Guidelines on the correct reporting of information concerning the mode of publication of research results

In the run-up to the planned introduction of a new open access policy to govern the publication of research results obtained in projects funded by the NCN, we have verified the annual and final project reports. We have analysed the modes in which our grantees publish their research results and the amount of funds slated for that purpose.

The analysis allowed us to identify two main problems:

• no correct distinction is made between green and gold open access;
• expenses listed in reports include costs other than merely publication costs.

In relation to the above, we kindly request grantees to pay greater attention to these aspects in their reports.

Let us recall: Green Open Access, otherwise known as self-archiving, means that the author's accepted manuscript or version of record may be deposited in a repository and made available to the public before or immediately after the article/book or book chapter is published in print by its publisher. The repository may be institutional, disciplinary, national or international.

Gold Open Access allows open access to a work immediately after its publication on the website or another platform owned by the publisher. If the access is provided at a later date, this is known as Delayed OA.

Publishing an article version, e.g. on the website of the author or the university, is not classified as traditional Green or Gold OA. The action is often in conflict with the provisions of the publishing licence and publishing law.

In agreement reports in subsequent editions of our calls, we will make the cost-related conditions more clear by changing the current formulation: “costs of open access publication” to: “costs of open access publication fees paid from the project funds”.