|
See also Papers produced by the project
Latest articles on OA impact |
This is an external feed from an unmoderated, multi-contributor source. Not all entries will appear in the classified bibliography |
Last updated 6 December 2010; first posted 15 September 2004. Please email additions, corrections or comments to Steve Hitchcock.
This bibliography cited in support of Lincoln University Research Committee policy of 'universal practice' for repository deposit, 30 March 2010
This bibliography cited in Times Higher Education Leader: Put all the results out in the open, 12 November 2009
A great resource! Eloy Rodrigues, University of Minho, via Twitter, Jul 17th 2009
This bibliography cited in support of Student Statement on The Right to Research (2009)
This bibliography cited to support the Stanford University
School of Education Open Access Motion
Open Access Policy
Resources
Q&A
behind the Stanford OA policy (29 June 2008)
"incredible resource"
OA Librarian blog, Citation
Impact Bibliography Resource (December 7, 2005)
"excellent bibliography"
Peter Suber, American Scientist Open Access Forum (28 September 2005) http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/4804.html
"This ongoing chronological
bibliography may be worth bookmarking and checking every few months. There's
very little annotation, but it's a good brief bibliography on a narrow - but
important - subject."
Walt Crawford, Cites & Insights (November 2004, p13) http://citesandinsights.info/civ4i13.pdf
Citations
of this bibliography found by Google Scholar
Web pages that link
to this bibliography found by Google
This chronological bibliography is intended to describe progress in reporting these studies; it also lists the Web tools available to measure impact. It is a focused bibliography, on the relationship between impact and access. It does not attempt to cover citation impact, or other related topics such as open access, more generally, although some key papers in these areas are listed as jump-off points for wider study.
OA impact biblio rapid reader Top five most-cited papers from this bibliography,
as measured by Google Scholar |
Added 6 December 2010
Davis. P. (2010)
Does
Open Access Lead to Increased Readership and Citations? A Randomized
Controlled Trial of Articles Published in APS Journals
The Physiologist,
53 (6), December 2010
Extracts. Introduction: In order to isolate the effect of access on
readership and citations, we conducted a randomized controlled trial of
open access publishing on articles published electronically in 11 APS
journals. This report details the findings three years after the
commencement of the experiment. Discussion: The results of this
experiment suggest that providing free access to the scientific
literature may increase readership (as measured by article downloads)
and reach a larger potential audience (as measured by unique visitors),
but have no effect on article citations. These results are consistent
with an earlier report of the APS study after one year and the results
of other scientific journals after two years. The fact that we observe
an increase in readership and visitors for Open Access articles but no
citation advantage suggests that scientific authors are adequately
served by the current APS model of information dissemination, and
second, that the additional readership is taking place outside this
core research community.
Added 6 December 2010
Davis. P. (2010)
Access,
Readership, Citations: A Randomized Controlled Trial Of Scientific
Journal Publishing
eCommons@Cornell, 20 October 2010
From the abstract: This dissertation explores the relationship of Open
Access publishing with subsequent readership and citations. It reports
the findings of a randomized controlled trial involving 36 academic
journals produced by seven publishers in the sciences, social sciences
and humanities. At the time of this writing, all articles have aged at
least two years. Articles receiving the Open Access treatment received
significantly more readership (as measured by article downloads) and
reached a broader audience (as measured by unique visitors), yet were
cited no more frequently, nor earlier, than subscription-access control
articles. A pronounced increase in article downloads with no
commensurate increase in citations to Open Access treatment articles
may be explained through social stratification, a process which
concentrates scientific authors at elite, resource-rich institutions
with excellent access to the scientific literature. For this community,
access is essentially a non-issue.
Added 17 Feb 2010, updated 18 Oct 2010
Gargouri, Y., Hajjem, C., Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y., Brody, T., Carr,
L. and Harnad, S. (2010)
Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality
Research
PLoS ONE 5(10): e13636, October 18, 2010, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013636
Also in ECS EPrints, 10 Feb 2010, http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18493/ (this version includes the paper and full
supplemental materials, including further analyses and responses to comments and feedback),
and in arXiv, arXiv:1001.0361v2 [cs.CY], 3 Jan 2010
Abstract
Background. Articles whose authors have supplemented subscription-based access to the
publisher's version by self-archiving their own final draft to make it accessible
free for all on the web (Open Access, OA) are cited significantly more than
articles in the same journal and year that have not been made OA. Some have
suggested that this OA Advantage may not be causal but just a self-selection bias,
because authors preferentially make higher-quality articles OA. To test this we
compared self-selective self-archiving with mandatory self-archiving for a sample of
27,197 articles published 20022006 in 1,984 journals.
Methdology/Principal Findings. The OA Advantage proved just as high for both.
Logistic regression analysis showed that the advantage is independent of other
correlates of citations (article age; journal impact factor; number of co-authors,
references or pages; field; article type; or country) and highest for the most
highly cited articles. The OA Advantage is real, independent and causal, but skewed.
Its size is indeed correlated with quality, just as citations themselves are (the
top 20% of articles receive about 80% of all citations).
Conclusions/Significance. The OA advantage is greater for the more citable articles,
not because of a quality bias from authors self-selecting what to make OA, but
because of a quality advantage, from users self-selecting what to use and cite,
freed by OA from the constraints of selective accessibility to subscribers only. It
is hoped that these findings will help motivate the adoption of OA self-archiving
mandates by universities, research institutions and research funders.
Added 6 Dec 2010 Comments below refer to the PLoS ONE publication
Howard, J., Is
There an Open-Access Citation Advantage? The Chronicle of
Higher Education, 19 Oct 2010:
Seeks to reignite the earlier debate around the preprint of the new
PLoS ONE paper. And succeeds - see reader responses attached to the
article, some extracts below.
Harnad, S., Correlation,
Causation, and the Weight of Evidence, Open Access
Archivangelism, 20 Oct 2010: One can only speculate on the
reasons why some might still wish to cling to the self-selection bias
hypothesis in the face of all the evidence to date. The straightforward
causal relationship is the default hypothesis, based on both
plausibility and the cumulative weight of the evidence. Hence the
burden of providing counter-evidence to refute it is now on the
advocates of the alternative.
sk_griffhoven, October 20, 2010: The authors were unable to control for
institutional effects in their model. While deposit mandates might be
responsible for the results they report, they might not, and I dont
see how mandates would outperform self-selection. Most importantly,
there is no basis for making a causal claim. I agree with Philip David:
the authors greatly overstate their results.
stevanharnad, October 21, 2010: The causal claim is not that mandated
OA out-performs self-selected OA, but that self-selected OA does *not*
out-perform mandated OA, hence OA is causal.
signofthefourwinds, October 21, 2010: It doesnt make sense that
researchers suddenly give up their habit of consulting certain
databases to go search in Google Scholar. What user behavior change
accounts for the OA advantage?
stevanharnad, October 22, 2010: The OA Advantage is not just, or
primarily, a convenience or laziness effect (though some of that no
doubt contributes to it too): It is not that scholars have become
sloppy, relying on google scholar instead of consulting more
established databases. It is that when their institution cannot afford
access to articles they need, they must make do with only those of them
that they can access for free online.
Patrick Chardenet, October 22, 2010: I dont think that the problem is
to know if Open Access reinforces or not the number of citations. It is
rather a question of knowing if the measurement of science by the
measurement of the number of citations has an interest for the
scientific development.
stevanharnad, October 22, 2010: In a nutshell, citations are not the
goal of research; the goal is that the research should be read, used
and built upon, in further research and applications. And citations are
a measure of that. But for research to be read, used and built upon, it
has to be accessible. That is why and how OA increases citations.
Fenner, M., New
in PLoS ONE: Citation rates of self-selected vs. mandated Open Access,
PLoS Blogs, Gobbledygook, 19 Oct 2010: "I feel that
the paper comes a little short. Yes, they did a very detailed analysis
of the citation behavior, and take into account important cofactors.
But the reader is left with the impression that mandatory
self-archiving of post-prints in institutional repositories is the only
reasonable Open Access strategy, and the introduction and discussion
accordingly leave out some important arguments." Notable for the
substantive discussion that follows between the blogger (Fenner) and
one of the principal authors of the paper (Harnad).
Harnad, S., Comparing
OA and Non-OA: Some Methodological Supplements, Open Access
Archivangelism, 19 Oct 2010. Responds
to Fenner: "If we have given "the
impression that mandatory self-archiving of post-prints in
institutional repositories is the only reasonable Open Access
strategy," then we have succeeded in conveying the implication of our
findings."
Comments below refer to the preprint
Davis, P., Does
a Citation Advantage Exist for Mandated Open Access Articles?
the scholarly kitchen, Jan 7, 2010; "Gargouri reports that
institutionally-mandated
OA papers received about
a 15% citation advantage over self-selected OA papers, which seems
somewhat counter-intuitive. If better articles tend to be
self-archived, their reasoning goes, we should expect that papers
deposited under institutional-wide mandates would under-perform
those
where the authors select which articles to archive. The
authors of
this paper deal, rather unscientifically, with this inconvenient truth
with a quick statistical dismissal that their finding "might be due
to chance or sampling error. In sum, this paper tests an interesting
testable hypothesis on whether mandatory self-archiving policies are
beneficial to their authors in terms of citations. Their
unorthodox methodology, however, results in some inconsistent and
counter-intuitive results that are not properly addressed in their
narrative."
The following were among the comments
added to the above blog by Davis.
Harnad, S., Jan 7, 2010: "Mandated OA Advantage? Yes, the fact that the
citation advantage of mandated OA was slightly greater than that of
self-selected OA is surprising, and if it proves reliable, it is
interesting and worthy of interpretation. We did not interpret it in
our paper, because it was the smallest effect, and our focus was on
testing the Self-Selection/Quality-Bias hypothesis, according to which
mandated OA should have little or no citation advantage at all, if
self-selection is a major contributor to the OA citation advantage."
Gaule,
P., Jan 7, 2010: "the paper does not appear to include controls for
institutions of the authors of the control sample. This is particularly
worrisome when comparing papers originating from CERN which arguably
does cutting edge physics to the control papers. The key issue in this
paper seems to be interpreting the mandated open access versus
self-selected open access. The authors find and point out that the
mandates actually result in compliance of around 60%. However, they
have little to say on what is going on here and why papers end up in
the compliant group or not. I am not sure what conclusions can be
inferred from this comparison of two types of self-selection, at least
one of which is not well understood."
Harnad, S., Jan 8, 2010: "(2)
THE SPECIAL CASE OF CERN: With so few institutional mandates, its not
yet possible to control for institutional quality. But CERN is indeed a
special case; when it is removed, however, it does not alter the
pattern of our results. (3) SELECTIVE COMPLIANCE? Mandate compliance is
not yet 100%, so some form of self-selection still remains a logical
possibility, but we think this is made extremely improbable when there
is no decline in the OA Advantage even when mandates quadruple the OA
rate from the spontaneous self-selective baseline of 15% to the current
mandated average of 60%."
Schneider, J. W., Jan 8, 2010: "the claim
of causality seems well beyond the mark. Neither former research nor
the current regression design permits any casual claims."
Harnad,
S., Jan 9, 2010: "CAUSALITY: We agree that causality is difficult to
demonstrate with correlational statistics. However, we note that the
hypothesis that (2a) making articles open access causes them to be more
citeable and the hypothesis that (2b) being more citeable causes
articles to be made open access are both causal hypotheses."
Harnad, S., Open
Access: Self-Selected, Mandated & Random; Answers &
Questions,
Open Access Archivangelism, February 8, 2010: "What follows is what we
hope will be found to be a conscientious and attentive series of
responses to questions raised by Phil Davis about our paper (currently
under refereeing) -- responses for which we did further analyses of our
data (not included in the draft under refereeing)."
Added 18 October 2010
Herb, U. (2010)
OpenAccess
Statistics: Alternative Impact Measures for Open Access documents? An
examination how to generate interoperable usage information from
distributed Open Access services
E-LIS, 25 Sep 2010. In:
L'information scientifique et technique dans l'univers numérique.
Mesures et usages. L'association des professionnels de l'information et
de la documentation, ADBS, pp. 165-178
From the abstract: This
contribution shows that most common methods to assess the impact of
scientific publications often discriminate Open Access publications
and by that reduce the attractiveness of Open Access for scientists.
Assuming that the motivation to use Open Access publishing services
(e.g. a journal or a repository) would increase if these services would
convey some sort of reputation or impact to the scientists, alternative
models of impact are discussed. Prevailing research results indicate
that alternative metrics based on usage information of electronic
documents are suitable to complement or to relativize citation-based
indicators. Furthermore an insight into the project OpenAccess-
Statistics OA-S is given. OA-S implemented an infrastructure to collect
document-related usage information from distributed Open Access
Repositories in an aggregator service in order to generate
interoperable document access information according to three standards
(COUNTER, LogEc and IFABC).
Added 18 October 2010
Suber, P. (2010)
Thinking
about prestige, quality, and open access
SPARC Open Access Newsletter, issue #125, September 2, 2008
Brief
extracts. Here are a dozen thoughts or theses about prestige and OA. I
start with the rough notion that if journal quality is real excellence,
then journal prestige is reputed excellence. (1) Universities reward
faculty who publish in high-prestige journals, and faculty are strongly
motivated to do so. If universities wanted to create this
incentive, they have succeeded. If journal prestige and
journal
quality can diverge, then universities and funders may be giving
authors an incentive to aim only for prestige. If they wanted
to
create an incentive to put quality ahead of prestige, they haven't yet
succeeded. (8) Universities tend to use journal prestige and impact as
surrogates for quality. The excuses for doing so are getting
thin.
Added 18 October 2010
Willinsky, J. (2010)
Open
access and academic reputation
NISCAIR Online Periodicals Repository (NOPR), Annals of Library and
Information Studies, 57 (3), Sep 2010, 296-302
Abstract:
Open access aims to make knowledge freely available to those who would
make use of it. High-profile open access journals, such as those
published by PLoS (Public Library of Science), have been able to
demonstrate the viability of this model for increasing an authors
reach and reputation within scholarly communication through the use of
such bibliographic tools as the Journal Impact Factor, conceived and
developed by Eugene Garfield. This article considers the various
approaches that authors, journals, and funding agencies are taking
toward open access, as well as its effect on reputation for authors
and, more widely, for journals and the research enterprise itself.
"Measuring the effect for physics or astronomy is easy. This link returns the number of articles published in the Astrophysical Journal in 2003 and their number of citations.
"This next link shows the number of these papers which are available OA in the arXiv, and their citations.
"The result is that 75% of the papers are in the arXiv, and they represent 90% of the citations, a 250% OA effect.
"By replacing ApJ with the mnemonic for any other physics or astronomy
journal one can repeat the measurement; for Nuclear Physics A (NuPhA) one gets
that 32% of the articles are in the arXiv, and they represent 78% of the
citations, a 740% OA effect."
From Michael Kurtz, American Scientist Open Access Forum, 28 September 2005 http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/4807.html
Note, the database links are 'live', i.e. they return the current database
figures, not the exact figures on which Michael Kurtz would have based his
calculations, but the percentages quoted are unlikely to change dramatically,
in the short term at least.
Elucidation of calculation (by Stevan Harnad, figures valid on 22 July 2007)
For ApJ:
TOT: articles 2592 citations 70732
Arx: articles 1943 citations 62586 c/a 32.21 (rounded to 32)
Non: articles 649 citations 8146 c/a 12.55 (rounded to 13)
Then 32/13 = 2.5 (250%)
For NuPhA:
TOT: articles 1134 citations 4451
Arx: articles 344 citations 3225 c/a 9.375
Non: articles 790 citations 1226 c/a 1.552
Then 9.375/1.553 = 6.041 (600%)
Michael Kurtz comments: "The differences in (NuPhA: 740% to 600% effect) results are because the database has changed over the past two years since I did it. There is a systematic error in the calculations for Nuclear Physics A (Elsevier does not give us the references) so the results will be higher than the true value. Physical Review C (Nuclear Physics) has an OA advantage number of 221%, the systematic in this case is small and in the other direction."
Reviews of OA impact studies |
This is an important article. It's the first major study since the famous Lawrence paper documenting the proposition that OA increases impact. It's also the first to go beyond Lawrence in scope and method in order to answer doubts raised about his thesis. By confirming that OA increases impact, it gives authors the best of reasons to provide OA to their own work (21 June 2004)Broader collaborations have emerged to extend these findings (e.g. Brody et al. 2004).
Open access has become feasible because of the move towards online publication and dissemination. A new measure that becomes possible with online publication is the number of downloads or 'hits', opening a new line of investigation. Brody et al. have been prominent in showing there is a correlation between higher downloads and higher impact, particularly for high impact papers, holding out the promise not just for higher impact resulting from open access but for the ability to predict high impact papers much earlier, not waiting years for those citations to materialise (e.g. Brody and Harnad 2005). The effect can be verified with the Correlation Generator (below).
(Note. The latest listings might include preprints, or even pre-preprints. This area of study is effectively a work in progress, and as such the list is intended to raise awareness of the most recent results, even where these may not be definitive or final versions. Check back for definitive versions.)
Added 6 September 2010
Zawacki-Richter, O., Anderson, T. and Tuncay, N. (2010)
The
Growing Impact of Open Access Distance Education Journals: A
Bibliometric Analysis
The Journal of Distance
Education / Revue de l'Éducation à Distance, 24
(3), 2010
From
the Abstract: we examine 12 distance education journals (6 open and 6
published in closed format by commercial publishers). Using an online
survey completed by members of the editorial boards of these 12
journals and a systematic review of the number of citations per article
(N = 1,123) and per journal issue between 2003 and 2008, we examine the
impact, and perceived value of the 12 journals. We then compute
differences between open and closed journals. The results reveal that
the open access journals are not perceived by distance eductation
editors as significantly more or less prestigious than their closed
counterparts. The number of citations per journal and per article also
indicates little difference. However we note a trend towards more
citations per article in open access journals. Articles in open access
journals are cited earlier than in non-open access journals.
Added 6 September 2010
Kim, J. (2010)
Faculty
self-archiving: Motivations and barriers
Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 16
Jul 2010
info:doi/10.1002/asi.21336
This
paper is broader than open access impact, but one part of the
investigation looked at it.
From the Discussion: A few interviewees did
believe that self-archiving resulted in their research work being cited
more frequently, although 13 interviewees were unsure about the
positive relationship between self-archiving and the citation rate.
Professors even considered self-archiving to serve other purposes, for
example, to recruit graduate students, or to find collaborators,
instead of increasing the impact of research. In fact, five
interviewees expressed uncertainty regarding whether self-archiving
would improve professional recognition. Four other interviewees did not
expect self-archiving to increase academic recognition, as they
believed this related more to the quality of research itself, rather
than merely making it publicly accessible. These findings suggested
that the majority of faculty participants in this study were unaware of
the evidence of a citation advantage from OA previously identified by
several studies. Without noticing the evidence, professors tend not to
expect a citation advantage from self-archiving; however, they see
benefits from the user side through self-archiving. This study shows
that faculty have diverse opinions about citation rates and academic
recognition related to self-archiving.
Added 6 September 2010
Strotmann, A. and Zhao, D. (2010)
Impact
of Open Access on stem cell research: An author co-citation analysis
76th IFLA General
Conference and Assembly, Gothenburg, Sweden, 22
Jun 2010
Abstract:
We explore the impact of Open Access (OA) on stem cell research through
a comparison of research reported in OA and in non-OA publications.
Using an author co-citation analysis method, we find that (a) OA and
non-OA publications cover similar major research areas in the stem cell
field, but (b) a more diverse range of basic and medical research is
reported in OA publications, while (c) biomedical technology areas
appear biased towards non-OA publications. From the Introduction: many
studies have investigated whether OA publication of research results
has a positive effect on the citation ranking of those publications ...
we approach the comparison between OA and non-OA publishing of research
results from a somewhat different perspective. We explore whether there
are substantial differences between the intellectual structure of a
research field when viewed from either the point of view of the OA
publications in that field or from that of its non-OA publications.
Added 6 September 2010
Jacques, T. S. and Sebire, N. J. (2010)
The
impact of article titles on citation hits: an analysis of general and
specialist medical journals
JRSM Short Reports,
1 (1), 2, 01 Jun 2010
info:doi/10.1258/shorts.2009.100020
More factors to consider in citation impact assessment.
From the Abstract:
We hypothesized that specific features of journal titles may be related
to citation rates. We reviewed the title characteristics of the 25 most
cited articles and the 25 least cited articles published in 2005 in
general and specialist medical journals including the Lancet, BMJ and
Journal of Clinical Pathology. The title length and construction were
correlated to the number of times the papers have been cited to May
2009. Results The number of citations was positively correlated with
the length of the title, the presence of a colon in the title and the
presence of an acronym. Factors that predicted poor citation included
reference to a specific country in the title. Conclusions These data
suggest that the construction of an article title has a significant
impact on frequently the paper is cited. We hypothesize that this may
be related to the way electronic searches of the literature are
undertaken.
Added 9 June 2010
Herb, U. (2010)
Alternative
Impact Measures for Open Access Documents? An examination how to
generate interoperable usage information from distributed open access
services
76th IFLA General
Conference and Assembly, Gothenburg, Sweden, August 2010,
paper available online 29 May 2010
From the Abstract: This contribution shows that most common methods to
assess the impact of scientific publications often discriminate open
access publications and by that reduce the attractiveness of Open
Access for scientists. Assuming that the motivation to use open access
publishing services (e.g. a journal or a repository) would increase if
these services would convey some sort of reputation or impact to the
scientists, alternative models of impact are discussed. Prevailing
research results indicate that alternative metrics based on usage
information of electronic documents are suitable to complement or to
relativize citation based indicators.
Added 9 June 2010
Giglia, E. (2010)
The
Impact Factor of Open Access journals: data and trends
DHANKEN, digital repository of HANKEN research, 27 May 2010.
In 14th International
Conference on Electronic Publishing, Helsinki, 16-18 June
2010. Slides in E-LIS, 21 June 2010 http://eprints.rclis.org/18669/
From the Abstract: The aim of this preliminary work, focused on Gold Open
Access, is to test the performance of Open Access journals with the
most traditional bibliometric indicator Impact Factor, to verify the
hypothesis that unrestricted access might turn into more citations and
therefore also good Impact Factor indices. Open Access journals are
relatively new actors in the publishing market, and gaining reputation
and visibility is a complex challenge. Some of them show impressive
Impact Factor trends since their first year of tracking.
Added 17 May 2010
Calver, M. C. and Bradley, J. S. (2010)
Patterns of Citations of Open Access and Non-Open Access Conservation Biology
Journal Papers and Book Chapters
Conservation Biology,
published online: 23 Apr 2010
From the abstract: We compared the number of citations of OA and non-OA
papers in six journals and four books published since 2000 to test
whether OA increases number of citations overall and increases
citations made by authors in developing countries. After controlling
for type of paper (e.g., review or research paper), length of paper,
authors' citation profiles, number of authors per paper, and whether
the author or the publisher released the paper in OA, OA had no
statistically significant influence on the overall number of citations
per journal paper. Journal papers were cited more frequently if the
authors had published highly cited papers previously, were members of
large teams of authors, or published relatively long papers, but papers
were not cited more frequently if they were published in an OA source.
Nevertheless, author-archived OA book chapters accrued up to eight
times more citations than chapters in the same book that were not
available through OA, perhaps because there is no online abstracting
service for book chapters. There was also little evidence that journal
papers or book chapters published in OA received more citations from
authors in developing countries relative to those journal papers or
book chapters not published in OA. For scholarly publications in
conservation biology, only book chapters had an OA citation advantage,
and OA did not increase the number of citations papers or chapters
received from authors in developing countries.
Added 6 September 2010
Habibzadeh, F. and Yadollahie, M. (2010)
Are
Shorter Article Titles More Attractive for Citations? Cross-sectional
Study of 22 Scientific Journals
Croatian Medical Journal,
51 (2), April 2010
Open
access is not the only factor affecting citation impact. Here is
another factor that has received rather less attention. From the
Abstract: Longer titles seem to be associated with higher citation
rates. This association is more pronounced for journals with high
impact factors. Editors who insist on brief and concise titles should
perhaps update the guidelines for authors of their journals and have
more flexibility regarding the length of the title.
Added 17 May 2010
Agerbæk, A. and Nielsen, K. (2010)
Factors
in Open Access which Influence the Impact Cycle
ScieCom info, Vol 6, No 1, 2010 (issue notice posted 22 March 2010)
Short paper illustrating journal publishing flowcharts for non-open
access (OA), gold OA and green OA, showing why, in principle, open
access might lead to higher citations due to wider and earlier
dissemination.
Added 17 May 2010
Wagner, A. B. (2010)
Open
Access Citation Advantage: An Annotated Bibliography
Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, No. 60, Winter 2010
(issue notice posted 16 March 2010)
The bibliography is divided into three sections:
- Review articles [5 reviews]
- Studies showing an open access citation advantage (OACA) [39 articles]
- Studies showing either no OACA effect or ascribing OACA to factors
unrelated to OA publication [7 articles]
The following databases were searched ... results were cross-checked
against an extensive, more general bibliography (this bibliography). It
is interesting to note that no study has ever claimed that OA articles
were cited less than TA articles. The research question still being
debated is whether other factors explain the widely observed OACA (Open
Access Citation Advantage) rather than the mere fact an article is open
access.
Added 09 Mar 2010
Snijder, R. (2010)
The
profits of free books - an experiment to measure the impact of Open
Access publishing
Google sites, undated, but first spotted in the wild 23 February 2010.
In Learned Publishing, Vol. 23, No. 4, October 2010, 293-301
Abstract: to measure the impact of Open Access (OA) publishing of
academic books, an experiment was set up. During a period of nine
months three sets of books were disseminated through an institutional
repository, the Google Book Search program or both channels. A fourth
set was used as control group. Open Access publishing enhances
discovery and online consultation. No relation could be found between
OA publishing and citation rates. Contrary to expectations, OA
publishing does not stimulate or diminish sales figure. The Google Book
Search program is superior compared to the repository.
Added 09 Mar 2010
Swan, A. (2010)
The Open
Access citation advantage: Studies and results to date
ECS EPrints, 17 Feb 2010
Abstract: presents a summary of reported studies on the Open Access
citation advantage. There is a brief introduction to the main issues
involved in carrying out such studies, both methodological and
interpretive. The study listing provides some details of the coverage,
methodological approach and main conclusions of each study.
Added 17 Feb 2010
Giglia, E. (2010)
Più citazioni in
Open Access? Panorama della letteratura con uno studio sull'Impact
Factor delle riviste Open Access
E-LIS, 21 Jan 2010, also in CIBER 1999-2009, 2009 (Ledizioni),
pp. 125-145
From
the English abstract: This work aims to frame the international debate
on the advantage citation of articles published in Open Access, then
present and discuss the overall data sull'Impact Factor of open access
journals, the result of an original study conducted in the Journal
Citation Reports (Thomson Reuters). The basic idea is to test the
performance of OA journals according to the traditional bibliometric
indicators dell'Impact Factor, in order to test the hypothesis that
unrestricted access may involve a greater number of citations and,
therefore, also a good impact factor. The results seem to confirm: the
38,62% of Open Access journals included in the "Journal Citation
Reports" is positioned in the first five percentile as an indicator
when considering the Impact Factor. If you use the Immediacy Index is
the percentage is 37.16%, while the second new indicator dell'Impact
Factor over 5 years - however, only applies to 356 titles on 479 - the
percentage rises to 40.05%.
Added 17 Feb 2010
Davis, P. (2009)
Studies on
access: a review
arXiv:0912.3953v1 [cs.DL], 20 Dec 2009
Brief
abstract: A review of the empirical literature on access to scholarly
information. This review focuses on surveys of authors, article
download and citation analysis.
Added 17 Feb 2010
Ibanez, A., Larranaga, P. and Bielza, C. (2009)
Predicting
citation count of Bioinformatics papers within four years of publication
Bioinformatics, 25 (24), 3303-3309, 15 December 2009
info:pmid/19819886 | info:doi/10.1093/bioinformatics/btp585
From
the abstract: "The possibility of a journal having a tool capable of
predicting the citation count of an article within the first few years
after publication would pave the way for new assessment systems.
Results: This article presents a new approach based on building several
prediction models for the Bioinformatics journal. These models predict
the citation count of an article within 4 years after publication
(global models). To build these models, tokens found in the abstracts
of Bioinformatics papers have been used as predictive features, along
with other features like the journal sections and 2-week
post-publication periods." Comment: Bioinformatics is not an open
access journal, so these results are not based on data for open access
papers, but they may have parallels with methods for predicting
citations and impact based on usage of OA papers
(e.g. Brody et al., 2005).
Data on which the results are based can be found at
the authors'
site. Without
access to the full paper it is not clear what predictive features are
being applied to achieve the claimed successful results: "In these new
models, the average success rate for predictions using the naive Bayes
and logistic regression supervised classification methods was 89.4% and
91.5%, respectively, within the nine sections and for 4-year time
horizon."
Added 10 Dec 2009
Rand, D. G. and Pfeiffer, T. (2009)
Systematic Differences in Impact across Publication Tracks at PNAS
PLoS ONE,
4(12): e8092, December 1, 2009
Investigates
citation counts for the three different publication tracks of the
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). Open access is used as a control factor in the
analysis; "To empirically investigate the impact of papers published
via each track, we inspect 2695 papers published between June 1, 2004
and April 26, 2005, covering PNAS Volume 101 Issue 22 through Volume
102 Issue 17. For each paper, we examine Thomson Reuters Web of Science
citation data as of October 2006 and May 2009, as well as page-view
counts as of October 2006. We also note the track through which each
paper was published, the topic classification of each paper, the date
of publication, and whether each article was published as open access
and/or as part of a special feature." In quantifying the size of the OA
effect to control, the paper found that "similar to previous
observations, Open Access papers receive approximately 25% more
citations than non-Open Access papers (Median 2006 [2009] citations:
Open access = 12.5 [38], non-Open access = 10 [30]; 75% percentile 2006
[2009] citations: Open access = 21 [61], non-Open access = 17 [50])."
Added 10 Dec 2009
Soong, S. (2009)
Measuring Citation Advantages of Open Accessibility
D-Lib Magazine,
15 (11/12), December 2009
Short
study of a small collection of papers deposited after publication in
the institutional repository of the Hong Kong University of Science and
Technology (HKUST). "A total of 50 archived journal articles that
already have 10 or more citation counts in Scopus were randomly
selected for inclusion in this study." Claims to present an
"easy-to-follow framework for citation impact analysis of open
accessibility. This framework allows for direct measurement and
comparison of citation rates before and after journal articles are made
openly available." The method compares the citation performance of the
same article over time pre- and post-open access rather than, as other
studies of OA impact, comparing open access papers with non-open access
papers from the same source.
Added 10 Dec 2009
Poor, N. (2009)
Global Citation Patterns of Open Access Communication Studies Journals:
Pushing Beyond the Social Science Citation Index
International Journal of
Communication, Vol. 3, 2009
From the abstract: Connectivity and citations, as used by a large
number of scholars in different fields, are a common measure of the
health of a discipline. This paper shows the citation patterns for a
multinational sample of open access journals in Communication Studies.
Their citations are similar to those of the main communication
journals, but with more international citations. Differences in the
citation patterns are attributable to the international nature of the
sampled journals, not to their open access status. From the conclusion:
The citation pattern of these open access journals is the same as that
for non-open access journals, which is how it should be if open access
journals are going to be of the same quality as more established,
non-open access journals (recall that open access does require
peer-review). The journals in the sample are not in a separate citation
space, and they take part in the larger conversation of the field. As
such, this indicates, to a certain extent, the health of these journals
(they are not isolates in the citing direction), which, in turn, is a
decent indicator for the health of the field.
Added 17 Feb 2010
Akre, O., Barone-Adesi, F., Pettersson, A., Pearce, N., Merletti, F., and Richiardi, L. (2009)
Differences
in citation rates by country of origin for papers published in
top-ranked medical journals: do they reflect inequalities in access to
publication?
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 24
Nov 2009
info:pmid/19934169 | info:doi/10.1136/jech.2009.088690
Investigates
the connection between citations and access, but not open access, by
country and income with reference to the country of publication. From
the abstract: "Methods: We obtained the number of citations and the
corresponding authors country for 4724 papers published between 1998
and 2002 in the British Medical Journal, the Lancet, Journal of the
American Medical Association, New England Medical Journal. Countries
were grouped according to the World Bank classification and geographic
location: low-middle income countries, European high-income countries,
non-European high-income countries, UK and USA. Conclusions: Papers
from different countries published in the same journal have different
citation rates."
Added 10 Dec 2009
Mertens, S. (2009)
Open Access: Unlimited Web Based Literature Searching
Dtsch Arztebl Int., 106(43): October 23, 2009, 710-712
Reviews the findings of most of the principal papers found in this
bibliography
Added 15 July 2009
Kousha, K. and Abdoli, M. (2009)
The
citation impact of Open Access Agricultural Research: a comparison between OA
and Non-OA publications (pdf 12pp)
World Library And Information Congress: 75th IFLA General Conference and
Council, 23-27 August 2009, Milan, Italy. Also in Online Information Review,
Vol. 34, No. 5, 2010, 772-785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684521011084618
Blogged summary, Open
Access enhances accessibility and citation impact, International
Association of Agricultural Information Specialists, 13 July 2009: "The results
showed that there is an obvious citation advantage for self-archived
agriculture articles as compared to non-OA articles." - "results indicate that
self-archived research articles published in the non-OA agriculture journals
could attract nearly two times more citations than their non-OA counterparts."
Added 15 Oct 2009
Lariviere, V. and Gingras, Y. (2009)
The impact factor's Matthew effect: a
natural experiment in bibliometrics
arXiv.org, arXiv:0908.3177v1 [physics.soc-ph], 21 Aug 2009, also in
Journal of the American Society For Information Science And Technology, 61 (2): 424-427, February 2010
Makes no mention of open access impact, but presents some interesting parallel
results on journal impact factors, in this case that publication in higher
impact journals can result in higher citations for a given paper.
Added 15 Oct 2009
Asif-ul Haque and Ginsparg, P. (2009)
Positional Effects on Citation and
Readership in arXiv
arXiv.org, arXiv:0907.4740v1 [cs.DL], 27 Jul 2009
in Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, Vol. 60 No. 11, 2203 - 2218, published online: 22 Jul 2009
Added 15 Oct 2009
Greyson, D., Morgan, S., Hanley, G. and Wahyuni, D. (2009)
Open access archiving and article
citations within health services and policy research
E-LIS, 14 Jul 2009, in Journal of the
Canadian Health Libraries Association (JCHLA) / Journal de l'Association des
bibliothèques de la santé du Canada (JABSC), 2009, vol. 30, no. 2,
51-58
From the abstract: This paper contributes to growing body of research exploring
the “OA advantage” by employing an article-level analysis comparing
citation rates for articles drawn from the same, purposively selected journals.
We used a two-stage analytic approach designed to test whether OA is associated
with (1) likelihood that an article is cited at all and (2) total number
citations that an article receives, conditional on being cited at least once.
Adjusting for potential confounders: number of authors, time since publication,
journal, and article subject, we found that OA archived articles were 60% more
likely to be cited at least once, and, once cited, were cited 29% more than
non-OA articles.This paper contributes to growing body of research exploring
the “OA advantage” by employing an article-level analysis comparing
citation rates for articles drawn from the same, purposively selected journals.
We used a two-stage analytic approach designed to test whether OA is associated
with (1) likelihood that an article is cited at all and (2) total number
citations that an article receives, conditional on being cited at least once.
Adjusting for potential confounders: number of authors, time since publication,
journal, and article subject, we found that OA archived articles were 60% more
likely to be cited at least once, and, once cited, were cited 29% more than
non-OA articles.
See also this poster (1pp) with
the same title, E-LIS, 14 Jul 2009, in Canadian Health Libraries Association/ Association
des bibliothèques de la santé du Canada (CHLA/ ABSC) Conference 2009,
Winnepeg, Manitoba (Canada), May 30 - June 3, 2009
Added 15 Oct 2009 Joint,
N. (2009)
The Antaeus column: does
the “open access” advantage exist? A librarian's perspective
Library Review, Vol. 58, No. 7, 2009, 477-481
From the summary: Findings – The 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.
Added 15
July 2009 Gentil-Beccot, A., Mele, S., Brooks, T. (2009)
Citing and Reading Behaviours in
High-Energy Physics. How a Community Stopped Worrying about Journals and
Learned to Love Repositories
arXiv.org, arXiv:0906.5418v1 [cs.DL], v1, 30 Jun 2009
From the abstract: The analysis of citation data demonstrates that free and
immediate online dissemination of preprints creates an immense citation
advantage in HEP, whereas publication in Open Access journals presents no
discernible advantage. In addition, the analysis of clickstreams in the leading
digital library of the field shows that HEP scientists seldom read journals,
preferring preprints instead.
Added 15 July 2009
Lansingh, V. C. and Carter, M. J. (2009)
Does
Open Access in Ophthalmology Affect How Articles are Subsequently Cited in
Research? (abstract only, subscription required)
Ophthalmology, 116(8):1425-1431, August 2009, available
online 22 June 2009 Scintilla
From the abstract: Examination of 480 articles in ophthalmology in the
experimental protocol and 415 articles in the control protocol. ... Four
subject areas were chosen to search the ophthalmology literature in the PubMed
database ... Searching started in December of 2003 and worked back in time to
the beginning of the year. The number of subsequent citations for equal numbers
of both open access (OA) and closed access (CA) (by subscription) articles was
quantified using the Scopus database and Google search engine. A control
protocol was also carried out to ascertain that the sampling method was not
systematically biased by matching 6 ophthalmology journals (3 OA, 3 CA) using
their impact factors, and employing the same search methodology to sample OA
and CA articles. The total number of citations was significantly higher for
open access articles compared to closed access articles for Scopus. However,
univariate general linear model (GLM) analysis showed that access was not a
significant factor that explained the citation data. Author number,
country/region of publication, subject area, language, and funding were the
variables that had the most effect and were statistically significant. Control
protocol results showed no significant difference between open and closed
access articles in regard to number of citations found by Scopus ... Unlike
other fields of science, open access thus far has not affected how
ophthalmology articles are cited in the literature.
Added 15 Oct 2009
Ostrowska, A. (2009)
Open Access Journals Quality
– How to Measure It?
INFORUM 2009: 15th Conference on Professional Information Resources,
Prague, May 27-29, 2009
Added 15 July 2009 Lin,
S.-K. (2009)
Full Open Access Journals
Have Increased Impact Factors (editorial)
Molecules, 2009, 14(6):2254-2255
Added 15 July 2009
Mukherjee, B. (2009)
The hyperlinking pattern
of open-access journals in library and information science: A cited citing
reference study
Library & Information Science
Research, 31 (2), April 2009, 113-125
This paper appears to be another take on this study
Added 29 April 2009
Tiwari, A. (2009)
Citation
Trend Line For PLoS Journals
Fisheye Perspective blog, April 25, 2009
A short illustrated blog on predicting the impact of a new journal. The author,
a bioscientist, evaluates two PLoS (OA) journals using Scopus Journal Analyzer.
Using the service's Trend Line and % Not Cited parameters the author predicts
that one, a new journal that doesn't yet have an official impact factor, will
soon rival the other, which does: "I am sure it's impact factor (or quality or
what ever you love) is going to be same or may be much more." Does not claim to
be statistically sound.
Added 29 April 2009
Gargouri, Y. and Harnad, S. (2009)
Logistic
regression of potential explanatory variables on citation counts
Preprint 11/04/2009
Logistic regression analysis on the correlation between citation counts (as
dependent variable) and a set of potential correlator/predictor variables.
Result: Published journal papers that are self-archived in institutional
repositories - in this study the repositories mandate deposit, obviating the
self-selection bias postulated by some to be a factor in self-archiving - can
achieve a citation advantage whether published in journals of high and low
impact factor (IF): "Overall, OA is correlated with a significant citation
advantage for all journal IF intervals".
Added 29 April 2009
Watson, A. B. (2009)
Comparing citations and downloads
for individual articles
Journal of Vision, April 3, 2009 Volume 9, Number 4, Editorial i, Pages
1-4
Measures the correlation between downloads and citations counts for articles in
Journal of Vision: "Download statistics provide a useful indicator, two
years in advance, of eventual citations."
Added 29 April 2009
Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A., Bettencourt, L.,
Chute, R., Rodriguez, M. A. and Balakireva, L. (2009)
Clickstream Data
Yields High-Resolution Maps of Science
PLoS ONE, 4(3): e4803, March 11, 2009 Scintilla
See also Nature news article on this paper, 9
March 2009: "A striking difference in the usage maps is that journals in the
humanities and social sciences figure much more prominently than in
citation-based maps. The difference partly arises because Bollen's study covers
a wider literature than the citation databases, which are biased towards
natural sciences journals. "By including practitioners we capture a much wider
sample of the scholarly community," adds Bollen. Usage maps are also more up to
date than citation ones because the inherent delay in publication means it
takes at least two years before a paper will start to gather citations in
sufficient numbers to be meaningful. Anthony van Raan argues that this more
current view may in fact represent today's "fashions", rather than trends that
will endure."
These findings are not based on OA journals or papers, but highlight the
emerging value of clicks, or hits, as possible contributory factors for online
impact metrics.
Added 15 July 2009
Bernius, S. and Hanauske, M. (2009)
Open
Access to Scientific Literature - Increasing Citations as an Incentive for
Authors to Make Their Publications Freely Accessible
Institute for Information Systems, Frankfurt University, publications 2009, in
42nd Hawaii International Conference on
System Sciences (HICSS '09), 5-8 Jan. 2009, pp. 1-9
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2009.335
Summary of results from also in
Bernius, S., Hanauske, M., König, W. and Dugall, B. (2009)
Open
Access Models and their Implications for the Players on the Scientific
Publishing Market (see section 1.2)
Economic Analysis and Policy Journal, Vol. 39, No. 1, March 2009
Added 29 April 2009
Åström, F. (2009)
Citation
patterns in open access journals
OpenAccess.se and the National Library of Sweden, February 25, 2009.
"Fewer analyses have investigated whether OA and non-OA journals in the same
research fields are citing the same literature; and to what extent this
reflects whether it is the same kind (and thus comparable) research that is
published in the two forms of scholarly publications. ... The citation
structures in the journals were analysed through MDS maps building on
co-citation analyses, as well as a more thorough comparison investigating
overlaps of cited authors and journals between the different journals. ... The
results of the analyses suggests that it is hard to draw any overall
conclusions on the matter of whether research published in OA journals is
likely to have a larger citation impact or not."
This conclusion is unsurprising since the study did not measure impact but
mapped citation patterns between journals. It is suggested that these mappings
could improve understanding when comparing the impact of OA and non-OA
journals.
Added 29 April 2009
Gaulé, P. (2009)
Access
to the scientific literature in India
CEMI Working Paper 2009-004, February 23, 2009, in In Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, Vol. 60, Issue 12, 2548 - 2553, published online: 8 Oct 2009
Abstract: This paper uses an evidence-based approach to assess the difficulties
faced by developing country scientists in accessing the scientific literature.
I compare backward citations patterns of Swiss and Indian scientists in a
database of 43'150 scientific papers published by scientists from either
country in 2007. Controlling for fields and quality with citing journal fixed
effects, I find that Indian scientists (1) have shorter references lists (2)
are more likely to cite articles from open access journals and (3) are less
likely to cite articles from expensive journals. The magnitude of the effects
is small which can be explained by informal file sharing practices among
scientists.
Added 26 February 2009
Evans, J. A. and Reimer, J. (2009)
Open Access and Global
Participation in Science (full text requires subscription; summary only)
Science, Vol. 323. No. 5917, 20
February 2009, 1025 Scintilla
From the paper: "The influence of OA is more modest than many have proposed, at c.8%
for recently published research, but our work provides clear support for
its ability to widen the global circle of those who can participate in science
and benefit from it."
Listen to Science podcast
interview with James Evans
See also articles on this paper:
Dolgin, E., Online access = more
citations, The Scientist, 19th
February 2009 (free registration required): "When the authors looked just at
poorer countries, however, they found that the influence of open access was
more than twice as strong. For example, in Bulgaria and Chile, researchers
cited nearly 20% more open access articles, and in Turkey and Brazil, the
number of citations rose by more than 25%. Free online availability "is not a
huge driver of science in the first world, but it shapes parts of science in
the rest of world," Evans told The
Scientist."
Xie, Y., Open,
electronic access to research crucial for global reach, ars technica, February 19, 2009
Added 26 February 2009
Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A. and Chute, R.
(2009)
A principal component analysis of 39
scientific impact measures
arXiv.org, arXiv:0902.2183v1 [cs.CY], 12 Feb. 2009, in PLoS ONE 4(6):
e6022, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0006022
Added 29 April 2009
Castillo, M. (2009)
Citations and Open
Access: Questionable Benefits
American Journal of Neuroradiology,
February 2009 Scintilla
An editorial.
(Ed. For the record, but I cannot
indicate what is questionable about OA, in this author's view, as I can't
access any part of this, not even an abstract.)
Added 26 February 2009
Norris, M. (2009)
The citation advantage of open access
articles
PhD thesis, Loughborough University Institutional Repository, 2009-01-15
Michael Norris has been named Highly Commended Award winner of the 2008
Emerald/EFMD Outstanding Doctoral Research Award in the Information Science
category for this doctoral thesis.
Two published papers (JASIST, ElPub) are based on this work.
Added 15 July 2009
Frandsen, T. F. (2009)
The effects of open
access on un-published documents: A case study of economics working papers
HAL: hprints-00352359, version 2, 12 January 2009, Journal of
Informetrics (2009) in press
Added 13 January 2009
O'Leary, D. E. (2008)
The relationship between
citations and number of downloads
Decision Support Systems, Vol. 45, No. 4, November 2008, 972-980,
available online 11 April 2008 (full text requires subscription; abstract only)
Broadly agrees with earlier findings (e.g. Brody
et al.) about the correlation - 'strong positive statistically
significant relationship' - between downloads and citations for digital papers,
notably for the most-downloaded, 'top' papers, in this case based on data for a
single, focussed source, the journal Decision Support Systems.
Added 29 April 2009
Mukherjee, B. (2008)
Do open-access journals in
library and information science have any scholarly impact? A bibliometric study
of selected open-access journals using Google Scholar (full text requires
subscription; abstract only)
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
Vol. 60, No. 3, March 2009, 581-594, published online: 16 Dec 2008
From the abstract: "Using 17 fully open-access journals published
uninterruptedly during 2000 to 2004 in the field of library and information
science, the present study investigates the impact of these open-access
journals in terms of quantity of articles published, subject distribution of
the articles, synchronous and diachronous impact factor, immediacy index, and
journals' and authors' self-citation."
The paper does not appear to reveal any comparative findings (OA vs non-OA).
Added 24 November 2008
Tenopir, C. and King, D. W. (2008)
Electronic Journals
and Changes in Scholarly Article Seeking and Reading Patterns
D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 14 No. 11/12,
November/December 2008
From the abstract: "Reading patterns and citation patterns differ, as faculty
read many more articles than they ultimately cite and read for many purposes in
addition to research and writing. The number of articles read has steadily
increased over the last three decades, so the actual numbers of articles found
by browsing has not decreased much, even though the percentage of readings
found by searching has increased. Readings from library-provided electronic
journals has increased substantially, while readings of older articles have
recently increased somewhat. Ironically, reading patterns have broadened with
electronic journals at the same time citing patterns have narrowed."
Added 24 November 2008
Gaule, P. and Maystre, N. (2008)
Getting
cited: does open access help?
Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, CEMI-WORKINGPAPER-2008-007, November
2008
also available from RePEc
http://ideas.repec.org/p/cmi/wpaper/cemi-workingpaper-2008-007.html
Explains the 'widely held belief' that free availability of scientific articles
increases the number of citations they receive thus: "Since open access is
relatively more attractive to authors of higher quality papers, regressing
citations on open access and other controls yields upward-biased estimates."
Findings are based on a sample of 4388 biology papers published between May
2004 and March 2006 by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
(PNAS). "Using an instrumental variable approach, we find no significant effect
of open access. Instead, self-selection of higher quality articles into open
access explains at least part of the observed open access citation advantage."
Note, OA in PNAS is itself self-selective by virtue of its OA charging
structure (i.e. payment is required for the published article to be OA, but not
if it is not OA).
Added 26
February 2009 Frandsen, T. F. (2008)
Attracted to open access
journals: a bibliometric author analysis in the field of biology
Hprints, Nordic arts and humanities e-print archive, HAL: hprints-00328270,
version 1, 10 October 2008
also in Journal of Documentation,
January 2009
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do?contentType=Article&contentId=1766883
Added 26 February 2009
Frandsen, T. F. (2008)
The integration of open
access journals in the scholarly communication system: Three science
fields
Hprints, Nordic arts and humanities e-print archive, HAL: hprints-00326285,
version 1, 2 October 2008
also in Information Processing &
Management, January 2009 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2008.06.001
From the abstract: "This study is an analysis of the citing behaviour in (open
access) journals within three science fields: biology, mathematics, and
pharmacy and pharmacology. The integration of OAJs in the scholarly
communication system varies considerably across fields. The implications for
bibliometric research are discussed."
Added 13 January 2009 De
Groote, S. L (2008)
Citation patterns of
online and print journals in the digital age
J. Med. Libr. Assoc., 2008 October; 96(4): 362-369 Scintilla
From the abstract: "Journals available in electronic format were cited more
frequently in publications from the campus whose library had a small print
collection, and the citation of journals available in both print and electronic
formats generally increased over the years studied."
Added 10 November 2008
Kousha, K. (2008)
Characteristics
of Open Access Web Citation Network: A Multidisciplinary Study
Proceedings of WIS 2008, Fourth International Conference on Webometrics,
Informetrics and Scientometrics & Ninth COLLNET Meeting (Berlin, 28
July - 1 August 2008), edited by H. Kretschmer and F. Havemann, October 2008
Added 10 November 2008, updated 29
April 2009 Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y. and Archambault, E. (2008)
The decline in the concentration of
citations, 1900-2007
arXiv.org, arXiv:0809.5250v1 [physics.soc-ph], 30 Sep 2008 and in Journal of
the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 60, No.
4, April 2009, 858-862, published online: 29 Jan 2009
From the abstract: "This paper challenges recent research (Evans, 2008) reporting that the concentration of cited
scientific literature increases with the online availability of articles and
journals. ... contrary to what was reported by Evans, the dispersion of
citations is actually increasing."
Added 25 September 2008
Davis, P. M.
Author-choice open access publishing
in the biological and medical literature: a citation analysis
arXiv.org, arXiv:0808.2428v1 [cs.DL], 18 Aug 2008, in
Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology,
Vol. 60, No. 1, January 2009, 3-8, published online: 25 Sep 2008
Scintilla
This study is a follow-up to the controlled trial of
open access publishing published in the BMJ: "According to a study
of 11 biological and medical journals that allow authors the choice of making
their articles freely available from the publisher's website, few show any
evidence of a citation advantage. For those that do, the effect appears to be
diminishing over time. ... (the paper) analyzed over eleven thousand articles
published in journals since 2003, sixteen hundred of these articles (15%)
adopting the author-choice open access model."
Added 25 September 2008
Clauson, K. A., Veronin, M. A., Khanfar, N. M. and Lou, J. Q.
Open-access
publishing for pharmacy-focused journals (full text requires subscription;
summary only)
American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, Vol. 65, No. 16, 1539-1544,
August 15, 2008 Scintilla
From the conclusion. A very small number of pharmacy-focused journals adhere to
the OA paradigm of access. However, journals that adopt some elements of the OA
model, chiefly free accessibility, may be more likely to be cited than
traditional journals. Pharmacy practitioners, educators, and researchers could
benefit from the advantages that OA offers but should understand its financial
disadvantages.
The same issue has an editorial by C. Richard Talley, Open-access publishing:
why not? accessible only to subscribers
Added 10 November 2008
Henneken, E. A., Kurtz, M. J., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C. S.,
Thompson, D., Bohlen, E. and Murray, S. S. (2008)
Use of Astronomical Literature - A
Report on Usage Patterns
arXiv.org, arXiv:0808.0103v1 [cs.DL], 1 Aug 2008
in Journal of Informetrics, Vol. 3, Issue 1, 1-90 (January 2009)
Added 4 August
2008 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
BMJ, 2008;337:a568, published 31 July 2008 Scintilla
Added 24 November 2008
Levitt, J. M. and Thelwall, M. (2008)
Patterns of annual
citation of highly cited articles and the prediction of their citation ranking:
A comparison across subjects (full text requires subscription; abstract
only)
Scientometrics, Vol. 77, No. 1 (2008)
41-46, published online: 24 July 2008
From the abstract: "For four of the six subjects, there is a correlation of
over 0.42 between the percentage of early citations and total citation ranking
but more highly ranked articles had a lower percentage of early citations.
Surprisingly, for highly cited articles in all six subjects the prediction of
citation ranking from the sum of citations during their first six years was
less accurate than prediction using the sum of the citations for only the fifth
and sixth year."
Open access is not a factor here. The highly-cited subject articles
investigated here date from 1969-71. For open access papers, Brody et al. (2005) revealed a correlation to
predict impact from much earlier data, i.e. download data for OA papers, before
any citations.
Added 28 July 2008
Evans, J. A. (2008)
Electronic Publication and
the Narrowing of Science and Scholarship (full text requires subscription;
abstract only)
Science, Vol. 321, No. 5887, 18 July
2008, 395-399 Scintilla
From the abstract: "Using a database of 34 million articles, their citations
(1945 to 2005), and online availability (1998 to 2005), I show that as more
journal issues came online, the articles referenced tended to be more recent,
fewer journals and articles were cited, and more of those citations were to
fewer journals and articles. The forced browsing of print archives may have
stretched scientists and scholars to anchor findings deeply into past and
present scholarship. Searching online is more efficient and following
hyperlinks quickly puts researchers in touch with prevailing opinion, but this
may accelerate consensus and narrow the range of findings and ideas built
upon."
This work was funded by the National Science Foundation. See the NSF press
release and video interview with James Evans
See also the news feature Great
minds think (too much) alike, The
Economist, July 17th 2008
Added 25 September 2008, updated 13
January 2009 Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., and Rowland, F.
The
citation advantage of open-access articles (full text requires
subscription; abstract only)
Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, Vol. 59, No. 12, 2008, 1963-1972,
published online: 9 July 2008
also available from Loughborough University Institutional Repository,
2009-01-12 http://hdl.handle.net/2134/4083
From the abstract: "Of a sample of 4,633 articles examined, 2,280 (49%) were OA
and had a mean citation count of 9.04 whereas the mean for (toll access) TA
articles was 5.76. There appears to be a clear citation advantage for those
articles that are OA as opposed to those that are TA. This advantage, however,
varies between disciplines, with sociology having the highest citation
advantage, but the lowest number of OA articles, from the sample taken, and
ecology having the highest individual citation count for OA articles, but the
smallest citation advantage. Tests of correlation or association between OA
status and a number of variables were generally found to weak or inconsistent.
The cause of this citation advantage has not been determined."
Added 28 July 2008
Eger, A. (2008)
Database
statistics applied to investigate the effects of electronic information
services on publication of academic research - a comparative study covering
Austria, Germany and Switzerland
GMS Medizin - Bibliothek - Information, June 26, 2008
Findings on increased usage of online full text articles leading to increased
publication, but says nothing on the effects of such access on citation
practices
Updated 25 September
2008 Norris, M., Oppenheim, C. and Rowland, F. (2008)
Open
Access Citation Rates and Developing Countries
12th International Conference on Electronic Publishing (ElPub 2008),
Toronto, June 25-27, 2008
"the admittedly small number of citations from authors in developing countries
do indeed seem to show a higher proportion of citations being given to OA
articles than is the case for citations from developed countries."
Added 25 September 2008
Sheikh Mohammad, S.
Research
impact of open access contributions across disciplines
12th International Conference on Electronic Publishing (ElPub 2008),
Toronto, June 25-27, 2008
Added 10
November 2008 Dietrich, J. P. (2008)
Disentangling visibility and
self-promotion bias in the arXiv: astro-ph positional citation effect
arXiv.org, arXiv:0805.0307v2 [astro-ph], 25 Jun 2008, in Publications of the
Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 120 (869): 801-804
Added 26 May 2008 Cheng,
W. H. and Ren, S. L. (2008)
Evolution
of open access publishing in Chinese scientific journals (full text
requires subscription; abstract only)
Learned Publishing, Vol. 21, No. 2, April 2008, 140-152
From the abstract: "Citation indicators of OA journals were found to be higher
than those of non-OA journals."
Added 28
July 2008 Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallières, F., Carr, L.,
Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y., Oppenheim, C., Hajjem, C. and Hilf, E. R. (2008)
The Access/Impact
Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access: An Update
Serials Review, Vol. 34, Issue 1,
March 2008, 36-40, available online 6 March 2008 Scintilla
also available from ECS EPrints, 06 Jun 2008
http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/15852/
Update to the paper published in Serials Review, 30(4), 2004
Added 26 May 2008
Lokker, C., McKibbon, K. A., McKinlay, R.J., Wilczynski, N. L. and Haynes, R.
B. (2008)
Prediction of
citation counts for clinical articles at two years using data available within
three weeks of publication: retrospective cohort study
BMJ, 2008;336:655-657 (22 March), published 21 February 2008 Scintilla
"Conclusion: Citation counts can be reliably predicted at two years using data
within three weeks of publication."
Added 11 February 2008
Chu, H. and Krichel, T. (2008)
Downloads vs. Citations:
Relationships, Contributing Factors and Beyond
E-LIS, 9 February 2008, in 11th Annual Meeting of the International Society
for Scientometrics and Informetrics, Madrid, 25-27 June 2007
From the abstract: "In a nutshell, an infrastructure that encourages
downloading at digital libraries would eventually lead to higher usage of their
resources."
Added 26 May 2008 Turk,
N. (2008)
Citation impact of Open
Access journals (full text requires subscription; summary only)
New Library World, Vol. 109, No. 1/2, January/February 2008, 65-74
Review of the main research about citation impact of Open Access journals,
focused on LIS journals.
Added 26 May 2008
Hardisty, D. J. and Haaga, D. A. F. (2008)
Diffusion
of Treatment Research: Does Open Access Matter? (pdf 39pp)
Center for the Decision Sciences, Columbia University, in Journal of
Clinical Psychology, Vol. 64(7), 1-19 (2008)
From the abstract: "In a pair of studies, mental health professionals were
given either no citation, a normal citation, a linked citation, or a free
access citation and were asked to find and read the cited article. After one
week, participants read a vignette on the same topic as the article and gave
recommendations for an intervention. In both studies, those given the free
access citation were more likely to read the article, yet only in one study did
free access increase the likelihood of making intervention recommendations
consistent with the article."
Added 11 February 2008
Kousha, K. and Thelwall, M. (2007)
The Web impact of open
access social science research (full-text requires subscription; otherwise
abstract only)
Library & Information Science Research, Volume 29, Issue 4, December
2007, 495-507, available online 15 October 2007
preprint http://www.scit.wlv.ac.uk/~cm1993/papers/OpenAccessSocialSciencePreprint.doc
(.doc 12pp)
From the abstract: "The results suggest that new types of citation information
and informal scholarly indictors could be extracted from the Web for the social
sciences."
Added 17
December 2007 Dietrich, J. P. (2007)
The Importance of Being First:
Position Dependent Citation Rates on arXiv:astro-ph
arXiv.org, arXiv:0712.1037v1 [astro-ph], 6 December 2007, in Publications of
the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 120 (864): 224-228, February 2008
From the abstract: "We study the dependence of citation counts of e-prints
published on the arXiv:astro-ph server on their position in the daily astro-ph
listing. ... cannot exclude that increased visibility at the top of the daily
listings contributes to higher citation counts as well."
Added 13 September 2007
Kurtz, M. J. and Henneken, E. A. (2007)
Open Access does not increase
citations for research articles from The Astrophysical Journal
arXiv.org, arXiv:0709.0896v1 [cs.DL], 6 September 2007
Abstract: We demonstrate conclusively that there is no "Open Access Advantage"
for papers from the Astrophysical Journal. The two to one citation advantage
enjoyed by papers deposited in the arXiv e-print server is due entirely to the
nature and timing of the deposited papers. This may have implications for other
disciplines.
Added 22 August 2007
Sotudeh, H. and Horri, A. (2007)
The citation performance of open
access journals: A disciplinary investigation of citation distribution
models (full-text subscribers only; no abstract)
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
Vol. 58, No. 13, 2007, 2145-2156, published online August 17, 2007
From the conclusion: "To sum up, the similarity of the science system across
OAJ and NOAJ boundaries has been confirmed. We see this as further evidence of
OA's widespread recognition by scientific communities. However, because the
magnitudes of the exponents found in this study are lower than what was
previously observed for the whole system, OA may currently perform at a
slightly lower level. According to the models used in this study, the citation
distributions between fields are strongly disproportionate in Life Sciences and
Engineering and Material Sciences, favoring larger fields in the former, but
smaller fields in the latter. However, the distributions tend to be rather
linear in the Natural Sciences."
Added 13 September 2007
Brody, T., Carr, L., Gingras, Y., Hajjem, C., Harnad, S. and Swan, A. (2007)
Incentivizing
the Open Access Research Web: Publication-Archiving, Data-Archiving and
Scientometrics
CTWatch Quarterly, Vol. 3, No. 3, August 2007
Added 22 August 2007
Lin, S.-K. (2007)
Editorial: Non-Open
Access and Its Adverse Impact on Molecules
Molecules, 12, 1436-1437, 16 July 2007
The point of this short editorial is clear, that the difference between the OA
and non-OA content in the journal Molecules is clearly reflected in
higher citations for the former. The context could be clearer, however. The
OA/non-OA history of the journal, especially prior to the period under review
(2005-6), is not elaborated and familiarity with the journal is assumed.
Added 22 August 2007
Taylor, D. (2007)
Looking
for a Link: Comparing Faculty Citations Pre and Post Big Deals
Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship, v.8 no.1
(Spring 2007)
Note. The Big Deal is where a library or consortium of libraries subscribes to
a larger package of a publisher's journals than they would have if they had
subscribed to journals individually. Big Deals are claimed to improve access
for an institution's users. "Pre Big Deal, the percentage of citations to
journals that are part of Big Deals but were previously not subscribed to was
an average of 2.6%. Post Big Deal this increased to an average of 6.1%." There
is no analysis or comment on how this result might be affected if it was
considering open access.
Added 22 May 2007 Craig,
I. D., Plume, A. M., McVeigh, M. E., Pringle, J. and Amin, M. (2007)
Do Open Access
Articles Have Greater Citation Impact? A critical review of the literature
Publishing Research Consortium, undated (announced 17 May 2007), Journal of
Informetrics, 1 (3): 239-248, July 2007
Added 10 May 2007 Tonta,
Y., Ünal, Y. and Al, U. (2007)
The Research Impact of
Open Access Journal Articles
E-LIS, 30 April 2007, also in Proceedings ELPUB 2007, the 11th International
Conference on Electronic Publishing, Vienna, 13-15 June 2007
Added 26 May 2008
Sharma, H. P. (2007)
Download plus citation
counts - a useful indicator to measure research impact (correspondence, pdf
1pp)
Current Science, 92 (7): 873-873, April 10, 2007
Added 10 May 2007
Piwowar, H. A., Day, R. S. and Fridsma, D. B. (2007)
Sharing
Detailed Research Data Is Associated with Increased Citation Rate
PLoS ONE, March 21, 2007
Principal Findings: "We examined the citation history of 85 cancer microarray
clinical trial publications with respect to the availability of their data. The
48% of trials with publicly available microarray data received 85% of the
aggregate citations. Publicly available data was significantly (p = 0.006)
associated with a 69% increase in citations, independently of journal impact
factor, date of publication, and author country of origin using linear
regression."
Added 8 March 2007
Bergstrom, T. C. and Lavaty, R. (2007)
How often do
economists self-archive?
eScholarship Repository, University of California, February 8, 2007
Added 26 May 2008
Chapman, S., Nguyen, T. N. and White, C. (2007)
Press-released
papers are more downloaded and cited (full text requires subscription;
extract only)
Tobacco Control, 16 (1): 71-71, February 2007
Added 22 January 2007
Harnad, S. and Hajjem, C. (2007)
The
Open Access Citation Advantage: Quality Advantage Or Quality Bias?
Author blog, Open Access Archivangelism, 21 January 2007
Does the OA Advantage (OAA) occur because authors are more likely to
self-selectively self-archive articles that are more likely to be cited
(self-selection "Quality Bias": QB), or because articles that are self-archived
are more likely to be cited ("Quality Advantage": QA)? Preliminary evidence
based on over 100,000 articles from multiple fields, comparing self-selected
self-archiving with mandated self-archiving to estimate the contributions of QB
and QA to the OAA shows: "Both factors contribute, and the contribution of QA
is greater." Includes comment on Moed, H. (2006), The effect
of 'Open Access' upon citation impact: An analysis of ArXiv's Condensed Matter
Section.
Added 17 January 2007
Harnad, S. (2007)
Citation
Advantage For OA Self-Archiving Is Independent of Journal Impact Factor,
Article Age, and Number of Co-Authors
Author blog, Open Access Archivangelism, 17 January 2007
Further comment on Eysenbach, G. (2006), Citation
Advantage of Open Access Articles: "The OA-self-archiving advantage remains
a robust, independent factor."
Added 17 January 2007
Brody, T. (2007)
Evaluating Research Impact
through Open Access to Scholarly Communication
PhD, Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, May 2006, in
ECS EPrints, 14 January 2007
Added 8 March 2007
McDonald, J. D. (2007)
Understanding Online
Journal Usage: A Statistical Analysis of Citation and Use
Journal of the American Society for Information Science &
Technology, 58(1): 39-50, January 1, 2007, also in Caltech Library System
Papers and Publications, 18 May 2006
Added 28 July 2008
Knowlton, S. A. (2007)
Continuing
use of print-only information by researchers
J Med Libr Assoc., 95(1): 83-88,
January 2007
"to study the question, "Are researchers still accessing and using material
issued only in print?," a group of journals was selected, and the impact factor
of each was tracked over the period 1993-2003.
Conclusion: the online status of a journal is not sufficient to override all
other considerations by researchers when they choose which material to cite."
Added 26 May 2008
Walters, G. D. (2006)
Predicting
subsequent citations to articles published in twelve crime-psychology journals:
Author impact versus journal impact (full text requires subscription;
abstract only)
Scientometrics, 69 (3): 499-510, December 2006
"These results suggest that author impact may be a more powerful predictor of
citations received by a journal article than the periodical in which the
article appears."
Added 23 November 2006
Harnad, S. (2006)
The
Self-Archiving Impact Advantage: Quality Advantage or Quality Bias?
Author blog, Open Access Archivangelism, 20 November 2006
Added 19 November
2006 Moed, H. F. (2006)
The effect of 'Open Access'
upon citation impact: An analysis of ArXiv's Condensed Matter Section
ArXiv, Computer Science, cs.DL/0611060, 14 November 2006, in Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 58, No. 13,
2007, 2145-2156, published online August 30, 2007 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.20663
(subscriber access only to full text)
"This article statistically analyses how the citation impact of articles
deposited in the Condensed Matter section of the preprint server ArXiv, and
subsequently published in a scientific journal, compares to that of articles in
the same journal that were not deposited in that archive. Its principal aim is
to further illustrate and roughly estimate the effect of two factors, 'early
view' and 'quality bias', upon differences in citation impact between these two
sets of papers ... The analysis provided evidence of a strong quality bias and
early view effect. Correcting for these effects, there is in a sample of 6
condensed matter physics journals studied in detail, no sign of a general 'open
access advantage' of papers deposited in ArXiv. The study does provide evidence
that ArXiv accelerates citation, due to the fact that that ArXiv makes papers
earlier available rather than that it makes papers freely available."
Added 13 September 2007
Bollen, J. and Van de Sompel, H. (2006)
Usage Impact Factor: the effects of
sample characteristics on usage-based impact metrics
arXiv.org > cs > arXiv:cs/0610154v2 [cs.DL], 26 October 2006, in
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
59 (1): 136-149, January 1, 2008
Updated 23 November 2006
Mayr, P. (2006)
Constructing experimental
indicators for Open Access documents
E-LIS, 05 October 2006, in Research Evaluation, special issue on 'Web
indicators for Innovation Systems', Vol. 15, No. 2, 1 August 2006, 127-132
Author preprint, http://www.ib.hu-berlin.de/~mayr/arbeiten/mayr_RE06.pdf
(pdf 9pp)
Added 19 November 2006
Henneken, E. A., Kurtz, M. J., Warner, S., Ginsparg, P., Eichhorn, G.,
Accomazzi, A., Grant, C. S., Thompson, D., Bohlen, E. and Murray, S. S. (2006)
E-prints and Journal Articles in
Astronomy: a Productive Co-existence
ArXiv, Computer Science, cs.DL/0609126, 22 September 2006, in Learned
Publishing, Vol. 20, No. 1, January 2007, 16-22
Added 28 July 2008
Jacsó, P. (2006)
Open
Access to Scholarly Full Text Documents (pdf 8pp)
Online Information Review, 30(5) 2006, 587-594
Added 19 November 2006
Zhang, Y. (2006)
The Effect of Open Access on
Citation Impact: A Comparison Study Based on Web Citation Analysis
(abstract only)
Libri, September 2006 (Full text for
subscribers)
Added 09 March 2010
Kurtz, M. and Brody, T. (2006)
The impact
loss to authors and
research
e-Prints Soton, 12 July 2006, in Jacobs, N. (ed.), Open Access: Key
strategic, technical and economic aspects (Oxford, UK:
Chandos
Publishing)
Added 03 August 2006
Metcalfe, T. S. (2006)
The Citation
Impact of Digital Preprint Archives for Solar Physics Papers
Solar Physics, Vol. 239, No. 1-2, December 2006, pp. 549-553
also in ArXiv, Astrophysics, astro-ph/0607079, 5 July 2006 http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0607079
"Most astronomers now use the arXiv.org server (astro-ph) to distribute
preprints, but the solar physics community has an independent archive hosted at
Montana State University. For several samples of solar physics papers published
in 2003, I quantify the boost in citation rates for preprints posted to each of
these servers. I show that papers on the MSU archive typically have citation
rates 1.7 times higher than the average of similar papers that are not posted
as preprints, while those posted to astro-ph get 2.6 times the average. A
comparable boost is found for papers published in conference proceedings,
suggesting that the higher citation rates are not the result of self-selection
of above-average papers."
Added 03 August 2006
Henneken, E. A., Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C.,
Thompson, D., and Murray, S. S. (2006)
Effect of E-printing
on Citation Rates in Astronomy and Physics
Journal of Electronic Publishing, Vol. 9, No. 2, Summer 2006, also in
ArXiv, Computer Science, cs.DL/0604061, v2, 5 June 2006 http://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0604061
"It has been observed that papers that initially appear as arXiv e-prints get
cited more than papers that do not. Using the citation statistics from the
NASA-Smithsonian Astrophysics Data System, we confirm the findings from other
studies, we examine the average citation rate to e-printed papers in the
Astrophysical Journal, and we show that for a number of major astronomy and
physics journals the most important papers are submitted to the arXiv e-print
repository first.
Added 03 August 2006
Kousha, K. and Thelwall, M. (2006)
Google Scholar Citations
and Google Web/URL Citations: A Multi-Discipline Exploratory Analysis
E-LIS, 05 June 2006, also in Proceedings International Workshop on
Webometrics, Informetrics and Scientometrics & Seventh COLLNET Meeting,
Nancy (France), May 2006
"we built a sample of 1,650 articles from 108 Open Access (OA) journals
published in 2001 in four science and four social science disciplines. We
recorded the number of citations to the sample articles using several methods
based upon the ISI Web of Science, Google Scholar and the Google search engine
(Web/URL citations). For each discipline, we found significant correlations
between ISI citations and both Google Scholar and Google Web/URL citations;
with similar results when using total or average citations, and when comparing
within and across (most) journals."
Added 16 May
2006 Eysenbach, G. (2006)
Citation Advantage
of Open Access Articles
PLoS Biology, Volume 4, Issue 5, May 2006 Scintilla
Further evidence for the OA citation advantage, although quite critical of
other studies with which its findings broadly agree. This example is based on a
small, single journal sample (PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences). Since PNAS offers authors the choice of paying to provide open
access to published papers and/or freely self-archiving, a 'Secondary analysis'
considers the relative impact of each type of OA, although the number of papers
involved is really too small to give this result the weight of the broader
findings. The paper is accompanied by two editorials, one in the publishing
journal, the other a self-published editorial by the author:
MacCallum, C. J. and Parthasarathy, H. (2006) Editorial: Citation
Advantage of Open Access Articles, PLoS Biology, Volume 4, Issue 5,
May 2006
Eysenbach, G. (2006) The Open Access
Advantage, Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2006;8(2):e8
Added 15 March 2006
Davis, P. M. and Fromerth, M. J. (2006)
Does the arXiv lead to higher
citations and reduced publisher downloads for mathematics articles? (pdf
12pp)
draft manuscript, ArXiv.org, cs.DL/0603056, 14 March 2006,
Scientometics, Vol. 71, No. 2. (May 2007)
Added 16 March 2006
Harnad, S. (2006)
OA Impact Advantage = EA + (AA)
+ (QB) + QA + (CA) + UA
Author eprint, 14 March 2006, ECS EPrints repository, School of Electronics and
Computer Science, University of Southampton
Added 03 August 2006
Mueller, P. S., Murali, N. S., Cha, S. S., Erwin, P. J. and Ghosh, A. K. (2006)
The effect
of online status on the impact factors of general internal medicine
journals
Netherlands Journal of Medicine, 64 (2): 39-44, February 2006
"becoming available online as FUTON (full text on the Net) is associated with a
significant increase in journal impact factor."
Added 30 December 2005
Hajjem, C., Harnad, S. and Gingras, Y. (2005)
Ten-Year
Cross-Disciplinary Comparison of the Growth of Open Access and How it Increases
Research Citation Impact (pdf 8pp)
IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin, Vol. 28 No. 4, December 2005
also Author eprint, 16 December 2005 http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/11688/
"In 2001, Lawrence found that articles in computer science that were openly
accessible (OA) on the Web were cited substantially more than those that were
not. We have since replicated this effect in physics. To further test its
cross-disciplinary generality, we used 1,307,038 articles published across 12
years (1992-2003) in 10 disciplines (Biology, Psychology, Sociology, Health,
Political Science, Economics, Education, Law, Business, Management). The
overall percentage of OA (relative to total OA + NOA) articles varies from
5%-16% (depending on discipline, year and country) and is slowly climbing
annually. Comparing OA and NOA articles in the same journal/year, OA articles
have consistently more citations, the advantage varying from 25%-250% by
discipline and year."
Added 30 December 2005
Hajjem, C., Gingras, Y., Brody, T., Carr, L. and Harnad, S. (2005)
Open Access to Research
Increases Citation Impact (.doc 12pp)
Author eprint, 16 December 2005, Technical Report, Institut des sciences
cognitives, Université du Québec à Montréal
Added 30 December 2005
Sahu, D.K., Gogtay, N.J. and Bavdekar, S.B. (2005)
Effect of open access on citation rates
for a small biomedical journal
Author eprint, December 1, 2005, in Fifth International Congress on Peer
Review and Biomedical Publication, Chicago, September 16-18, 2005
"We assessed the influence of OA on citations rates for a small,
multi-disciplinary journal which adopted OA without article submission or
article access fee. DESIGN The full text of articles published since 1990 were
made available online in 2001. Citations for these articles as retrieved using
Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar were divided into two groups - the
pre-OA period (1990-2000) and the post-OA period (2001-2004). CONCLUSIONS Open
access was associated with increase in the number of citations received by the
articles. It also decreased the lag time between publication and the first
citation. For smaller biomedical journals, OA could be one of the means for
improving visibility and thus citation rates."
Added 27 September 2005
Zhao, D. (2005)
Challenges of scholarly
publications on the Web to the evaluation of science -- A comparison of author
visibility on the Web and in print journals (abstract only)
Information Processing and Management, 41:6, 1403-1418, December 2005
Compares author visibility between the Web and print journals as revealed from
citation analysis based on a search for the term "XML" or "eXtensible Markup
Language" using NEC Research Institute's CiteSeer, the entire ISI Science
Citation Index (SCI) database, and journals indexed and classified in SCI as
representing computer science research. The main finding: "The author ranking
by number of citations that resulted from CiteSeer data is highly correlated
with that obtained from SCI." i.e. it's not comparing OA impact vs non-OA but
Web vs journal, and finds that authors, notably the top authors, are
self-archiving and publishing papers in both places.
Added 11 February 2008
Coats, A. J. S. (2005)
Top of the charts:
download versus citations in the International Journal of Cardiology
(full-text requires subscription; otherwise abstract only)
International Journal of Cardiology, Volume 105, Issue 2, 2 November
2005, 123-125, available online 7 October 2005
From the abstract: "We have recorded the 10 top cited articles over a 12-month
period and compared them to the 10 most popular articles being downloaded over
the same time period. The citation-based listing included basic and applied,
observational and interventional original research reports. For downloaded
articles, which have shown a dramatic increase for the International Journal of
Cardiology from 48,000 in 2002 to 120,000 in 2003 to 200,000 in 2004, the most
popular articles over the same period are very different and are dominated by
up-to-date reviews of either cutting-edge topics (such as the potential of stem
cells) or of the management of rare or unusual conditions. There is no overlap
between the two lists despite covering exactly the same 12-month period and
using measures of peer esteem. Perhaps the time has come to look at the usage
of articles rather than, or in addition to, their referencing."
Added 13 July 2005
Adams, J. (2005)
Early citation counts
correlate with accumulated impact (abstract only)
Scientometrics, 63 (3): 567-581, June 2005
Working towards earlier prediction of impact. This paper is not OA and has just
appeared but was written before Brody et al.
(2005) revealed a correlation to predict impact from even earlier data,
i.e. download data for OA papers, before any citations.
Added 26 September 2005
Moed, H. F. (2005)
Statistical
Relationships Between Downloads and Citations at the Level of Individual
Documents Within a Single Journal (abstract only)
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
56(10): 1088-1097, published online 31 May 2005
"Statistical relationships between downloads from ScienceDirect of documents in
Elsevier's electronic journal Tetrahedron Letters and citations to these
documents recorded in journals processed by the (ISI) for the Science Citation
Index (SCI) are examined. ... Findings suggest that initial downloads and
citations relate to distinct phases in the process of collecting and processing
relevant scientific information that eventually leads to the publication of a
journal article." Does not investigate open access sources. Notes the need for
caution in drawing conclusions on the frequency of paper downloads from formal
citation patterns, and vice versa.
Updated 05 October 2005
Vaughan, L. and Shaw, D. (2005)
Web citation data for impact
assessment: A comparison of four science disciplines (abstract only)
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,
Vol. 56, No. 10, 1075 - 1087, published online 27 May 2005
appears to be an expansion of Can Web Citations
be a Measure of Impact? An Investigation of Journals in the Life Sciences
(abstract only)
ASIST 2004: Proceedings of the 67th ASIS&T Annual Meeting, Vol. 41
(Medford, USA: Information Today), pp. 516-526
Brody, T., Harnad, S. and Carr, L. (2005)
Earlier Web Usage
Statistics as Predictors of Later Citation Impact
Author eprint, 18 May 2005, University of Southampton, School of Electronics
and Computer Science, Journal of the American Association for Information
Science and Technology, Volume 57, Issue 8, 2006, 1060-1072 (abstract)
Added 19 May 2005 Wren,
J. D. (2005)
Open access
and openly accessible: a study of scientific publications shared via the
internet
BMJ, 330:1128, 12 April 2005 Scintilla
Added 13 April 2005
Belew, R. (2005)
Scientific impact quantity and
quality: Analysis of two sources of bibliographic data (pdf 12pp)
Arxiv.org, cs.IR/0504036, 11 April 2005
Added 28 July 2008 De
Groote, S. L., Shultz, M. and Doranski, M. (2005)
Online
journals' impact on the citation patterns of medical faculty J Med Libr Assoc., 93 (2): 223-228, April
2005
From the conclusion: "It is possible that electronic access to information
(i.e., online databases) has had a positive impact on the number of articles
faculty will cite. Results of this study suggest, at this point, that faculty
are still accessing the print-only collection, at least for research purposes,
and are therefore not sacrificing quality for convenience."
Added 03 August 2006
Metcalfe, T. S. (2005)
The Rise and Citation Impact of
astro-ph in Major Journals
ArXiv, Astrophysics, astro-ph/0503519, 23 March 2005
"I describe a simple method to determine the adoption rate and citation impact
of astro-ph over time for any journal using NASA's Astrophysics Data System
(ADS). I use the ADS to document the rise in the adoption of astro-ph for three
major astronomy journals, and to conduct a broad survey of the citation impact
of astro-ph in 13 different journals. I find that the factor of two boost in
citations for astro-ph papers is a common feature across most of the major
astronomy journals."
Updated 13 April 2005
Ongoing studies Hajjem, C. (2004-05)
Cover page for the
range of studies highlighted below, Laboratoire de recherche en Sciences
Cognitives, UQAM. (Text in French but graphs "self-explanatory"; see this comment
for elaboration)
Updated 26 September
2005 Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Smith, J. and Luce, R. (2005)
Toward alternative metrics of
journal impact: A comparison of download and citation data (pdf 34pp)
Arxiv.org, cs.DL/0503007, 03 March 2005, in Information Processing and
Management, 41(6): 1419-1440, December 2005
Added 5 January 2005
Ongoing study Brody, T., et al.
Citation Impact of Open Access
Articles vs. Articles Available Only Through Subscription ("Toll-Access")
with downloadable graphs of '% Articles OA' and '% OA Advantage' by discipline
and sub-discipline
Updated 31 January 2005
Schwarz, G. and Kennicutt Jr., R. C. (2004)
Demographic and Citation Trends
in Astrophysical Journal Papers and Preprints (pdf 14pp)
Arxiv.org, astro-ph/0411275, 10 November 2004, Bulletin of the American
Astronomical Society, Vol. 36, 1654-1663
See also a note from AAS Pub Board meeting, Tucson, November 3-4 2003
"Greg Schwarz (from the ApJ editorial office) reported some work he's doing
tracking citation rates of papers published in the ApJ based on whether they
were posted on astro-ph or not: ApJ papers that were also on astro-ph have a
citation rate that is _twice_ that of papers not on the preprint server"
http://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0311&L=pamnet&D=1&O=D&P=1632
Added 03 August 2006
Havemann, F. (2004)
Eprints in der
wissenschaftlichen kommunikation (Eprints in scientific communication)
Author eprint, 26 October 2004, presented at the Institute of Library Science,
Humboldt University, Berlin, June 1, 2004
"the use of eprints can significantly accelerate the scientific communication.
This was demonstrated by me with a small sample of articles in theoretical High
Energy Physics published 1998 and 1999 in Physical Review D. Typically the
eprints in this sample are available eight months before the printed issue is
published. Three quarters of them are cited in eprints authored by other
researchers before the journal issue appears (among them all highly cited
eprints)."
Brody, T. (2004)
Citation Analysis in the Open
Access World
Author eprint, October 4, 2004, in Interactive Media International
Added 9 November 2004
McVeigh, M. E. (2004)
Open
Access Journals in the ISI Citation Databases: Analysis of Impact Factors and
Citation Patterns
Thomson Scientific, October 2004
Added 29
September 2004 Antelman, K. (2004)
Do
Open-Access Articles Have a Greater Research Impact?
College and Research Libraries, 65(5):372-382, September 2004
also Author eprint, E-LIS, 29 September 2004, http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00002309/
Added 17 May
2010 Comment on this paper:
Davis, P., Do Open-Access Articles Really have a Greater Research Impact? Letter
to the editor, College & Research Libraries, Vol.
67, No. 2, March 2006: "The study of citation behavior is complex and
involves multiple confounding, and interacting variables.
Methodologically, it is very difficult to distinguish whether Open
Access is an explanatory cause of increased access, or whether it is
merely an artifact of other causal explanations such as article
duplication or self-promotion. Do Open Access articles really have a
greater research impact, as Antelman suggests? Yes, but Open Access may
not be the cause."
Author's response: "While I intentionally
phrased my conclusion as an association, rather than a causation
(open-access articles have a greater research impact than articles
that are not freely available), there clearly is an implied causation
and I should have been more explicit that the data do not support that.
The article was very much a product of its time, however, when there
was little solid data that there even was an association between open
access and increased citations. ... Since I did the study in
C&RL,
I have collected additional data that indicate that quality bias is
real and significant, at least in the social sciences."
Davis, P.: In 2005, Wren conducted a massive automated study of the availability of
author reprints on the public web. He reported two main conclusions:
that articles available freely online yielded more citations; and that
there was a high degree of association between high-prestige journals
and frequency of author reprints. Journals with high Impact Factors
(New England Journal of Medicine, Nature, Science, and Cell) were
associated with a higher degree of author republishing than
lower-impact journals. Wren went further to discuss possible causes of
this difference and briefly discusses a trophy effect the desire for
researchers to display their accomplishments which would explain why
high impact publications are more common online. This is consistent
with Antelmans findings, that the greatest impact of open access is
with the most-cited articles.
Antelman, K.: Wren's study needs to be looked at carefully, however, because he did not look
at the source of the open access copies he found, so the extent of
trophy effect self-archiving cannot be assessed from his data. I also
collected some data on the source of open access copies from three of
the high-impact journals he looked atNEJM, Science and Natureand,
while many articles from those journals are freely available online,
many or most are not posted by the authors themselves, in particular,
NEJM where only 12% of the open access articles were posted by authors
or their institutions."
Updated 5
January 2005 Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L.,
Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y., Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H. and Hilf, E.
(2004)
The Access/Impact Problem
and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access
Author eprint, 15 September 2004, in Serials Review, Vol. 30, No. 4,
310-314 (free access to published
version during 2005)
Shorter version: The green and
the gold roads to Open Access
Nature, Web Focus: access to the literature, May 17, 2004
Updated 26
September 2005 Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant,
C. S., Demleitner, M., Murray, S. S. (2004b)
The Effect
of Use and Access on Citations
Author eprint, September 2004, in Information Processing and Management,
41 (6): 1395-1402, December 2005
Perneger, T. V. (2004)
Relation
between online "hit counts" and subsequent citations: prospective study of
research papers in the BMJ
BMJ, 329:546-547, 4 September 2004 Scintilla
Prakasan, E. R. and Kalyane, V. L. (2004)
Citation analysis of LANL
High-Energy Physics E-Prints through Science Citation Index (1991-2002)
Author eprint, E-LIS, 26 August 2004
Added 13 April 2005
Murali, N. S., Murali, H. R., Auethavekiat, P., Erwin, P. J., Mandrekar, J. N.,
Manek, N. J. and Ghosh, A. K. (2004)
Impact
of FUTON and NAA Bias on Visibility of Research
Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Vol. 79, No. 8, 1001-1006, August 2004
Notes and comment: FUTON = full text on the Net; NAA = no abstract available
This is not an article on how Open Access increases impact but on how *Online*
Access increases impact. The effects are related, but one is a licensing
effect, not an OA effect.
Added 10 May 2007 Davis,
P. M. (2004)
For Electronic
Journals, Total Downloads Can Predict Number of Users
portal: Libraries and the Academy, Vol. 4, No. 3, July 2004, 379-392
Harnad, S. and Brody, T. (2004a)
Comparing
the Impact of Open Access (OA) vs. Non-OA Articles in the Same Journals
D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 10 No. 6, June 2004
Replicates the Lawrence effect -- OA increases impact -- in physics.
Pringle, J. (2004)
Do Open
Access Journals have Impact?
Nature, Web Focus: access to the literature, May 7, 2004
Testa, J. and McVeigh, M. E. (2004)
The
Impact of Open Access Journals: A Citation Study from Thomson ISI (pdf
17pp)
Author eprint, 14 April 2004
Kurtz, M. J. (2004)
Restrictive access
policies cut readership of electronic research journal articles by a factor of
two (pdf 2pp)
Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA
Poster presentation at National Policies on Open Access (OA) Provision for
University Research Output: an International meeting, Southampton, 19
February 2004
Brody, T., Stamerjohanns, H., Harnad, S., Gingras, Y.
and Oppenheim, C. (2004)
The Effect of
Open Access on Citation Impact (pdf 1pp)
Poster presentation at National Policies on Open Access (OA) Provision for
University Research Output: an International meeting, Southampton, 19
February 2004
Updated 5
January 2005 Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C.
S., Demleitner, M. and Murray, S. S. (2004a)
Worldwide
Use and Impact of the Nasa Astrophysics Data System Digital Library
Author eprint, January 28, 2004, in Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, Vol. 56, No. 1, 36-45, published online
20 September 2004
Hitchcock, S., Brody, T., Gutteridge, C., Carr, L. and Harnad, S. (2003b)
The Impact of
OAI-based Search on Access to Research Journal Papers
Author eprint, 15 September 2003, in Serials, Vol. 16, No. 3, November
2003, 255-260
Hitchcock, S., Woukeu, A., Brody, T., Carr, L.,
Hall, W. and Harnad, S. (2003a)
Evaluating
Citebase, an open access Web-based citation-ranked search and impact discovery
service
Technical Report ECSTR-IAM03-005, School of Electronics and Computer Science,
University of Southampton, July 2003
Added 28 October 2004
Bollen, J., Vemulapalli, S. S., Xu, W. and Luce, R. (2003)
Usage Analysis
for the Identification of Research Trends in Digital Libraries
D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 9, No. 5, May 2003
Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C., Demleitner, M.,
Murray, S. S., Martimbeau, N. and Elwell, B. (2003b)
The NASA
Astrophysics Data System: Sociology, Bibliometrics, and Impact
Author eprint, March 2003, Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, submitted for publication
Updated 23
February 2005 Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant,
C. S., Demleitner, M., Murray, S. S., Martimbeau, N. and Elwell, B. (2003a)
The
Bibliometric Properties of Article Readership Information
Author eprint, March 2003, in Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, 56 (2): 111-128, January 15, 2005
Added 17 December 2007
Drenth, J. P. H. (2003)
More reprint requests, more
citations? (subscriber access to full text)
Scientometrics, Vol. 56, No. 2, February 2003, 283-286, revised version
published online August 2006
From the abstract: "This study aims to correlate the number of reprint requests
from a 10-year-sample of articles with the number of citations. ... Articles
that received most reprint requests are cited more often."
Darmoni, S. J., et al. (2002)
Reading
factor: a new bibliometric criterion for managing digital libraries
Journal of the Medical Library Association, Vol. 90, No. 3, July 2002
Kurtz, M. J., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C. S., Thompson, D. M.,
Bohlen, E. H. and Murray, S. S. (2002)
The NASA
Astrophysics Data System: Obsolescence of Reads and Cites (pdf 8pp)
Library and Information Services in Astronomy IV, edited by B. Corbin,
E. Bryson, and M. Wolf, July 2002
Bollen, J. and Luce, R. (2002)
Evaluation of
Digital Library Impact and User Communities by Analysis of Usage Patterns
D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 8, No. 6, June 2002
Lawrence, S. (2001)
Free
online availability substantially increases a paper's impact
Nature, 31 May 2001
see also Online or
invisible, an extended version of the Nature article self-archived
by the author
The first major findings on the impact effect documented in this bibliography,
it remains the most cited paper in the bibliography. Note, its results concern
online access rather than open access. At that time the focus was on the
transition from print to electronic publication, with Lawrence quantifying the
improved access that resulted based on a sample of c.120k computer science
papers from 1,494 'venues'.
Added 04 October 2005
Anderson, K., Sack, J., Krauss, L. and O'Keefe, L. (2001)
Publishing
Online-Only Peer-Reviewed Biomedical Literature: Three Years of Citation,
Author Perception, and Usage Experience
Journal of Electronic Publishing, Vol. 6, No. 3, March 2001
One of the first studies of the citation effect of online against
offline publication, rather than of open access against non-OA. Provides
data for one journal and a small number of articles over a three year period
year. This paper was added to the bibliography following this correspondence:
Updated 04 October 2005
Odlyzko, A. M. (2000)
The rapid evolution of
scholarly communication
PEAK 2000: Economics and Usage of Digital Library Collections
conference, Ann Arbor, MI, March 2000.
Also in Learned Publishing, 15(1), 7-19, January 2002 here.
Author eprint http://www.dtc.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/rapid.evolution.pdf
Notes the growing usage of information in electronic form (c.f. print forms)
and of journal papers from non-journal sites (e.g. eprints), and presents
evidence that usage increases when access is more convenient
Youngen, G. K. (1998)
Citation
Patterns to Electronic Preprints in the Astronomy and Astrophysics
Literature
Library and Information Services in Astronomy III, ASP Conference
Series, Vol. 153, 1998
see also
Citation
Patterns to Traditional and Electronic Preprints in the Published
Literature
College & Research Libraries, September 1998
Youngen, G. (1998)
Citation Patterns
Of The Physics Preprint Literature With Special Emphasis On The Preprints
Available Electronically
Author eprint, UIUC Physics and Astronomy library, c. 5 November 1998,
presented at ACRL/STS on 6/29/97
Correlation Generator http://citebase.eprints.org/analysis/correlation.phpCiteseer "Scientific literature digital library" http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/ User service, free
Generates a graph (or table) of the correlation between citation impact and usage impact from the Citebase database
see Brody, T. and Harnad, S. 2005 (in prep.)
Elsevier Scopus Bibliographic database covering 13,450 peer-reviewed
titles http://www.scopus.com/ User service
see
Added 28 July 2008 Jacsó,
P. (2007) Scopus
(2008 Winter Release), Gale, Reference Reviews, Péter's Digital Reference
Shelf, November 2007
Added 15 March 2006
Burnham, J. F. (2006) Scopus
database: a review, Biomedical Digital Libraries, 3:1, 8 March 2006
Added 15 March 2006 Dess,
H. M. (2006) Scopus, Issues in
Science and Technology Librarianship, Winter 2006
Added 15 May 2006 Quint, B.
(2006) Elsevier’s Scopus
Introduces Citation Tracker: Challenge to Thomson ISI’s Web of Science?,
Newsbreaks, January 23, 2006
Added 13 September 2007
Goodman, D. and Deis, L. (2006) Update
on Scopus, The Charleston Advisor, Vol. 7, No. 3, January 2006,
42-43
Jacsó, P. (2004) Scopus,
Thomson Gale, September 2004
see also Comparative reviews
Google Scholar Find articles from academic publishers, preprint
repositories and universities, as well as scholarly articles across the web
(presents citations as separate results) http://scholar.google.com/ User service, free
see
Added 28 July 2008 Harzing, A. W.K., van der Wal, R. (2008) Google Scholar as a
new source for citation analysis, Ethics
in Science and Environmental Politics, Vol. 8, No. 1, June 03, 2008,
61-73
Added 28 July 2008 Jacsó,
P. (2008) The
pros and cons of computing the h-index using Google Scholar. Online Information Review, 32(3) 2008,
437-452
Added 26 May 2008 Meier, J.
J. and Conkling, T. W. (2008) Google Scholar's Coverage
of the Engineering Literature: An Empirical Study, Journal of Academic
Librarianship, Vol. 34, No. 3, May 2008, 196-201 (full text requires
subscription; abstract only)
Added 28 July 2008 Jacsó,
P. (2008) Google
Scholar, Online, Mar/Apr 2008,
53-54
Added 13 September 2007
Harzing, A.-W. (2007) Reflections
on Google Scholar, Harzing.com, fifth version, 6 September 2007
about the citation analysis software Publish or Perish and its relation with
Google Scholar
Added 13 September 2007
Quint, B. (2007) Changes at
Google Scholar: A Conversation With Anurag Acharya, NewsBreaks,
August 27, 2007
rare public interview with the low-profile 'designer and missionary' behind
Google Scholar
Added 22 August 2007 Mayr,
P. and Walter, A.-K. (2007) An
exploratory study of Google Scholar, arXiv.org > cs >
arXiv:0707.3575v1 [cs.DL], July 24, 2007, in Online Information Review,
Vol. 31, No. 6 (2007), 814-830. Author preprint also available from http://www.ib.hu-berlin.de/~mayr/arbeiten/OIR-Mayr-Walter-2007.pdf
Added 10 May 2007 Robinson,
M. L. and Wusteman, J. (2007) Putting Google
Scholar to the test: a preliminary study, author eprint, also in
Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems, Vol. 41, Issue 1,
February 2007, 71-80
Added 15 May 2006 Sadeh, T.
(2006) Google Scholar
Versus Metasearch Systems, HEP Libraries Webzine, issue 12, March
2006
"thoughtful and informative ... altogether the best overview of Google Scholar,
other large federated search systems such as Scirus, and library-based
metasearch tools I've seen." Reviewed by Tennant, R., Current Cites,
January 2006 issue
Added 15 March 2006
Burright, M. (2006) Google Scholar -- Science
& Technology, Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship,
Winter 2006
Added 28 February 2006
Noruzi, A. (2005) Google
Scholar: the new generation of citation indexes (pdf 11pp), E-LIS, 11
February 2006, in LIBRI 55(4): 170-180
Jacsó, P., (2005) Google
Scholar and The Scientist, commenting on his interview in Perkel, J., The Future of Citation
Analysis (abstract only), The Scientist, October 24, 2005
Jacsó, P. (2005) Google
Scholar (Redux), Thomson Gale, June 2005
Myhill, M. (2005) Google Scholar,
Charleston Advisor, Vol. 6, No. 4, April 2005
Added 22 August 2007
Giustini, D. and Barsky, E. (2005) A look at Google
Scholar, PubMed, and Scirus: comparisons and recommendations, Journal of
the Canadian Health Libraries Association/Journal de l'Association des
bibliothèques de la santé du Canada (JCHLA / JABSC) 26: 85-89 (2005) (pdf
5pp)
Jacsó, P. (2004) Google
Scholar Beta, Thomson Gale, December 2004
see also Comparative reviews
ISI Web of Science Cited reference searching of 8,700 high impact
research journals http://www.isinet.com/products/citation/wos/
User service
see
Added 28 July 2008 Jacsó,
P. (2007) Web of
Science, Gale, Reference Reviews, Péter's Digital Reference Shelf, January
2007
Jacsó, P. (2004) Web of
Science Citation Indexes, Thomson Gale, August 2004
see also Comparative reviews
Added 11 December 2006 Rexa.Info Covers the computer science research literature. Rexa is "a sibling to CiteSeer, Google Scholar, Academic.live.com, the ACM Portal. It's chief enhancement is that Rexa knows about more first-class, de-duplicated, cross-referenced object types: not only papers and their citation links, but also people, grants, topics" http://rexa.info/ User service, free (login required)
Added 13 April 2006
Windows Live Search Academic Beta version. Indexes content related to
computer science, physics, electrical engineering, and related subject areas,
with more than 6 million records from approximately 4300 journals, 2000
conferences and ArXiv.org. In collaboration with Citeseer http://academic.live.com/ User service, free
see
Added 26 May 2008 Nadella,
S. (2008) Book
search winding down, Live Search, The official blog of the Live Search team
at Microsoft, May 23, 2008
"Live Search Books and Live Search Academic projects ... will be taken down
next week. Books and scholarly publications will continue to be integrated into
our Search results, but not through separate indexes."
Added 28 July 2008 Jacsó,
P. (2008) Live
Search Academic, Gale, Reference Reviews, Péter's Digital Reference Shelf,
April 2008
Added 28 July 2008 Jacsó,
P. (2006) Windows
Live Academic, Online, Sep/Oct
2006, 59-60
Added 15 May 2006 Quint, B.
(2006) Windows
Live Academic Search: The Details, Newsbreaks, April 17, 2006
Added 13 April 2006
Sherman, C. (2006) Microsoft
Launches Windows Live Academic Search, SearchEngineWatch.com, April 12,
2006
Added 15 May 2006
Citations in Economics not intended for direct user access; instead is
made available to RePEc services such as Socionet, EconPapers and IDEAS. Uses
Citeseer software http://citec.repec.org/
Data service, free
Rank working papers series and journals in Economics http://citec.repec.org/s/
see
Barrueco Cruz, J. M. and Krichel, T. (2004) Building an autonomous
citation index for grey literature: the economics working papers case (pdf
12pp), E-LIS, 01 February 2005, also in Proceedings GL6: Sixth International
Conference on Grey Literature, New York, December 2004
CrossRef Forward linking service tool allows CrossRef member
publishers to display cited-by links in their primary content, Data service
CrossRef and
Atypon announce forward linking service (press release) June 8, 2004
Institute of Physics becomes first journals publisher to implement 'cited-by'
links using CrossRef's Forward Linking service: Time travel with IOP journals (IOP press
release) 14 March, 2005
Forthcoming ISI Web Citation Index User
service
see
Added 15 May 2006 Martello,
A. (2006) Selection
of Content for the Web Citation Index: Institutional Repositories and
Subject-Specific Archives, Thomson.com, undated
Pringle, J. (2005) Partnering
helps institutional repositories thrive, KnowledgeLink Newsletter,
February 2005
Citeseer's
replacement? List server mailing, 18 March 2004
Quint, B. (2004) Thomson ISI
to Track Web-Based Scholarship with NEC’s CiteSeer, Information Today
Newsbreaks, March 1, 2004
Added 13 January 2009
Norris, M., Oppenheim, C. and Rowland, F. (2008)
Finding open access
articles using Google, Google Scholar, OAIster and OpenDOAR
Online Information Review, Vol. 32, No. 6, 2008, 709-715
also available from Loughborough University Institutional Repository,
2009-01-12 http://hdl.handle.net/2134/4084
From the abstract: "Google, Google Scholar, OAIster and OpenDOAR were used to
try to locate OA versions of peer reviewed journal articles drawn from three
subjects (ecology, economics, and sociology). The paper shows the relative
effectiveness of the search tools in these three subjects. The results indicate
that those wanting to find OA articles in these subjects, for the moment at
least, should use the general search engines Google and Google Scholar first
rather than OpenDOAR or OAIster."
Added 28 July 2008
Jacsó, P. (2008)
The
Plausibility of Computing the H-index of Scholarly Productivity and Impact
Using Reference Enhanced Databases
Online Information Review, 32(2) 2008,
266-283
"aims to provide a general overview of the three largest,
cited-reference-enhanced, multidisciplinary databases (Google Scholar, Scopus,
and Web of Science) for determining the h-index. The practical aspects of
determining the h-index also need scrutiny, because some content and software
characteristics of reference-enhanced databases can strongly influence the
h-index values."
Added 26 May 2008 Meho, L. I. and Rogers, Y. (2008) Citation Counting, Citation Ranking, and h-Index of Human-Computer Interaction Researchers: A Comparison between Scopus and Web of Science, E-LIS, 10 March 2008, in Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59 (11): 1711-1726, September 2008
Added 26 May 2008 Kloda, L. A. (2007) Use Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science for Comprehensive Citation Tracking, Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 2(3): 87-90, 2007, also in E-LIS, 21 September 2007 http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00011437/
Added 26 May 2008 Schroeder, R. (2007) Pointing Users Toward Citation Searching: Using Google Scholar and Web of Science, portal: Libraries and the Academy, Vol. 7, No. 2, April 2007, 243-248 (full text requires subscription)
Added 13 September 2007 Goodman, D. and Deis, L. (2007) Update on Scopus and Web of Science, The Charleston Advisor, Vol. 8, No. 3, January 2007, 15-18
Added 10 May 2007 Meho, L. I. and Yang, K. (2006) A New Era in Citation and Bibliometric Analyses: Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, arXiv.org, Computer Science, cs/0612132, 23 Dec 2006, published as Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of science versus scopus and google scholar, in Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 58, No. 13, 2007, 2105-2125
Added 11 December 2006 Fingerman, S. (2006) Web of Science and Scopus: Current Features and Capabilities, Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, Fall, 2006
Added 17 January 2007
Neuhaus, C. and Daniel, H.-D. (2006) Data
sources for performing citation analysis: An overview, ETH E-Collection,
June 30, 2006, Journal of Documentation, accepted for publication
Reports the limitations of Thomson Scientific’s citation indexes and reviews
the characteristics of the citation-enhanced databases Chemical Abstracts,
Google Scholar and Scopus.
Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J. and Wang, L. (2006) Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science, Biomedical Digital Libraries, June 29, 2006
Added 8 March 2007
Bosman, J., van Mourik, I., Rasch, M., Sieverts, E. and Verhoeff, H. (2006) Scopus
reviewed and compared, Igitur repository, Utrecht University, June 2006
The coverage and functionality of the citation database Scopus, including
comparisons with Web of Science and Google Scholar
Wenzel, E. (2006) Google
Scholar beta, ZDNet, May 2, 2006
Brief comparison of Google Scholar and Microsoft Live Academic Search
Bailey, C. W. Jr (2006) A
Simple Search Hit Comparison for Google Scholar, OAIster, and Windows Live
Academic Search, Digital Koans, author blog, April 13, 2006
A simple but revealing experiment: "It should be clear that a sample of one
search term is a very crude measure".
Pauly, D. and Stergiou, K. I. (2005) Equivalence of results from two citation analyses: Thomson ISI’s Citation Index and Google’s Scholar service (pdf 3pp), Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 22 December 2005, 33-35
Added 23 November 2006 Jacso, P. (2005) Comparison and analysis of the citedness scores in Web of Science and Google Scholar (pdf 10pp), Digital Libraries: Implementing Strategies and Sharing Experiences, Lecture Notes In Computer Science, 3815: 360-369, 2005, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries, ICADL 2005, Bangkok, Thailand, December 12-15, 2005
Roth, D. L. (2005) The emergence of competitors to the Science Citation Index and the Web of Science (pdf 6pp), Current Science Online, Vol. 89, No. 9, 10 November 2005
Jacsó, P. (2005) As we may search – Comparison of major features of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases (pdf 11pp), Current Science Online, Vol. 89, No. 9, 10 November 2005
Bauer, K. and Bakkalbasi, N. (2005) An Examination
of Citation Counts in a New Scholarly Communication Environment, D-Lib
Magazine, 11(9), September 2005.
Compares citation counts provided by Web of Science, Scopus, and Google
Scholar.
LaGuardia, C. (2005) Scopus vs. Web of Science, Library Journal, 130(1); 40, 42, January 15, 2005
Deis, L. F. and Goodman, D. (2005) Web of Science (2004 version) and Scopus, Charleston Advisor, Vol. 6, No. 3, January 2005
"Research impact translates into money: employment, salary, tenure money, as well as research-funding money: (1) RAE rank correlates with substantial top-sliced funding, (2) it also correlates highly (0.91) with citation counts, and (3) self-archiving increases citation counts by 50-250+%. Do you really think that any researcher who is *aware* of those three correlations is being rational if he doesn't self-archive?" Stevan Harnad
Added 6 September 2010
Li, J., Sanderson, M., Willett, P., Norris, M. and
Oppenheim, C. (2010)
Ranking
of Library and Information Science Researchers: Comparison of Data
Sources for Correlating Citation Data and Expert Judgments
Journal of Informetrics, 16
Jun 2010
Open
access provides scope for new citation-based metrics, but these would
have to be tested and validated against current, preferred methods of
assessment. This paper is not focussed on open access, but it shows how
such testing and validation might be performed.
From the Abstract: This
paper studies the correlations between peer review and citation
indicators when evaluating research quality in library and information
science (LIS). Forty two LIS experts provided judgments on a five-point
scale of the quality of research published by 101 scholars; the median
rankings resulting from these judgments were then correlated with h-,
g- and H-index values computed using three different sources of
citation data: Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and Google Scholar (GS).
Added 06 September 2010
Aguillo, I. F., Ortega, J. L., Fernández, M. and Utrilla, A. M. (2010)
Indicators
for a webometric ranking of open access repositories
Scientometrics, Vol. 82, No. 3, March 2010, 477-486, published
online: 6 February 2010
Added 09 Mar 2010
Harnad, S., Carr, L., Swan, A., Sale, A. and Bosc, H. (2009)
Maximizing
and Measuring Research Impact Through University and Research-Funder
Open-Access Self-Archiving Mandates
ECS EPrints, 08 Dec 2009, in Wissenschaftsmanagement,
15 (4), 36-41
Added 09 Mar 2010
Aguillo, I. (2009)
Measuring
the institution's footprint in the web
Library Hi Tech,
Vol. 27, No. 4, 2009, 540-556
DOI: 10.1108/073788309
Added 09 June 2010
Allen, L., Jones, C., Dolby, K., Lynn, D. and Walport, M. (2009)
Looking
for Landmarks: The Role of Expert Review and Bibliometric Analysis in
Evaluating Scientific Publication Outputs
PLoS ONE, 4(6): e5910, June 18, 2009 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005910
Added 09 Mar 2010
Corbyn, Z. (2009)
Hefce
backs off citations in favour of peer review in REF
Times Higher Education, 18 June 2009
Added 26 February 2009, updated 29
April 2009 Houghton, J., Rasmussen, B., Sheehan, P., Oppenheim,
C., Morris, A., Creaser, C., Greenwood, H., Summers, M. and Gourlay, A.
(2009)
Economic
implications of alternative scholarly publishing models: Exploring the costs
and benefits
JISC, 27 January 2009
Added 10 November 2008
Oppenheim, C. (2008)
Out with the old and
in with the new: The RAE, bibliometrics and the new REF (first page pdf;
full text requires subscription)
Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 40 (3): 147-149,
September 2008
Added 24 November 2008
Cho, S.-R. (2008)
New evaluation indexes
for articles and authors' academic achievements based on Open Access
Resources (full text requires subscription; abstract only)
Scientometrics, Vol. 77, No. 1 (2008)
91-112, published online: 24 July 2008
Added 10 November 2008
Oppenheim, C. and Summers, M. A. C.
Citation counts and the
Research Assessment Exercise, part VI: Unit of assessment 67 (music)
Information Research, 13 (2), paper 342, June 2008
Added 28 July 2008
Adler, R., Ewing, J. (Chair) and Taylor, P. (2008)
Citation
Statistics (pdf 26pp)
Joint Committee on Quantitative Assessment of Research, International
Mathematical Union, IMU-ICIAM-IMS, 6/11/2008
Added 28 July 2008
Harnad, S. (2008)
Validating
research performance metrics against peer rankings
Ethics in Science and Environmental
Politics, Vol. 8, No. 1, June 03, 2008, 103-107
Added 28 July
2008 Taraborelli, D. (2008)
Soft peer review. Social
software and distributed scientific evaluation (pdf 12pp)
In Proceedings of the 8th International
Conference on the Design of Cooperative Systems (COOP 08),
Carry-Le-Rouet, France, May 20-23, 2008
From the abstract: "I analyze the contribution that social bookmarking systems
can provide to the problem of usage-based metrics for scientific evaluation. I
suggest that collaboratively aggregated metadata may help fill the gap between
traditional citation-based criteria and raw usage factors."
Added 13 January 2009
Pringle, J. (2008)
Trends in the use of ISI
citation databases for evaluation
Learned Publishing, Vol. 21, No. 2, April 2008, 85-91
Abstract: "This paper explores the factors shaping the current uses of the ISI
citation databases in evaluation both of journals and of individual scholars
and their institutions. Given the intense focus on outcomes evaluation, in a
context of increasing 'democratization' of metrics in today's digital world, it
is easy to lose focus on the appropriate ways to use these resources, and
misuse can result."
Added 11 February 2008
Armbruster, C. (2008)
Access,
Usage and Citation Metrics: What Function for Digital Libraries and
Repositories in Research Evaluation?
Social Science Research Network, February 05, 2008
From the abstract: "This systematic appraisal of the future role of digital
libraries and repositories for metric research evaluation proceeds by
investigating the practical inadequacies of current metric evaluation before
defining the scope for libraries and repositories as new players. Services
reviewed include: Leiden Ranking, Webometrics Ranking of World Universities,
COUNTER, MESUR, Harzing POP, CiteSeer, Citebase, RePEc LogEc and CitEc, Scopus,
Web of Science and Google Scholar."
Added 26 May 2008 Surya,
M., D'Este, P. and Neely, A. (2008)
Citation Counts:
Are They Good Predictors of RAE Scores? A bibliometric analysis of RAE 2001
Cranfield QUEprints, 31.01.2008
Added 10 May 2007, Updated 17 July
2009 Harnad, S. (2007)
Open Access Scientometrics and the
UK Research Assessment Exercise
ArXiv, Computer Science, cs.IR/0703131, 26 March 2007. Preprint of invited
keynote address to 11th Annual Meeting of the International Society for
Scientometrics and Informetrics, Madrid, 25-27 June 2007
also in ECS EPrints, 29 March 2007 http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/13804/
Latest version ECS EPrints, 27 Feb 2009 http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/17142/,
in Scientometrics, 79 (1), 2009, 147-156, published online: 13 November
2008, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0409-z
Added 19 November 2006
Steele, C., Butler, L. and Kingsley, D. (2006)
The publishing imperative:
the pervasive influence of publication metrics
ANU Institutional Repository, 30 October 2006, also in Learned
Publishing, 19(4): 277-290, October 2006
Added 19 November 2006
Houghton J. and Sheehan, P. (2006)
The Economic Impact of
Enhanced Access to Research Findings
Centre for Strategic Economic Studies. Victoria University. July 2006
See also
Houghton, J., Steele, C. and Sheehan, P. (2006)
Research
Communication Costs In Australia: Emerging Opportunities And Benefits
Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST), Australia, September 2006
Added 13
September 2007 Shadbolt, N., Brody, T., Carr, L. and Harnad, S.
(2006)
The Open Research Web: A
Preview of the Optimal and the Inevitable
ECS EPrints, 02 May 2006, in Open Access: Key Strategic, Technical and
Economic Aspects, Jacobs, N., Ed., chapter 21 (Oxford: Chandos Publishing)
Added 26
September 2005 Harnad, S. (2005)
Maximising the Return on
UK's Public Investment in Research
Author eprint, September 14, 2005
Attempts to monetise 'lost' impact: "The online-age practice of self-archiving
has been shown to increase citation impact by a dramatic 50-250%, but so far
only 15% of researchers are doing it spontaneously. Citation impact is rewarded
by universities (through promotions and salary increases) and by
research-funders like RCUK (through grant funding and renewal) at a
conservative estimate of £46 per citation. ... As a proportion of the RCUK’s
yearly £3.5bn research expenditure (yielding 130,000 articles x 5.6 = 761,600
citations), our conservative estimate would be 50% x 85% x £3.5.bn = £1.5bn
worth of loss in potential research impact (323,680 potential citations lost)."
See also
Australia is not
maximising the return on its research investment (ETD2005, Sydney)
for the same estimate applied to the potential lost return ($425M) there.
Day, M. (2004)
Institutional
repositories and research assessment (pdf 29pp)
Author eprint (v. 0.1), 2 December 2004
Harnad, S. (2003)
Maximizing
university research impact through self-archiving
Jekyll.com, No. 7, December 2003
Harnad, S. (2003)
Enhance UK research
impact and assessment by making the RAE webmetric
Author eprint, in Times Higher Education Supplement, 6 June 2003, p. 16
Harnad, S., Carr, L., Brody, T. and Oppenheim, C. (2003)
Mandated online RAE CVs
linked to university eprint archives: Enhancing UK research impact and
assessment
Ariadne, issue 35, April 2003
Smith, A. and Eysenck, M. (2002)
The correlation between
RAE ratings and citation counts in psychology (pdf 12pp)
Technical Report, Psychology, Royal Holloway College, University of London,
June 2002
Holmes, A. and Oppenheim, C. (2001)
Use of
citation analysis to predict the outcome of the 2001 Research Assessment
Exercise for Unit of Assessment (UoA) 61: Library and Information
Management
Information Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, January 2001
Harnad, S. (2001)
Research
Access, Impact and Assessment (longer version)
Author eprint, in Times Higher Education Supplement, 1487: p. 16., 2001
Garfield, E. (1988)
Can
Researchers Bank on Citation Analysis? (pdf 10pp)
Current Comments, No. 44, October 31, 1988
attached (pp 3-10)
Diamond, Jr., A. M. (1986)
What is a Citation Worth?
J. Hum. Resour., 21:200-15, 1986
Garfield comments on studies that attempt to quantify the reward system of
science in terms of monetary returns to author salaries from article
publication and citations, reprinting one of those studies
Added 6 September 2010
Priem, J. and Hemminger, B. (2010)
Scientometrics
2.0: Toward new metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web
First Monday, 15 (7), Jul 2010
Added 6 September 2010
Herb, U., Kranz, E., Leidinger, T. and Mittelsdorf, B. (2010)
How
to assess the impact of an electronic document? And what does impact
mean anyway?: Reliable usage statistics in heterogeneous repository
communities
E-LIS, 10 Jun 2010. In OCLC
Systems & Services, Vol. 26, No. 2, 2010, 133-145
From
the Abstract: Purpose - Usually the impact of research and researchers
is quantified by using citation data: either by journal-centered
citation data as in the case of the journal impact factor (JIF) or by
author-centered citation data as in the case of the Hirsch- or h-index.
This paper aims to discuss a range of impact measures, especially
usage-based metrics, and to report the results of two surveys.
Originality/value - This paper delineates current discussions about
citation-based and usage-based metrics. Based on the results of the
surveys, it depicts which functionalities could enhance repositories,
what features are required by scientists and information professionals,
and whether usage-based services are considered valuable. These results
also outline some elements of future repository research.
Added 6 September 2010
Repanovici, A. (2010)
Measuring
the visibility of the University's scientific production using
GoogleScholar, "Publish or Perish" software and Scientometrics
76th IFLA General
Conference and Assembly, Gothenburg, Sweden, 07
Jun 2010
From
the Abstract: The first Romanian institutional repository was
implemented at Transilvania University of Brasov. As part of the
undertaken research, the visibility and the impact of the university's
scientific production was measured using the scientific methods of
scientometry, as a fundamental instrument for determining the
international value of an university as well as for the statistical
evaluation of scientific research results. The results showed that an
open access institutional repository would significantly add to the
visibility of the university's scientific production. In this article we
define the scientific production and productivity and present the main
indicators for the measurement of the scientific activity. Google
Scholar was used as a scientometric database which can be consulted
free of charge on the Internet and which indexes academic papers from
institutional repositories, identifying also the referenced citations.
The free Publish or Perish software can be used as an analysis
instrument for the impact of the research, by analysing the citations
through the h-index. We present the methodology and the results of an
exploratory study made at the Transilvania University of Brasov
regarding the h-index of the academic staff.
Added 9 June 2010
Neff, B. and Olden, J. (2010)
Not
So Fast: Inflation in Impact Factors Contributes to Apparent
Improvements in Journal Quality
BioScience,
60 (6), 455-9, June 2010
From the Abstract: Here we propose that impact factors may be subject to
inflation analogous to changes in monetary prices in economics. The
possibility of inflation came to light as a result of the observation
that papers published today tend to cite more papers than those
published a decade ago. We analyzed citation data from 75,312 papers
from 70 ecological journals published during 1998-2007. We found that
papers published in 2007 cited an average of seven more papers than
those published a decade earlier. This increase accounts for about 80%
of the observed impact factor inflation rate of 0.23. In examining the
70 journals we found that nearly 50% showed increases in their impact
factors, but at rates lower than the background inflation rate.
Therefore, although those journals appear to be increasing in quality
as measured by the impact factor, they are actually failing to keep
pace with inflation.
Added 6 September 2010
Repanovici, A. (2010)
Measuring
the visibility of the universities scientific production using
scientometric methods
6th WSEAS/IASME
International Conference on Educational Technologies
(EDUTE '10), 03 May 2010
Abstract:
Paper presents scientometry as a science and a fundamental instrument
for determining the international value of an university as well as for
the statistical evaluation of scientific research results. The impact
of the research measurable through scientometric indicators is
analyzed. Promoting the scientific production of universities through
institutional digital repositories deals with the concept of scientific
production of the university and the development of scientific research
in information society. These concepts are approached through the prism
of marketing methods and techniques. The digital repository is analyzed
as a PRODUCT, destined for promoting, archieving and preserving
scientific production. Find out more about the author and the paper
here.
The record
and abstract page for the paper does not currently link to the full text.
Added 6 September 2010
Wardle, D. (2010)
Do
Faculty of 1000 (F1000) ratings of ecological publications serve as
reasonable predictors of their future impact?
Ideas in Ecology and
Evolution, 3, 2010, 11-15
Commentary article.
From the Abstract: There is an increasing demand for an
effective means of post-publication evaluation of ecological work that
avoids pitfalls associated with using the impact factor of the journal
in which the work was published. One approach that has been gaining
momentum is the Faculty of 1000 (hereafter F1000) evaluation
procedure, in which panel members identify what they believe to be the
most important recent publications they have read. Here I focused on
1530 publications from 7 major ecological journals that appeared in
2005, and compared the F1000 rating of each publication with the
frequency with which it was subsequently cited. ... Possible reasons
for the F1000 process failing to identify high impact publications may
include uneven coverage by F1000 of different ecological topics,
cronyism, and geographical bias favoring North American publications.
As long as the F1000 process cannot identify those publications that
subsequently have the greatest impact, it cannot be reliably used as a
means of post-publication evaluation of the ecological literature.
Added 9 June 2010
Bornmann, L. and Daniel, H.-D. (2010)
The
citation speed index: A useful bibliometric indicator to add to the h
index
Authors' server, undated but notice posted to Sigmetrics listserv 26
March 2010, in Journal
of Informetrics, accepted for publication
This topic would appear to be a natural complement to OA citation
effects, but the paper does not mention any.
Added 9 June 2010
Horwood, L. and Robertson, S. (2010)
Role
of bibliometrics in scholarly communication
VALA2010 15th Biennial Conference and Exhibition, Melbourne, 9
Feb 2010
Added 9 Mar 2010
Bar-Ilan, J. (2009)
A
Closer Look at the Sources of Informetric Research
CYBERmetrics, 13 (1), 23 Dec 2009
From
the introduction: The Web has existed for twenty years only, yet the
large majority of the data sources for informetric research are
available through the Web. ISI's Web of Science was launched in 1997
... In November 2004 two additional major citation databases appeared
on the Web: Elsevier's Scopus and Google Scholar ... and there are
easily accessible and often open-source software tools that enable to
collect and analyze large quantities of data even on a personal
computer. It has become easy to conduct "desktop or poor-man's
bibiliometrics". The data for informetric research have never been
perfect, but now that informetric analysis can be conducted with much
greater ease than before, it is even more important to understand the
limitations and problems of data sources and methods and to assess the
validity of the results. In the following sections I discuss some
limitations of the existing sources.
Added 9 June 2010
Gonzalez-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V., Moya-Anegon, F. (2009)
The SJR
indicator: A
new indicator of journals' scientific prestige
ArXiv,
arXiv:0912.4141v1 [cs.DL], 21 Dec 2009
Added 9 Mar 2010
Ball, K. (2009)
The
Indexing of Scholarly Open Access Business Journals
Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship,
10 (3), Winter 2009
"this
study focusses on the business and management field and assess the
extent to which scholarly open access journals in this discipline are
currently being indexed by both commercial and non-commercial indexing
services. Of the commercial indexing services, Ebscos Business Source
Complete covers by far the largest number of open access journals. For
business researchers working in an academic environment, Business
Source Complete, with its more sophisticated searching and browsing
capabilities and deeper historical coverage, is probably the best
one-stop option for retrieving scholarly materials from both the
subscription-based and OA literature. However, from a simple quantity
perspective, OA business journals are being most extensively indexed by
OA indexing services, in particular, Google Scholar and Open J-Gate."
Added 9 Mar 2010
Neylon, C. and Wu, S. (2009)
Article-Level
Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact
PLoS Biology,
7 (11), 17 Nov 2009
Added 9 Mar 2010
Moed, H. (2009)
Measuring
contextual citation impact of scientific journals
ArXiv, arXiv:0911.2632v1 [cs.DL], 13 Nov 2009. Also in Journal
of Informetrics (to appear)
About journal impact, and not directly about open access. From the abstract:
"This paper explores a new indicator of journal citation impact,
denoted as source normalized impact per paper (SNIP). It measures a
journal's contextual citation impact, taking into account
characteristics of its properly defined subject field, especially the
frequency at which authors cite other papers in their reference lists,
the rapidity of maturing of citation impact, and the extent to which a
database used for the assessment covers the field's literature. It aims
to allow direct comparison of sources in different subject
fields."
Added 15 Oct 2009
Armbruster, C. (2009)
Whose
Metrics? On Building Citation, Usage and Access Metrics as Information Service
for Scholars
SSRN Social Science Research Network, 31 Aug 2009
Services mentioned: Journal impact factor, journal usage factor, GoPubMed, SSRN
CiteReader, RePEc LogEc, RePEc CitEc, SPIRES, Harzing POP, Webometrics, ISI Web
of Knowledge, Scopus, Google Scholar, Citebase, CiteSeer X, CERIF
Added 15 Oct 2009
Stock, W. (2009)
The
Inflation of Impact Factors of Scientific Journals
ChemPhysChem, 10 (13), 17 Aug 2009, 2193-6
Added 9 Mar 2010
Patterson, M. (2009)
PLoS Journals
measuring
impact where it matters
PLoS blog, 2009-07-13
On why PLoS is will no longer highlight the journal impact factor.
Instead it
will present a range of metrics focussed on the published
paper, including
individual citation counts from various sources, blog and bookmark
counts,
links and searches, as illustrated
by Peter Binfield in the PLoS one community blog (March 31, 2009):
"rather than updating the PLoS Journal sites with the new numbers,
weve
decided to stop promoting journal impact factors on our sites all
together.
Its time to move on, and focus efforts on more sophisticated, flexible
and meaningful measures."
Added 9 Mar 2010
Canos Cerda, J. H., Campos, M. L. and Nieto, E. M. (2009)
What's Wrong with
Citation Counts?
D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 15 No. 3/4, March/April 2009
From the abstract: "We argue that a new approach based on the
collection of
citation data at the time the papers are created can overcome current
limitations, and we propose a new framework in which the research
community is
the owner of a Global Citation Registry characterized by high quality
citation
data handled automatically."
Added 26 February 2009
Cross, J. (2009)
Impact
factors - the basics
The E-Resources Management Handbook (2006 - present), UKSG, this chapter
published online: 03 February 2009
Added 10 November 2008
Leydesdorff, L. (2008)
How are new
citation-based journal indicators adding to the bibliometric toolbox?
Author preprint, undated, (announced 31 Oct 2008), in Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 60, No. 7,
2009, 1327-1336, published online: 2 Feb 2009
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.21024
From the abstract: "The launching of Scopus and Google Scholar, and
methodological developments in social-network analysis have made many more
indicators for evaluating journals available than the traditional impact
factor, cited half-life, and immediacy index of the ISI. In this study, these
new indicators are compared with one another and with the older ones."
Added 9 June 2010
Final
Impact: What Factors Really Matter? (VIDEO) (2008)
Scholarly Communication Program, Columbia University, October 30, 2008
Panelists: Marian Hollingsworth, Thomson Reuters; Jevin West,
Eigenfactor.org; and Johan Bollen, Los Alamos National Laboratory
Added 10 November 2008
Radicchi, F., Fortunato, S. and Castellano, C. (2008)
Universality of citation
distributions: towards an objective measure of scientific impact
arXiv.org, arXiv:0806.0974v2 [physics.soc-ph], 5 Jun 2008 (v1), last revised 27
Oct 2008
in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of The United States of
America, 105 (45): 17268-17272, Nov. 11 2008
Added 10 November 2008
Banks, M. A. and Dellavalle, R. (2008)
Emerging Alternatives to
the Impact Factor
E-LIS, 05 September 2008, also in OCLC
Systems & Services, 24(3)
Added 10 November 2008
Brumback, R. A. (2008)
Worshiping false idols:
the impact factor dilemma
J. Child Neurol., Vol. 23, No. 4, April 2008, 365-367
"the opacity in Thomson Scientific's refusal to reveal the details of their
calculations only serves to increase suspicion about possible data
manipulations. ... Now would seem to be the appropriate time for the academic
community to demand valid metrics to assess published scientific material"
Added 26 May 2008
Althouse, B. M., West, J. D., Bergstrom, T. C. and Bergstrom, C. T. (2008)
Differences in
Impact Factor Across Fields and Over Time
eScholarship Repository, California Digital library, Department of Economics,
University of California Santa Barbara, Departmental Working Papers, paper
2008-4-23, April 23, 2008. In Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, Vol. 60, No. 1, 27-34, published online: 21 Aug 2008
Added 11 February 2008
Kosmopoulos, C. et Pumain, D. (2007)
Citation, Citation, Citation:
Bibliometrics, the web and the Social Sciences and Humanities
Cybergeo, Science et Toile, article 411, mis en ligne le 17 decembre
2007, modifie le 18 janvier 2008
From the abstract: "The paper reviews the main (bibliometric) data bases and
indicators in use. It demonstrates that these instruments give a biased
information about the scientific output of research in Social Sciences and
Humanities."
Added 28 July 2008
Rossner, M., Van Epps, H. and Hill, E. (2007)
Show me the data
(editorial)
The Journal of Cell Biology, Vol. 179,
No. 6, 1091-1092, published online December 17, 2007
"Just as scientists would not accept the findings in a scientific paper without
seeing the primary data, so should they not rely on Thomson Scientific's impact
factor, which is based on hidden data. As more publication and citation data
become available to the public through services like PubMed, PubMed Central,
and Google Scholar®, we hope that people will begin to develop their own
metrics for assessing scientific quality rather than rely on an ill-defined and
manifestly unscientific number."
Added 22 August 2007
Citrome, L. (2007)
Impact
Factor? Shmimpact Factor! The Journal Impact Factor, Modern Day Literature
Searching, and the Publication Process
Psychiatry, 4(5):54-57, 2007
Added 17 January 2007
Bornmann, L. and Daniel, H.-D. (2007)
What
do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior
Author eprint, undated, Journal of Documentation, accepted for
publication
Added 17 January 2007
Meho, L. I. (2006)
The Rise and Rise of Citation
Analysis
Author eprint, dLIST, 31 December 2006, Physics World, January 2007
"Provides a historical background of citation analysis, impact factor, new
citation data sources (e.g., Google Scholar, Scopus, NASA's Astrophysics Data
System Abstract Service, MathSciNet, ScienceDirect, SciFinder Scholar,
Scitation/SPIN, and SPIRES-HEP), as well as h-index, g-index, and a-index."
Added 19 November 2006
Electronic Publishing Services and Oppenheim, C. (2006)
UK scholarly journals:
2006 baseline report: An evidence-based analysis of data concerning scholarly
journal publishing, see Area 4: Citations, impact factors and their role
Research Information Network, Research Councils UK and the Department of Trade
& Industry, October 3, 2006
Added 3 May 2007 Ewing,
J. (2006)
Measuring
Journals
Notices of the AMS, Vol. 53, No. 9, October 2006, 1049-1053
"in many respects usage statistics are even more flawed than the impact factor,
and once again, the essential problem is that there are no explicit principles
governing their interpretation. ... while usage statistics are only
slightly useful, their misuse can be enormously damaging."
Added 8 March 2007
Garfield, E. (2006)
Commentary:
Fifty years of citation indexing
International Journal of Epidemiology, 2006 35(5):1127-1128, published
online September 19, 2006
Added 03 August 2006
PLoS Medicine Editors (2006)
The
Impact Factor Game: It is time to find a better way to assess the scientific
literature
PLoS Medicine, Vol. 3, No. 6, June 2006
Added 15 May 2006
Altbach, P. G. (2006)
The Tyranny of
Citations
Inside Higher Ed, May 8, 2006
Added 28 February 2006
Noruzi, A. (2006)
The Web Impact Factor: a
critical review (pdf, 10pp)
E-LIS, February 9, 2006, in The Electronic Library, 24 (2006)
"Web Impact Factor (WIF) is a quantitative tool for evaluating and ranking web
sites ... search engines provide similar possibilities for the investigation of
links between web sites/pages to those provided by the academic journals
citation databases from the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI). But the
content of the Web is not of the same nature and quality as the databases
maintained by the ISI."
Added 28 February 2006
Bollen, J., Rodriguez, M. A. and Van de Sompel, H. (2006)
Journal Status (pdf, 16pp)
Arxiv, 9 January 2006
"By merely counting the amount of citations and disregarding the prestige of
the citing journals, the ISI IF is a metric of popularity, not of prestige. We
demonstrate how a weighted version of the popular PageRank algorithm can be
used to obtain a metric that reflects prestige. ... Furthermore, we introduce
the Y-factor which is a simple combination of both the ISI IF and the weighted
PageRank, and find that the resulting journal rankings correspond well to a
general understanding of journal status."
Added 03 August 2006
Moed, H.F. (2005)
Citation analysis of
scientific journals and journal impact measures
Current Science, 89 (12): 1990-1996, December 25, 2005
Added 28 February 2006
Dong, P., Loh, M. and Mondry, A. (2005)
The "impact factor"
revisited
Biomedical Digital Libraries, December 2005
This is a review, so the findings are not new, but this is perhaps the first
such paper to reflect on the effect of free and online availability on journal
impact factors, among other IF-related issues.
Added 30 December 2005
Hardy, R., Oppenheim, C., Brody, T. and Hitchcock, S. (2005)
Open Access Citation
Information (.doc, 105pp)
Author eprint, November 11, 2005, JISC Committee for the Information
Environment (JCIE) Scholarly Communication Group, September 2005
Describes a proposal to increase the exposure of open access materials and
their references to indexing services, and to motivate new services by reducing
setup costs.
Added 8 March 2007
Perkel, J. M. (2005)
The
Future of Citation Analysis
The Scientist, Vol. 19, No. 20, October 24, 2005
"The challenge is to track a work's impact when published in nontraditional
forms"
Added 30 December 2005
Monastersky, R. (2005)
Impact Factors Run
Into Competition
Chronicle of Higher Education, October 14, 2005
Added 28 February 2005
Garfield, E. (2005)
The Agony
and the Ecstasy - The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor
(pdf, 22pp)
International Congress on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication,
Chicago, September 16, 2005
Garfield's typically dry, data-filled but essential take on JIFs.
Publishers promote impact factors of OA journals
BioMed Central "Open
access journals get impressive impact factors" 23 June 2005
Public Library of Science "The first impact factor
for PLoS Biology - 13.9" 27 June 2005
See also this discussion of these announcements on SPARC Open Access Forum,
prompted by Elsevier's response from Tony McSean,
followed by David Goodman,
Charles
Bailey, (both 8 July) and Matthew
Cockerill (10 July), or see this summary of the discussion: "BMC’s
Impact Factors: Elsevier’s Take and Reactions to It", Digital Koans
(Charles Bailey's Weblog), 11 July 2005, including Peter Suber's conclusion:
"It’s important to distinguish the citation impact of an individual article
from a journal impact factor. The BMC-Elsevier debate is about the latter. But
OA is more likely to rise and fall according to the former."
Abbasi, K. (2004)
Let's dump
impact factors
BMJ, Vol. 329, 16 October 2004
BMJ Rapid
Responses to this editorial; also see this list response
Baudoin, L., Haeffner-Cavaillon, N., Pinhas, N., Mouchet, S. and Kordon, C.
(2004)
Bibliometric
indicators: realities, myth and prospective (abstract only, full paper in
French)
Med Sci (Paris), 20 (10):909-15, October 2004
Jacsó, P. (2004)
The
Future of Citation Indexing - Interview with Dr. Eugene Garfield (pdf 3pp)
Author eprint, in Online, January 2004
Cockerill, M. J. (2004)
Delayed impact: ISI's
citation tracking choices are keeping scientists in the dark
BMC Bioinformatics 2004, 5:93, 12 July 2004
Added 26 September 2005
Shin E. J. (2003)
Do Impact
Factors change with a change of medium? A comparison of Impact Factors when
publication is by paper and through parallel publishing (abstract only)
Journal of Information Science, 29 (6): 527-533, 2003
"it is found that Impact Factors of (journals from the period) 2000 and 2001
were significantly higher than those of 1994 and 1995 in the journals published
by parallel publishing (combination journals–simultaneous publication of paper
and electronic journals). In particular, the Impact Factors of the combination
journals increased after the journals transformed their available media from
paper journals to combination ones."
Walter, G., Bloch, S., Hunt, G. and Fisher, K. (2003)
Counting
on citations: a flawed way to measure quality
MJA, 2003, 178 (6): 280-281
Borgman, C. L. and Furner, J. (2002)
Scholarly
Communication and Bibliometrics, author preprint (pdf 45pp)
Author eprint, in Annual Review of Information Science and Technology,
Vol. 36, edited by B. Cronin, 2002
Guédon, J.-C. (2001)
In Oldenburg’s
Long Shadow: Librarians, Research Scientists, Publishers, and the Control of
Scientific Publishing
Creating the Digital Future, Proceedings of the 138th Annual Meeting,
Association of Research Libraries, Toronto, Ontario, May 23-25, 2001
Garfield, E. (1999)
Journal impact factor:
a brief review
CMAJ, 161 (8), October 19, 1999
Wouters, P. (1999)
The Citation
Culture (pdf 290pp)
PhD Thesis, University of Amsterdam, 1999
Garfield, E. (1998)
The
use of journal impact factors and citation analysis in the evaluation of
science
Author eprint, presented at the 41st Annual Meeting of the Council of
Biology Editors, Salt Lake City, UT, May 4, 1998
Seglen, P. O. (1997)
Why the
impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research
BMJ, 314:497, 15 February 1997
Garfield, E. (1973)
Citation
Frequency as a Measure of Research Activity and Performance (pdf 3pp)
Author eprint, in Essays of an Information Scientist, 1: 406-408,
1962-73, Current Contents, 5, January 31, 1973
Garfield, E. (1955)
Citation
Indexes for Science: A New Dimension in Documentation through Association of
Ideas
Author eprint, in Science, Vol:122, No:3159, p.108-111, July 15, 1955
Suber, P. (updated)
Open Access
Overview
Swan, A. (2007)
Open
Access and the Progress of Science
American Scientist, April-June 2007
Swan justified open access in support of her 'progress' article in a list
discussion. See blogged
extracts from that discussion.
Swan, A. (2006)
Open
Access: Why should we have it?
presented at "Zichtbaar onderzoek. Kan Open Archives daarbij helpen?" / Visible
research. Can OAI help? Organised by AWI (Flemish Ministry for Economy,
Enterprise, Science, Innovation and Foreign Trade) and VOWB (Flemish
Organisation of Scientific Research Libraries), May 2006
Swan, A. (2005)
Open Access
JISC, Briefing Paper, 1 April 2005
Suber, P. (2004)
A Primer on Open
Access to Science and Scholarship
Author eprint, in Against the Grain, Vol. 16, No. 3, June 2004
Harnad, S. (2004)
The Green Road
to Open Access: A Leveraged Transition
American Scientist Forum, January 07, 2004
Suber, P. (2003)
Removing the Barriers
to Research: An Introduction to Open Access for Librarians
Author eprint, in College & Research Libraries News, 64, February,
92-94, 113
^Top |
<Home |