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

lkfitz's bookmarks 2016-08-23


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."


From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » lkfitz's bookmarks

Tags: oa.embargoes oa.citations oa.impact oa.advantage oa.publishing oa.journals oa.empirical

Date tagged:

08/23/2016, 16:12

Date published:

08/23/2016, 12:12