Revisiting an open access monograph experiment: measuring citations and tweets 5 years later

Author:

Snijder RonaldORCID

Abstract

AbstractAn experiment run in 2009 could not assess whether making monographs available in open access enhanced scholarly impact. This paper revisits the experiment, drawing on additional citation data and tweets. It attempts to answer the following research question: does open access have a positive influence on the number of citations and tweets a monograph receives, taking into account the influence of scholarly field and language? The correlation between monograph citations and tweets is also investigated. The number of citations and tweets measured in 2014 reveal a slight open access advantage, but the influence of language or subject should also be taken into account. However, Twitter usage and citation behaviour hardly overlap.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications,General Social Sciences

Reference38 articles.

1. Abrizah, A., & Thelwall, M. (2014). Can the impact of non-Western academic books be measured? An investigation of Google Books and Google Scholar for Malaysia. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(12), 2498–2508. doi:10.1002/asi.23145.

2. Aleixandre-Benavent, R., Valderrama Zurián, J. C., Alonso-Arroyo, A., Miguel-Dasit, A., González de Dios, J., & de Granda Orive, J. (2007). Spanish versus English as a language of publication and impact factor of Neurologia. Neurología (Barcelona, Spain), 22(1), 19–26. Retrieved from http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/17315099/reload=0.

3. Archambault, É., Caruso, J., & Nicol, A. (2014). State-of-art analysis of OA strategies to peer-review publications (Vol. 1). Retrieved from http://science-metrix.com/files/science-metrix/publications/d_2.1_sm_ec_dg-rtd_oa_policies_in_the_era_update_v05p.pdf.

4. Archambault, É., Côté, G., Struck, B., & Voorons, M. (2016). Research impact of paywalled versus open access papers. Retrieved from http://www.1science.com/oanumbr.html.

5. Bornmann, L. (2014). Alternative metrics in scientometrics: A meta-analysis of research into three altmetrics. Digital Libraries; Physics and Society, 103(3), 1123–1144. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1565-y.

Cited by 20 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3