IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v106y2016i3d10.1007_s11192-016-1833-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

No new evidence for a citation benefit for Author-Pay Open Access Publications in the social sciences and humanities

Author

Listed:
  • K. Brad Wray

    () (State University of New York, Oswego)

Abstract

I challenge a finding reported recently in a paper by Sotudeh et al. (Scientometrics, 2015. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1607-5 ). The authors argue that there is a citation advantage for those who publish Author-Pay Open Access (Gold Open Access) in journals published by Springer and Elsevier. I argue that the alleged advantage that the authors report for journals in the social sciences and humanities is an artifact of their method. The findings reported about the life sciences, the health sciences, and the natural sciences, on the other hand, are robust. But my finding underscores the fact that epistemic cultures in the social sciences and humanities are different from those in the other fields.

Suggested Citation

  • K. Brad Wray, 2016. "No new evidence for a citation benefit for Author-Pay Open Access Publications in the social sciences and humanities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1031-1035, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:106:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-016-1833-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-016-1833-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-016-1833-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    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. Jingfeng Xia, 2010. "A longitudinal study of scholars attitudes and behaviors toward open-access journal publishing," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(3), pages 615-624, March.
    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. Aurelia Magdalena Pisoschi & Claudia Gabriela Pisoschi, 2016. "Is open access the solution to increase the impact of scientific journals?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(2), pages 1075-1095, November.
    2. Mikael Laakso & Andrea Polonioli, 2018. "Open access in ethics research: an analysis of open access availability and author self-archiving behaviour in light of journal copyright restrictions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 291-317, July.
    3. Eugenio Petrovich, 2018. "Reply to Wray," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 651-654, October.
    4. Sergio Copiello, 2019. "The open access citation premium may depend on the openness and inclusiveness of the indexing database, but the relationship is controversial because it is ambiguous where the open access boundary lie," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 995-1018, November.
    5. Andrea Polonioli, 2016. "Metrics, flawed indicators, and the case of philosophy journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 987-994, August.
    6. K. Brad Wray, 2018. "A note on measuring normal science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 647-650, October.
    7. Craig Aaen-Stockdale, 2017. "Selfish Memes: An Update of Richard Dawkins’ Bibliometric Analysis of Key Papers in Sociobiology," Publications, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 5(2), pages 1-9, May.
    8. Hajar Sotudeh & Zohreh Estakhr, 2018. "Sustainability of open access citation advantage: the case of Elsevier’s author-pays hybrid open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 563-576, April.
    9. Andrea Polonioli, 2016. "Debunking unwarranted defenses of the status quo in the humanities and social sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1519-1522, June.
    10. K. Brad Wray, 2016. "Still no new evidence: Author-Pay Open Access in the social sciences and humanities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1527-1529, June.

    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:spr:scient:v:106:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s11192-016-1833-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.