IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v27y2018i1p1-15..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prevalence and citation advantage of gold open access in the subject areas of the Scopus database

Author

Listed:
  • Pablo Dorta-González
  • Yolanda Santana-Jiménez

Abstract

The potential benefit of open access (OA) in relation to citation impact has been discussed in the literature in depth. The methodology used to test the OA citation advantage includes comparing OA vs. non-OA journal impact factors and citations of OA vs. non-OA articles published in the same non-OA journals. However, one problem with many studies is that they are small and restricted to one discipline or set of journals-. Moreover, conclusions are not entirely consistent among research areas, and ‘early view’ and ‘selection bias’ have been suggested as possible explications. In the present article, an analysis of gold OA from across all areas of research—the 27 subject areas of the Scopus database—is realized. As a novel contribution, this article takes a journal-level approach to assessing the OA citation advantage, whereas many others take a paper-level approach. Data were obtained from Scimago Lab, sorted using Scopus database, and tagged as OA/non-OA using the DOAJ list. Jointly with the OA citation advantage, the OA prevalence as well as the differences between access types (OA vs. non-OA) in production and referencing are tested. A total of 3,737 OA journals (16.8%) and 18,485 non-OA journals (83.2%) published in 2015 are considered. As the main conclusion, there is no generalizable gold OA citation advantage at journal level.

Suggested Citation

  • Pablo Dorta-González & Yolanda Santana-Jiménez, 2018. "Prevalence and citation advantage of gold open access in the subject areas of the Scopus database," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 1-15.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:27:y:2018:i:1:p:1-15.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvx035
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Antonio Perianes-Rodríguez & Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, 2019. "Effects of journal choice on the visibility of scientific publications: a comparison between subscription-based and full Open Access models," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1737-1752, December.
    2. Chompunuch Saravudecha & Duangruthai Na Thungfai & Chananthida Phasom & Sodsri Gunta-in & Aorrakanya Metha & Peangkobfah Punyaphet & Tippawan Sookruay & Wannachai Sakuludomkan & Nut Koonrungsesomboon, 2023. "Hybrid Gold Open Access Citation Advantage in Clinical Medicine: Analysis of Hybrid Journals in the Web of Science," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-9, March.
    3. Kim Holmberg & Juha Hedman & Timothy D. Bowman & Fereshteh Didegah & Mikael Laakso, 2020. "Do articles in open access journals have more frequent altmetric activity than articles in subscription-based journals? An investigation of the research output of Finnish universities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 645-659, January.
    4. Sara M. González-Betancor & Pablo Dorta-González, 2019. "Publication modalities ‘article in press’ and ‘open access’ in relation to journal average citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 1209-1223, September.
    5. Pablo Dorta-González & Sara M. González-Betancor & María Isabel Dorta-González, 2021. "To what extent is researchers' data-sharing motivated by formal mechanisms of recognition and credit?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 2209-2225, March.
    6. Pablo Dorta-González & Rafael Suárez-Vega & María Isabel Dorta-González, 2020. "Open access effect on uncitedness: a large-scale study controlling by discipline, source type and visibility," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2619-2644, September.

    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:oup:rseval:v:27:y:2018:i:1:p:1-15.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.