New Initiative Preserving Research Integrity to Unite Scholars, Publishers
PRISM Coalition to Inform Public on Risks Government Interference Poses to Science and Medicine
New York, NY, August 23, 2007: The formation of a coalition of
scholarly societies and publishers was announced today in an effort to
safeguard the scientific and medical peer-review process and educate
the public about the risks of proposed government interference with the
scholarly communication process.
The Partnership for Research Integrity in Science and Medicine is a
coalition launched with developmental support from the Professional
& Scholarly Publishing Division of the Association of American
Publishers (AAP) to alert Congress to the unintended consequences of
government interference in scientific and scholarly publishing.
The group has launched a website at http://www.prismcoalition.org,
where it articulates the PRISM Principles, an affirmation of
publishers' contribution to science, research, and peer review, and an
expression of support for continued private sector efforts to expand
access to scientific information.
(http://www.prismcoalition.org/prism/about.htm)
"We are enthusiastic about this initiative and the potential of
our new website to educate policy makers and citizens about our efforts
to increase access to information, to alert them to the very real
threat to peer review that ill-considered government interference
represents, and to explore the ways in which we can safeguard peer
review as a critical component of scientific integrity," said Patricia
Schroeder, president and CEO of AAP. "Only by preserving the essential
integrity of the peer-review process can we ensure that scientific and
medical research remains accurate, authoritative, and free from
manipulation and censorship and distinguishable from junk science."
Recently, there have been legislative and regulatory efforts to compel
not-for-profit and commercial journals to surrender to the Federal
government a large number of published articles that scholarly journals
have paid to peer review, publish, promote, archive and distribute.
Mrs. Schroeder stressed that government interference in scientific
publishing would force journals to give away their intellectual
property and weaken the copyright protections that motivate journal
publishers to make the enormous investments in content and
infrastructure needed to ensure widespread access to journal articles.
It would jeopardize the financial viability of the journals that
conduct peer review, placing the entire scholarly communication process
at risk.
"Peer review has been the global standard for validating
scholarly research for more than 400 years and we want to make sure it
remains free of unnecessary government interference, agenda-driven
research, and bad science," said Dr. Brian Crawford, chairman of the
executive council of AAP's Professional & Scholarly Publishing
Division. "The free market of scholarly publishing is responsive to the
needs of scholars and scientists and balances the interests of all
stakeholders."
Critics argue that peer reviewed articles resulting from
government funded research should be available at no cost. However, the
expenses of peer review, promotion, distribution and archiving of
articles are paid for by private sector publishers, and not with tax
dollars. Mrs. Schroeder pointed out that these expenses amount to
hundreds of millions of dollars each year for non-profit and commercial
publishers. "Why would a federal agency want to duplicate such expenses
instead of putting the money into more research funding?" she said.
The PRISM website includes factual information and reasoned
commentary designed to educate citizens and policy makers, to dispel
inaccuracies and counter the rhetorical excesses indulged in by some
advocates of open access, who believe that no one should have to pay
for information that is peer reviewed at the expense of non-profit and
commercial publishers.
Featured on the PRISM website are backgrounders on peer review,
dissemination and access, preservation of the scholarly record and new
approaches publishers are taking along with discussion about the risks
of government intervention to the sustainability of peer review,
copyright infringement, the possibility of selective bias in the record
of science, federal budget uncertainties and inefficient allocation of
government funding that duplicates private sector investments.
Importantly, the site has information to assist the public in making
their concerns known to Congress.
"We want to share as much scientific and medical information as
possible with the entire world. That's why we got into this business in
the first place," Mrs. Schroeder said.
Anyone who wishes to sign on to the PRISM Principles may do so on the site.
Editors: For more information, visit the PRISM website at http://www.prismcoalition.org