The Post-Embargo Open Access Citation Advantage: It Exists (Probably), It’s Modest (Usually), and the Rich Get Richer (of Course)

peter.suber's bookmarks 2020-11-29

Summary:

Abstract:  Many studies show that open access (OA) articles—articles from scholarly journals made freely available to readers without requiring subscription fees—are downloaded, and presumably read, more often than closed access/subscription-only articles. Assertions that OA articles are also cited more often generate more controversy. Confounding factors (authors may self-select only the best articles to make OA; absence of an appropriate control group of non-OA articles with which to compare citation figures; conflation of pre-publication vs. published/publisher versions of articles, etc.) make demonstrating a real citation difference difficult. This study addresses those factors and shows that an open access citation advantage as high as 19% exists, even when articles are embargoed during some or all of their prime citation years. Not surprisingly, better (defined as above median) articles gain more when made OA.

 

Link:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0159614

Updated:

11/29/2020, 10:54

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks

Tags:

oa.advantage oa.embargoes oa.downloads oa.citations oa.impact oa.quality

Date tagged:

11/29/2020, 15:54

Date published:

08/22/2016, 11:54