IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v15y2021i2s1751157721000274.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The gap between Plan S requirements and grantees’ publication practices

Author

Listed:
  • Korytkowski, Przemyslaw
  • Kulczycki, Emanuel

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate potential differences—called the gap—in publication practices between the requirements of three routes established by the cOAlition S to be compliant with Plan S requirements and actual publication patterns, regarding publishing research funded by a national funder. We use Scopus data on 27,302 publications from 2014 to 2019 funded by the National Science Centre Poland (a member of cOAlition S). Our analysis reveals that almost one-third of publications would not meet the requirements of Plan S even though some of them are open access. Moreover, monitoring open access at the level of publications cannot be used to monitor or verify fulfilment of the requirements of Plan S, and gathering data to verify whether a journal is compliant with Plan S is a challenging task because of the lack of trusted data sources. We argue that the implementation of Plan S would require either a change of publication practices by researchers, or a substantial transformation of the academic publishing market to meet the expectation designed by cOAlition S and implemented by national and regional funders.

Suggested Citation

  • Korytkowski, Przemyslaw & Kulczycki, Emanuel, 2021. "The gap between Plan S requirements and grantees’ publication practices," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:15:y:2021:i:2:s1751157721000274
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2021.101156
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157721000274
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2021.101156?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vincent Larivière & Stefanie Haustein & Philippe Mongeon, 2015. "The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Thed N. van Leeuwen & Clifford Tatum & Paul F. Wouters, 2018. "Exploring possibilities to use bibliometric data to monitor gold open access publishing at the national level," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(9), pages 1161-1173, September.
    3. Przemysław Korytkowski & Emanuel Kulczycki, 2019. "Examining how country-level science policy shapes publication patterns: the case of Poland," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 119(3), pages 1519-1543, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yashan Li & Jinge Mao & Lin Zhang & Dongbo Wang & Si Shen & Ying Huang, 2022. "How scientific research incorporates policy: an examination using the case of China’s science and technology evaluation system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5283-5306, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Samuel A. Moore, 2020. "Revisiting “the 1990s debutante”: Scholar‐led publishing and the prehistory of the open access movement," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(7), pages 856-866, July.
    2. Stephan Puehringer & Johanna Rath & Teresa Griesebner, 2021. "The political economy of academic publishing: On the commodification of a public good," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-21, June.
    3. de Oliveira, Thaiane Moreira & de Albuquerque, Sofia & Toth, Janderson Pereira & Bello, Debora Zava, 2018. "International cooperation networks of the BRICS bloc," SocArXiv b6x43, Center for Open Science.
    4. Jesse L. Reynolds & Edward A. Parson, 2020. "Nonstate governance of solar geoengineering research," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 323-342, May.
    5. You, Taekho & Park, Jinseo & Lee, June Young & Yun, Jinhyuk & Jung, Woo-Sung, 2022. "Disturbance of questionable publishing to academia," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    6. Diana Amirbekova & Timur Narbaev & Meruyert Kussaiyn, 2022. "The Research Environment in a Developing Economy: Reforms, Patterns, and Challenges in Kazakhstan," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Schmal, W. Benedikt & Haucap, Justus & Knoke, Leon, 2023. "The role of gender and coauthors in academic publication behavior," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(10).
    8. Najko Jahn & Lisa Matthias & Mikael Laakso, 2022. "Toward transparency of hybrid open access through publisher‐provided metadata: An article‐level study of Elsevier," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(1), pages 104-118, January.
    9. Justus Haucap & Nima Moshgbar & W. Benedikt Schmal, 2021. "The impact of the German 'DEAL' on competition in the academic publishing market," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 2027-2049, December.
    10. Yurij L. Katchanov & Yulia V. Markova, 2017. "The “space of physics journals”: topological structure and the Journal Impact Factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 313-333, October.
    11. Bo-Christer Björk, 2017. "Scholarly journal publishing in transition- from restricted to open access," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(2), pages 101-109, May.
    12. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Jin Wang, 2022. "A study of interdisciplinary accounting research: analysing the diversity of cited references," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2131-2162, June.
    13. Jussi T. S. Heikkila, 2022. "Journal of Economic Literature codes classification system (JEL)," Papers 2207.06076, arXiv.org.
    14. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Myroslava Hladchenko, 2023. "Assessing the effects of publication requirements for professorship on research performance and publishing behaviour of Ukrainian academics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4589-4609, August.
    15. Wrzesinski, Marcel & Riechert, Patrick Urs & Dubois, Frédéric & Katzenbach, Christian, 2021. "Working with publication technology to make open access journals sustainable," EconStor Preprints 231355, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    16. William H. Walters, 2022. "Can differences in publisher size account for the relatively low prices of the journals available to master’s universities through commercial publishers’ databases? The importance of price discriminat," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 1065-1097, February.
    17. Andrea Caputo & Mariya Kargina, 2022. "A user-friendly method to merge Scopus and Web of Science data during bibliometric analysis," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 82-88, March.
    18. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Daniel J. Dunleavy & Mina Moradzadeh & Joshua Eykens, 2021. "A credit-like rating system to determine the legitimacy of scientific journals and publishers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8589-8616, October.
    19. Mehmet Pinar, 2023. "Do research performances of universities and disciplines in England converge or diverge? An assessment of the progress between research excellence frameworks in 2014 and 2021," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5731-5766, October.
    20. Hladchenko, Myroslava & Moed, Henk F., 2021. "The effect of publication traditions and requirements in research assessment and funding policies upon the use of national journals in 28 post-socialist countries," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:15:y:2021:i:2:s1751157721000274. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.