Abstract
This study analyses the performance of journals and publications based on their type of archiving policies. The main objective is the assessment of the feasibility of the journal typologies with a special emphasis on the comparison of both the subscription-based and the Open Access models. The analysis is backed by the combination of data contained in four of the main bibliographic databases to offer comprehensive, new and updated data on OA (Sherpa-RoMEO, DOAJ, Web of Science and Scopus). A total of 18.3 million articles and reviews were analysed between 2005 and 2015. In the comparison of Web of Science and Scopus, we found that the proportion of OA publications is 5% inferior in WoS. The growth of the total number of documents published in Gold OA journals is noteworthy in the period analysed. However, the study of the proportion of publications and citations in both databases revealed that Gold OA journals only increased their proportion of publications but not the proportion of citations. Trends in the proportion of highly cited publications (top 1%) depicted that OA journals were unable to exceed of this expected 1% in the 11 years under analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Archambault, E., Amyot, D., Deschamps, P., Nicol, A., Provencher, F., Rebout, L., et al. (2014). Proportion of Open Access papers published in peer-reviewed journals at the European and World levels (1996–2013). Brussels: European Commission.
Archambault, E., Cote, G., Struck, B., & Voorons, M. (2016). Research impact of paywalled versus open access papers. Quebec: Science-Metrix and 1science.
Bjork, B. C. (2017a). Growth of hybrid open access, 2009–2016. PeerJ,5(e3878), 10p. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3878.
Bjork, B. (2017b). Open Access to scientific articles: a review of benefits and challenges. Internal and Emergency Medicine,112, 877–901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-017-1603-2.
Bohannon, J. (2013). Who’s afraid of peer review? Science,342(6154), 60–65. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.342.6154.60.
Cambridge. (2018). How much do publishers charge for Open Access? Cambridge: University. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from https://osc.cam.ac.uk/open-access/open-access-policies/paying-open-access/how-much-do-publishers-charge-open-access.
Coalition-S. (2018). Plan S. Making full and immediate Open Access a reality. Brussels: Science Europe. Retrieved April 4, 2019 from https://www.coalition-s.org/.
Crawford W. (2016). Gold Open Access journals 2011–2015. Livermore (CA): Cites & Insights Books. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from https://waltcrawford.name/goaj1115.pdf.
Crowe, M., & Carlyle, D. (2015). Is open access sufficient? A review of the quality of open-access nursing journals. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing,24, 59–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12098.
Davis, P. M., Lewenstein, B. V., Simon, D. H., Booth, J. G., & Connolly, M. J. L. (2008). Open Access publishing, article downloads, and citations: Randomised controlled trial. BMJ,337, a568. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a568.
Dorta-González, P., González-Betancor, S. M., & Dorta-González, M. I. (2016). Reconsidering the gold open Access citation advantage postulate in a multidisciplinary context: An analysis of the subject categories in the Web of Science database 2009–2014. Scientometrics,112, 877–901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2422-y.
Dorta-González, P., & Santana-Jiménez, Y. (2018). Prevalence and citation advantage of gold open access in the subject areas of the Scopus database. Research Evaluation,27(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvx035.
Ennas, G., & Di Guardo, M. C. (2015). Features of top-rated gold open access journals: An analysis of the scopus database. Journal of Informetrics,9(1), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2014.11.007.
Erfanmanesh, M. (2017). Status and quality of Open Access journals in Scopus. Collection Building,36(4), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1108/CB-02-2017-0007.
European Union. (2019). Future of scholarly publishing and scholarly communication. Brussels: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. ISBN: 978-92-79-97238-6, https://doi.org/10.2777/836532.
Eysenbach, G. (2006). Citation advantage of Open Access articles. PLoS Biology,4(5), e157. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040157.
Gadd, E., Fry, J., & Creaser, C. (2018). The influence of journal publisher characteristics on open access policy trends. Scientometrics,115(3), 1371–1393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2716-8.
Gadd, E., & Troll, Covey D. (2016). What does ‘green’ open access mean? Tracking twelve years of changes to journal publisher self-archiving policies. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000616657406.
Guerrero-Bote, V. P., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2012). A further step forward in measuring journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR2 indicator. Journal of Informetrics,6, 674–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2012.07.001.
Gumpenberger, C., Ovalle-Perandones, M. A., & Gorraiz, J. (2013). On the impact of Gold Open Access journals. Scientometrics,96(1), 221–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0902-7.
Haug, C. J. (2019). No free lunch—What price Plan S for scientific publishing? New England Journal of Medicine,380(12), 1181–1185. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMms1900864.
Hua, F., Shen, C., Walsh, T., Glenny, A. M., & Worthington, H. (2017). Open Access: Concepts, findings and recommendations for stakeholders in dentistry. Journal of Dentistry,64, 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2017.06.012.
Huang, D. W. (2016). Positive correlation between quality and quantity in academic journals. Journal of Informetrics,10, 329–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.002.
Joint, N. (2009). The Antaeus column: does the “open access” advantage exist? A librarian’s perspective. Library Review,58(7), 476–481. https://doi.org/10.1108/00242530910978172.
Kohls, A., & Mele, S. (2018). Converting the literature of a scientific field to open access through global collaboration: The experience of SCOAP3 in Particle Physics. Publications. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications6020015.
Laakso, M., & Bjork, B. C. (2017). Hybrid Open Access: A longitudinal study. Journal of Informetrics,10(4), 919–932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.08.002.
Laakso, M., & Lindman, J. (2016). Journal copyright restrictions and actual Open Access availability: A study of articles published in eight top information systems journals (2010–2014). Scientometrics,109(2), 1167–1189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2078-z.
Laakso, M., Solomon, D., & Bjork, B. C. (2016). How subscription-based scholarly journals can convert to open access: A review of approaches. Learned Publishing,29, 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1056.
Lavizzari, C. S., & Viljoen, R. (2015). Open Access Licensing: a legal perspective for authors, publishers, funders, repository platform operators, and other stakeholders in the communication of science. London: Publishing Research Consortium.
Lawrence, S. (2001). Free online availability substantially increases a paper’s impact. Nature,411(6837), 521.
McGuigan, G. S., & Russell, R. D. (2008). The business of academic publishing: a strategic analysis of the academic journal publishing industry and its impact on the future of scholarly publishing. Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship, 9(3). http://southernlibrarianship.icaap.org/content/v09n03/mcguigan_g01.html.
McNutt, M. (2019). Plan S falls short for society publishers-and for the researchers they serve. PNAS,116(7), 2400–2403. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1900359116.
Miguel, S., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., & Moya-Anegón, F. (2011). Open Access and Scopus: A new approach to scientific visibility from the standpoint of access. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,62(6), 1130–1145. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21532.
Mingers, J., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015). A review of theory and practice in Scientometrics. European Journal of Operational Research,246, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.002.
Moed, H. F. (2007). The effect of “Open Access” on citation impact: An analysis of ArXiv’s condensed matter section. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,58(13), 2047–2054. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20663.
Orduña-Malea, E., & Delgado-López-Cózar, E. (2015). The dark side of open access in Google and Google Scholar: The case of Latin-American repositories. Scientometrics,102(1), 829–846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1369-5.
Pastorino, R., Milovanovic, S., Stojanovic, J., Efremov, L., Amore, R., & Boccia, S. (2016). Quality assessment of studies published in Open Access and subscription journals: Results of a systematic evaluation. PLoS ONE,11(5), e0154217. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154217.
Piwowar, H., et al. (2018). The state of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles. Peer J,6, e4375. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4375.
Purton, M., Michelangeli, F., & Fesus, L. (2019). Will Plan S put learned societies in jeopardy? FEBS Letters,593(4), 383–385. https://doi.org/10.1002/1873-3468.13333.
Ruiz-Pérez, S., & Delgado-López-Cózar, E. (2017). Spanish researchers’ opinions, attitudes, and practices towards Open Access publishing. El profesional de la información,26(4), 722–734. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2017.jul.16.
Science Europe. (2018). Making full and immediate Open Access a reality. Brussels: Science Europe. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from https://www.coalition-s.org/why-plan-s/.
Science-Metrix. (2018). Analytical support for bibliometrics indicators: open access availability of scientific publications. Montreal: Science-Metrix. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from http://www.science-metrix.com/sites/default/files/science-metrix/publications/science-metrix_open_access_availability_scientific_publications_report.pdf.
Solomon, D. J., Laakso, M., & Bjork, B. C. (2013). A longitudinal comparison of citation rates and growth among Open Access journals. Journal of Informetrics,7, 642–650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.03.008.
Spedding, M., Barrett, J., Morgan, E. T., Vore, M., Geraghty, D., Kirkpatrick, C., et al. (2019). Plan S: A threat to quality of science? Science,363(6426), 462. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw1424.
Suber P. (2008). Gratis and libre Open Access. SPARC Open Access Newsletter. Retrieved July 10, 2019 from https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/4322580/suber_oagratis.html?sequence=1.
Suber, P. (2012). Open Access. Cambridge: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-51763-8.
Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Dobranszki, J. (2019). Preprint policies among 14 academic publishers. Journal of Academic Librarianship,45(2), 162–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.02.009.
Thomson, S., & Kanesarajah, V. (2017). The European Research Council: The first 10 years. London: Clarivate Analytics.
Traag, V. A., & Waltman, L. (2019). Persistence of journal hierarchy in open access publishing. In 17thInternational conference on scientometrics and informetrics (pp. 1339–1345). Rome (Italy).
Van Noorden, R. (2013). The true cost of science publishing. Nature,495(7442), 426–429. https://doi.org/10.1038/495426a.
Waltman, L. (2016). A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics,10, 365–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2016.02.007.
Watson, R., Cleary, M., Jackson, D., & Hunt, G. E. (2012). Open access and online publishing: a new frontier in nursing? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 68(9), 1905–1908. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2012.06023.x.
Watson, R., & Hayter, M. (2019). Time to plan for Plan S. Nursing Open,6(2), 206–207. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.263.
Wicherts, J. M. (2016). Peer review quality and transparency of the peer-review process in Open Access and subscription journals. PLoS ONE,11(1), e0147913. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147913.
Willinsky, J. (2006). The access principle: The case for Open Access to research and scholarship. Cambridge: MIT Press. ISBN 0-262-23242-1.
Acknowledgements
Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez would like to thank doctor Alexis-Michel Mugabushaka and doctor Theodore Papazoglou for valuable comments and suggestions on an early version of this article. In memory of Boris Kragelj.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Perianes-Rodríguez, A., Olmeda-Gómez, C. Effects of journal choice on the visibility of scientific publications: a comparison between subscription-based and full Open Access models. Scientometrics 121, 1737–1752 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03265-y
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03265-y