.g., geospatial data, clinical data, etc.), while others do not (e.g., psychology, education, engineering, etc.). No matter where your research community or field falls in this spectrum, you can start improving your documentation today!

Stories (learn from others’ mistakes and successes)


Practical Tips by data type & format

General Resources


  • Want to learn more? Attend the upcoming Dartmouth workshops on data management to learn hands-on approaches to ensuring quality data.
  • Check out some of the documentation guidelines and standards out there. What can you borrow or learn from them to improve your own documentation?
  • Join the conversation on Twitter at (#LYD17 #loveyourdata) or share your insights on Facebook (#LYD17 #loveyourdata)

Stay tuned… tomorrow we will be providing good data examples!

Our daily blog posts are courtesy of the 2017 LYD Week Planning Committee. Learn more at https://loveyourdata.wordpress.com/lydw-2017/!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Love Your Data Week Feb 13th – 17th 2017

February 13th: Defining Data Quality

Post authored by Lora Leligdon


Welcome to Love Your Data week! Each day this week we will be blogging, tweeting, and sharing practical tips, resources, and stories to help you adopt good data practices. Up first, know your data quality!

Data quality is the degree to which data meets the purposes and requirements of its use. Depending on the uses, good quality data may refer to complete, accurate, credible, consistent or “good enough” data.

Things to consider:

What is data quality and how can we distinguish between good and bad data? How are the issues of data quality being addressed in various disciplines?

  • Data quality refers to the quality of content (values) in one’s data set. For example, if a data set contains names and addresses of customers, all names and addresses have to be recorded (data is complete) and correspond to the actual names and addresses (data is accurate), and all records have to be up-to-date (data is current).
  • The most common characteristics of data quality include completeness, validity, consistency, timeliness, and accuracy. Additionally, data has to be useful (fit for purpose), documented, and reproducible/verifiable.
  • At least four activities impact the quality of data: modeling the world (deciding what to collect and how), collecting or generating data, storage/access, and formatting/transformation.
  • Assessing data quality requires disciplinary knowledge and is time-consuming.
  • Data quality issues: how to measure, how to track lineage of data (provenance), when data is “good enough”, what happens when data is mixed and triangulated (esp. high quality and low quality data), and crowdsourcing for quality.
  • Data quality is responsibility of both data providers and data curators: data providers ensure the quality of their individual data sets, while curators help the community with consistency, coverage, and metadata.

“Care and Quality are internal and external aspects of the same thing. A person who sees Quality and feels it as he works is a person who cares. A person who cares about what he sees and does is a person who’s bound to have some characteristic of quality.”

― Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values




  • Want to learn more? Attend the upcoming Dartmouth workshops “Data Management Planning with the DMPTool” and “Data Cleaning with OpenRefine and R” to learn hands-on approaches to ensuring quality data.
  • Use criteria for good data (e.g., completeness, accuracy, fitness for use, documentation) to assess where your data stands.
  • Discuss your approaches to data collection and measures you took/could take to ensure integrity and completeness of your data.
  • Discuss steps to address missing or incomplete data in the context of your research. Does it matter? How much missing data affects validity, reliability or trustworthiness of your conclusions?

Remember to join our conversation on Twitter (#LYD17 #loveyourdata) or share your insights on Facebook (#LYD17 #loveyourdata). Up tomorrow…. Documenting, Describing, and Defining your data.

Our daily blog posts are courtesy of the 2017 LYD Week Planning Committee. Learn more at https://loveyourdata.wordpress.com/lydw-2017/!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Love Your Data Week Feb 13th – 17th 2017

February 9th: Love Your Data!

Post authored by Lora Leligdon


Next week is Love Your Data week, an international event to help researchers take better care of their data. This year’s theme is emphasizing data quality for researchers during any stage in their career.  

Similar to Open Access Week, the purpose of the Love Your Data (LYD) campaign is to raise awareness and build a community to engage with topics related to research data management, sharing, preservation, reuse, and library-based research data services. We believe research data are the foundation of the scholarly record and crucial for advancing our knowledge of the world around us. To celebrate, every day next week, we will blogging, tweeting, and sharing practical tips, resources, and stories to help you learn good data practices. 

Interested in learning more about research data management? The Library is pleased to announce a workshop series aimed at expanding your data best practices. Starting on February 20th, we will host six data management workshops exploring different stages of the research data life cycle, including data management planning, data cleaning, visualizing, storing, sharing, and preserving. Please visit dartgo.org/data_management_workshops for more information and to register to attend. Check out the Research Data Management Guide for information on DMPs, public access requirements, and more.

Please join our conversation on Twitter (#LYD17 #loveyourdata) or share your insights on Facebook (#LYD17 #loveyourdata).

Special thanks to the 2017 National LYD Week Planning Committee for organizing this week and sharing their amazing resources! Check out their work at https://loveyourdata.wordpress.com/lydw-2017/!

Questions? Please contact Lora Leligdon or Jen Green for more information.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Public Access and Federal Agencies: Staying the Course

Dartmouth’s Scholarly Communication, Copyright and Publishing Program actively supports researchers and scholars to fulfill the requirements from funding agencies, whether federal government or private foundations, to make the results of funded research publicly available to the taxpayers and other stakeholders responsible for the funding. With the dramatic changes in the U.S. federal government agencies, some have wondered about the fate of these public access requirements. It is important to note that the support for tax payer access to the results of funded research has always been a bi-partisan issue,and that governmental public access programs are integrated into policies and procedures at this point, and private funders like the Gates Foundation have asserted the importance of public access. That said, for those who want to follow the developments, here are a few recent posts:

David Wojick, a part time Senior Consultant for Innovation at OSTI, the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, in the Office of Science of the US Department of Energy, has a useful blog called insidepublicaccess. Wojick’s blog has recently featured posts on tracking the movements of the Trump Administration as it pertains to open access to and support of science and technology.

It is difficult to determine the longer term impact of statements and actions because they change so rapidly. Daily changes surrounding these and other federal issues has created a sense of chaos. However, following is a summary of recent ones related to public access, in an attempt to acknowledge the progression of actions and statements.

In November 2016, James Carafano (Heritage Foundation), was identified as a member of the “landing team” for the Department of Homeland Security. Carafano was the lead author of a Heritage Foundation report released during summer entitled “Science Policy: Priorities and Reforms for the 45th President.” While the report covers many issues surrounding science policy reform, one of the report’s strongest recommendations is the elimination of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy(OSTP). The OSTP has been a major source for federal funding for science and technology research.

In December 2016, the head of the Department of Energy transition team was replaced.  The DOE has been a leading developing the Public Access Program, which requires scholarship funded by federal grants to be free and open to the public who pay taxes to support these kinds of grants. The future of the Public Access Program will be determined by the heads of Federals Agencies, some of which have yet to be defined.

Late January 2017, The Office of Science and Technology Policy website was removed. It is now archived on the Obama Administration’s website

Late January 2017, Wojick writes via the Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) listserv that as of now, the OSTP will remain and notes that science has typically had bipartisan support, and may still do well under the Trump Administration.

Late January 2017, there were “reports of the Trump administration’s attempts to order media blackouts of federal agencies.” The American Library Association’s Office of Intellectual Freedom posted a statement condemning government agency censorship.

January 29, 2017, Ars Technica published an article noting the chaotic and confusing start to the Trump Administration’s actions surrounding support for science and technology research.  The article points out that decisions made one day have been redacted the next, thereby creating confusion and uncertainty. Of notable concern right now are vanishing webpages, which are now archived on Obama Administration website.

Much work has already been done to create frameworks for new Federal Agency heads to follow as they make decision about open access to research and scholarship.  One of these frameworks is the Federal Agency Open Licensing Playbook

It is important to keep the fundamental principles of public access to funded research in mind! 

Please contact us in the Scholarly Communication, Copyright and Publishing Program with questions! 

Barbara DeFelice and Jen Green

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Making sense from chaos: our global context

Our work in scholarly communication is necessarily global, and the two of us in Dartmouth’s Scholarly Communication, Copyright and Publishing Program are involved with international conferences this year, the Open Scholarship Initiative which is to be held in the U.S. and the Open Repositories meeting which is to be held in Australia. The order from our current government regarding travel has a real impact on both these international endeavors. In addition, a focus of our program is expanding access to the results of Dartmouth scholarship and research, and the role of the federal funding agencies is critical to that work. So we are taking stock of the situation. 

Within the scope of copyright, intellectual freedom, and open access, chaotic statements and actions from government officials have caused librarians and scholars to be concerned. As we watch what develops in the next days and weeks, it is important to know that organizations representing and supporting open scholarship in a global context have clear statements about their core values and mission. These statements and their steady language about working with colleagues, policy makers, and administrators internationally can provide reassuring frameworks to help us all navigate transitional and turbulent times.

Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI)

“OSI is a global collaborative effort between all major stakeholders in scholarly publishing to improve the future of how research information gets published, shared and accessed. The foundation of this effort is a 10-year series of annual meetings where high-level stakeholder representatives work together to solve important issues. Collaboration outside these meetings will also occur.”

SPARC (The Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition)

“SPARC is a global coalition committed to making Open the default for research and education. SPARC empowers people to solve big problems and make new discoveries through the adoption of policies and practices that advance Open Access, Open Data, and Open Education.”

Dartmouth is a member institution of SPARC, and we are actively engaged in conversations and developments within that community of scholarly communication professionals.

“SPARC (the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition) works to enable the open sharing of research outputs and educational materials in order to democratize access to knowledge, accelerate discovery, and increase the return on our investment in research and education. As a catalyst for action, SPARC focuses on collaborating with other stakeholders—including authors, publishers, libraries, students, funders, policymakers and the public—to build on the opportunities created by the Internet, promoting changes to both infrastructure and culture needed to make open the default for research and education.”

SPARC’s 2017 Program Plan emphasizes the important role that their organization and their member scholars and information professionals play in the global landscape of scholarly publishing, open scholarship, which is the backbone of efforts to share important research with one another and further society. This statement, in particular, is an important one to consider as we see transitions happening globally:

 “SPARC is a catalyst for action. Supported by 200+ members in the U.S. and Canada, and with international affiliates active in Africa, Europe and Japan, our pragmatic agenda focuses on collaborating with stakeholders in the global community to encourage new norms, practices, and policies that promote equitable access, sharing, and use of scholarship.”

Library Publishing Coalition (LPC)

Melanie Schlosser, the Scholarly Communications Program Leader at the Educopia Institute, on behalf of the Library Publishing Coalition (LPC), expressed concern about the impact on LPC members. Dartmouth is a member of the LPC, and the Scholarly Communication, Copyright and Publishing Program is active in LPC. One of us is presenting at the annual Forum this year. 

“We at the Library Publishing Coalition and our host organization, the Educopia Institute, are following recent political developments in the United States carefully, and we join with our colleagues at ARL and the AAUP in noting the broad implications of recent federal policy for libraries, publishers, and scholarship as a whole. …. We are cognizant of the fact that some of these developments – namely the recent executive order on immigration and refugees – may directly affect our members’ ability to participate in in life of the LPC. Please know that we are committed to representing the needs of our international membership, and to providing a variety of opportunities for participation in the community, and that we will be taking this into account as we plan future events.” 

Core values are in the background of our minds, guiding our major and minor decisions, but it’s true that they should also serve as our stable framework when facing turbulent times. As developments emerge surrounding issue of open scholarship, we will try to provide those we serve nationally and internationally with solid perspectives and facts to help stabilize us within shifting landscapes.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Open Access Fund Use on the Rise at Dartmouth

Dartmouth supports broader access to the results of the scholarship and research oOAlogo_Lock2f the Dartmouth community in many ways. Just one of these ways is through a fund to support the article processing charges that are used by some completely open access journals to cover costs of publishing, instead of putting up barriers to access through charging subscriptions. The use of this fund has been increasing as the benefits of having one’s work be accessible globally are clearer in the age of digital communications. Access drives awareness which increases use which can result in more immediate measurable impact of the work.  

As important as the Dartmouth Open Access fund is for increasing the reach of Dartmouth scholarship, researchers are publishing many more open access articles than are supported by this fund. There were 22 funded articles in 2016, but based only on   publication data in the Web of Science,  there were 270 open access articles published by Dartmouth authors in 2016. Over the last 3  years, the number of open access articles published by Dartmouth authors increased by 24.4%. The number of articles funded by the Dartmouth Open Access Fund nearly tripled.  The Dartmouth fund serves as a last resort when there is no research grant to fund the publishing of the article. 

The following sample of recently funded articles shows the variety of departments and topics supported by Dartmouth’s Open Access Fund, which has been used by 67 authors in 19 different departments since the inception of the fund. 


  1. The future of global health education: training for equity in global health by Lisa V. Adams, Claire M. Wagner, Cameron T. Nutt and Agnes Binagwaho in BMC Medical Education DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0820-0
  2. Coevolution of Cooperation and Partner Rewiring Range in Spatial Social Networks by Tommy Khoo, Feng Fu & Scott Pauls in Nature Scientific Reports DOI  10.1038/srep36293
  3. Dark shadow of the long white cloud: Neighborhood safety is associated with self-rated health and cortisol during pregnancy in Auckland, Aotearoa/New Zealand by Zaneta Thayer in SSM-Population Health DOI 10.1016/j.ssmph.2016.11.004
  4. Developing and pilot testing a Spanish version of CollaboRATE for use in the United States by Rachel C. Forcino, Nitzy Bustamante, Rachel Thompson, Sanja Percac-Lima, Glyn Elwyn, Diana Pérez-Arechaederra, and Paul J. Barr in PLOS ONE DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0168538
  5. Sarcopenia and Sarcopenic Obesity: Do They Predict Inferior Oncologic Outcomes After Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery? by Kimberly L. Mei, John A. Batsis, Jeannine B. Mills and Stefan D. Holubar in Perioperative Medicine DOI 10.1186/s13741-016-0052-1

Please consult Jen Green and Barbara DeFelice in the Scholarly Communication, Copyright and Publishing Program at Dartmouth with questions about open access publishing and the Dartmouth Open Access Fund.  

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment