Open Access Papers Have a Greater Citation Advantage in the Author-Pays Model Compared to Toll Access Papers in Springer and Elsevier Open Access Journals

Elaine Sullo

摘要

A Review of: Sotudeh, H., Ghasempour, Z., & Yaghtin, M. (2015). The citation advantage of author-pays model: The case of Springer and Elsevier OA journals. Scientometrics, 104(2), 581-608. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1607-5 Objective – To investigate the citation performance of open access (OA) and toll access (TA) papers published in author-pays open access journals. Design – Longitudinal citation analysis. Setting – Publications in Springer and Elsevier’s author-pays open access journals. Subjects – 633 journals published using the author-pays model. This model encompasses both journals where the article processing charge (APC) is required and journals in which authors can request open access and voluntarily pay APCs for accepted manuscripts. Methods – The authors identified APC funded journals (journals funded by mandatory author processing charges as well as those where authors voluntarily paid a fee in order to have their articles openly accessible) from both Springer and Elsevier, and analyzed papers published in these journals from 2007 to 2011. The authors excluded journals that adopted the APC model later than 2007. To identify Springer titles, the authors created a search strategy to identify open access articles in SpringerLink. A total of 576 journals were identified and double checked in the Sherpa-Romeo database (a database of copyright and open access self-archiving policies of academic journals) to verify their open access policies. The authors then downloaded the journal content using SpringerLink, and using Springer Author-Mapper, separated out the open access articles from the toll access articles. In order to identify the Elsevier APC funded journals, the authors referred to “Open Access Journal Directory: A-Z,” which contained 35 OA journals (p. 584). Once the authors consulted “Sponsored articles” issued by Elsevier and verified titles in Sherpa-Romeo, they identified 57 journals that fit the “author-pays” model. The bibliographic information was downloaded and OA articles were separated from TA articles. The authors confirmed that all journals were indeed OA publications by downloading the full-text from off-campus locations; they also verified that the journals were using the APC model by visiting each journal’s website. Because of the large number of subject areas of the identified journals, the researchers decided to classify the journals into four broader categories: Health Sciences, Life Sciences, Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences and Humanities. To calculate the impact of OA papers, citation per paper (CPP) was calculated for each subject area. Impact values were calculated on an annual basis as well. The researchers calculated the citation advantage of OA articles as the “difference between the open access and toll access impacts in terms of a percentage of the latter” (p. 585). Main Results – The authors categorized their findings according to three themes: the growth of APC funded OA papers, the number of OA papers by discipline, and citation advantage of OA vs. TA in general and by subject area. Together, Springer and Elsevier published 18,654 OA papers in the APC journals; this number represents 4.7% of the 396,760 papers published between 2007 and 2011. While the number of OA and TA papers has been growing annually, the number of OA papers has been growing more rapidly compared to the TA papers. In terms of subject areas, Life Sciences had the largest number of OA and TA papers (184,315), followed by Health Sciences (149,341), Natural Sciences (121,274), and Social Sciences and Humanities (42,824). Natural Sciences had the most OA papers (5.7%) in terms of the number of papers in this subject area being OA papers, followed by Social Sciences and Humanities (5.2%), Health Sciences (4.6%) and Life Sciences (3.6%). Overall, the researchers found that the impact values of OA papers were larger than those of the TA papers for each year examined. In considering subject areas, in all disciplines except Life Sciences, the most highly cited paper in the field is an OA paper. In Life Sciences, the most highly cited TA paper had 2,215 citations, compared to the OA paper, which had 1,501 citations. Even though the TA paper had more citations, overall, the OA papers had a higher impact (citation advantage). In Health Sciences, the most highly cited OA paper received 1,501 citations, which is 1.2 times the most highly cited TA paper, with 1,252 citations. The citation advantage for the OA group is 33.29% higher than the TA group. In Natural Sciences, the number of citations from the highest cited OA paper is 1,736, or 2.52 times higher than the most highly cited TA paper. The OA papers in this discipline had a 35.95% citation advantage. In Social Sciences and Humanities, the most highly cited OA paper had 681 citations, compared to the TA paper, with 432 citations. For this subject area, the citation impact of the OA paper is 3.14% higher than the TA paper. Conclusions – I

机译：综述：Sotudeh，H.，Ghasempour，Z.，＆Yaghtin，M.（2015）。作者付费模式的引文优势：以Springer和Elsevier OA期刊为例。 Scientometrics，104（2），581-608。 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1607-5目标–研究在作者付费开放期刊上发表的开放获取（OA）和收费访问（TA）论文的引文表现。设计–纵向引文分析。设置-Springer和Elsevier的作者中的出版物由付费用户访问。主题–使用作者付费模式出版的633种期刊。该模型既包括需要文章处理费（APC）的期刊，也包括作者可以请求开放访问并自愿为接受的手稿支付APC的期刊。方法–作者从Springer和Elsevier处确定了APC资助的期刊（期刊由强制性作者处理费资助，以及作者自愿支付费用以公开发表其文章的期刊），并分析了2007年以来在这些期刊上发表的论文直到2011年。作者不包括在2007年之后采用APC模式的期刊。为确定Springer的标题，作者创建了一种搜索策略，以在SpringerLink中标识开放获取的文章。共确定了576种期刊，并在Sherpa-Romeo数据库（学术期刊的版权和开放获取自我存档政策数据库）中进行了仔细检查，以验证其开放获取政策。然后，作者使用SpringerLink下载期刊内容，并使用Springer Author-Mapper将开放访问文章与收费访问文章分开。为了确定Elsevier APC资助的期刊，作者引用了“开放获取期刊目录：A-Z”，其中包含35种OA期刊（第584页）。一旦作者查阅了Elsevier发行的“赞助文章”并在Sherpa-Romeo中验证了标题，他们就确定了57种符合“作者付费”模式的期刊。下载了书目信息，并将OA文章与TA文章分开。作者通过从校外地点下载全文来确认所有期刊确实是OA出版物。他们还通过访问每个期刊的网站来验证期刊是否正在使用APC模型。由于已识别期刊的主题领域众多，研究人员决定将期刊分为四大类：卫生科学，生命科学，自然科学以及社会科学和人文科学。为了计算OA论文的影响，针对每个主题领域计算了每篇论文的引用率（CPP）。影响值也是每年计算的。研究人员将OA文章的引用优势计算为“开放获取和收费影响之间的差异，以后者的百分比表示”（第585页）。主要结果–作者根据三个主题对研究结果进行了分类：APC资助的OA论文的增长，按学科分类的OA论文的数量以及OA与TA在总体和主题领域的引用优势。 Springer和Elsevier一起在APC期刊上发表了18,654篇OA论文;该数字占2007年至2011年间发表的396,760篇论文的4.7％。虽然OA和TA论文的数量每年都在增长，但与TA论文相比，OA论文的数量增长更快。就学科领域而言，生命科学领域的OA和TA论文数量最多（184,315），其次是健康科学（149,341），自然科学（121,274）和社会科学与人文（42,824）。就该学科领域的OA论文数量而言，自然科学领域的OA论文数量最多（5.7％），其次是社会科学和人文学科（5.2％），卫生科学（4.6％）和生命科学（3.6％）。总体而言，研究人员发现，每年检查的OA论文的影响值均大于TA论文的影响值。在考虑学科领域时，除生命科学以外的所有学科中，该领域引用最多的论文是OA论文。在生命科学领域，被引用最多的TA论文被引用2,225，而OA论文被引用1,501。尽管TA论文被引用较多，但总体而言，OA论文的影响更大（引用优势）。在《健康科学》中，被引用次数最多的OA论文被引用1,501次，是被引用次数最多的TA论文（被引用1,252次）的1.2倍。 OA组的引用优势比TA组高33.29％。在自然科学中，被引用次数最多的OA论文的引用次数为1,736，是被引用次数最多的TA论文的2.52倍。该学科的OA论文具有35.95％的引用优势。在社会科学和人文科学领域，引用最多的OA论文被引用681次，而TA论文被引用432次。对于此主题领域，OA论文的引用影响比TA论文高3.14％。结论–我

Open Access Papers Have a Greater Citation Advantage in the Author-Pays Model Compared to Toll Access Papers in Springer and Elsevier Open Access Journals

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅