The Antaeus column: does the “open access” advantage exist? A librarian's perspective

Author:

Joint Nicholas

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to discuss the evidence about the benefits of running open access repositories, with particular emphasis on the so‐called “open access advantage.”Design/methodology/approachA brief account of the evolving arguments for open access, together with a summary and analysis of some recent articles proposing arguments for and against the idea of “open access advantage.”FindingsThe paper finds that many of the original arguments for the benefits of open access have fallen by the wayside; but that, in spite of this, there is a good evidence that an “open access advantage” does exist. The application of straightforward library statistical counting measures which are traditionally used to evaluate user benefits of mainstream services is just as effective an evaluation tool as more sophisticated citation analysis methods.Research limitations/implicationsAs much of the research into the impact of open access on citation counts of articles is highly complex and narrowly focussed, a continuation of such abstract research activity may obscure this topic rather than shed light.Practical implicationsThe insights of practitioner librarians into repository evaluation are highly important.Originality/valueThis article attempts to refocus the discussion of open access repositories away from the more abstract and remote analysis of their benefits, and emphasise that open access repositories are straightforward information services like any other, and should be evaluated on the same terms.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Library and Information Sciences

Reference8 articles.

1. Davis, P.M. (2007), “Does free‐access to scholarly articles increase readership and citation impact? A randomized controlled, multi‐publisher, multi‐journal study”, Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 1‐15, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/meet.145044026 (accessed 6 May 2009).

2. Davis, P.M. (2009), “Author‐choice open‐access publishing in the biological and medical literature: a citation analysis”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 3‐8, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.20965 (accessed 6 May).

3. Davis, P.M., Lewenstein, B.V., Simon, D.H., Booth, J.G. and Connolly, M.J.L. (2008), “Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial”, British Medical Journal, Vol. 337 No. a568, pp. 343‐5, available at: www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/337/jul31_1/a568 (accessed 6 May 2009).

4. Eysenbach, G. (2006), “Citation advantage of open access articles”, PLoS Biology, Vol. 4 No. 5, available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0040157 (accessed 6 May 2009).

5. Ginsparg, P. (1996), “Electronic publishing in science”, Invited contribution for Conference held at UNESCO HQ, Paris, 19‐23 February, during session Scientist's View of Electronic Publishing and Issues Raised, Wed 21 February 1996: Winners and Losers in the Global Research Village, available at: http://people.ccmr.cornell.edu/∼ginsparg/blurb/pg96unesco.html (accessed 6 May 2009). See also: Ginsparg, P. (1997), “Winners and losers in the global research village”, The Serials Librarian, Vol. 30 Nos 3/4, pp. 83‐95.

Cited by 14 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