DOCSLIB.ORG

Making Open Science a Reality”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Making Open Science a Reality”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No Please cite this paper as: OECD (2015-10-15), “Making Open Science a Reality”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 25, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jrs2f963zs1-en OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers No. 25 Making Open Science a Reality OECD Please cite this paper as: OECD (2015), “Making Open Science a Reality”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 25, OECD Publishing, Paris. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5jrs2f963zs1-en OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers No. 25 Making Open Science a Reality OECD MAKING OPEN SCIENCE A REALITY The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law. This paper is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and the arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD member countries. This report was declassified by written procedure by the Committee for Scientific and Technological Policy on 20 August 2015. © OECD/OCDE 2015 Applications for permission to reproduce or translate all or part of this material should be made to: OECD Publications, 2 rue André-Pascal, 75775 Paris, Cedex 16, France; e-mail: [email protected] Photo credit: Cover © Getty Images International. MAKING OPEN SCIENCE A REALITY TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................................... 5 GLOSSARY .................................................................................................................................................... 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 9 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 9 The rationale for open science ................................................................................................................... 10 Key actors in open science ......................................................................................................................... 12 Policy trends in open science ..................................................................................................................... 13 Main findings and policy messages ........................................................................................................... 14 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 17 CHAPTER ONE THE RATIONALES AND THE IMPACTS OF OPEN SCIENCE: AN OVERVIEW ... 18 Accessing scientific publications ............................................................................................................... 20 Accessing data ........................................................................................................................................... 26 “Altmetrics”, an alternative way to measure scientific impact .................................................................. 28 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 31 CHAPTER TWO OPEN ACCESS TO SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATIONS ..................................................... 36 Defining open access ................................................................................................................................. 36 Open access publishing and IP protection ................................................................................................. 41 Open access publishing and its legal implications ..................................................................................... 48 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 51 CHAPTER THREE OPEN RESEARCH DATA .......................................................................................... 52 Data-driven scientific research .................................................................................................................. 52 Defining open data ..................................................................................................................................... 55 Data sharing: challenges and opportunities ............................................................................................... 57 Data protection frameworks in OECD countries ....................................................................................... 62 OECD SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRY POLICY PAPERS 3 MAKING OPEN SCIENCE A REALITY Unsolved legal issues: public-private partnerships and text and data mining............................................ 65 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 68 CHAPTER FOUR THE GOVERNANCE OF OPEN SCIENCE: ACTORS, TRENDS AND POLICIES . 71 The key actors ............................................................................................................................................ 71 Open science and citizen involvement ....................................................................................................... 84 Governance of open science: Recent policy trends ................................................................................... 86 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 97 BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................................... 99 4 OECD SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRY POLICY PAPERS MAKING OPEN SCIENCE A REALITY FOREWORD Science is the mother of the digital age. And yet, twenty-two years after CERN placed the World Wide Web software in the public domain, effectively creating the open internet, science itself has struggled not only to “go digital” but also to “go open”. This report, Making open science a reality reviews the progress in OECD countries in making the results of publicly funded research, namely scientific publications and research data openly accessible to researchers and innovators alike. The report i) reviews the policy rationale behind open science and open data; ii) discusses and presents evidence on the impacts of policies to promote open science and open data; iii) explores the legal barriers and solutions to greater access to research data; iv) provides a description of the key actors involved in open science and their roles; and finally v) assesses progress in OECD and selected non-member countries based on a survey of recent policy trends. The project was carried out as a part of the activities of the OECD’s Working Party on Innovation and Technology Policy (TIP) of the Committee for Scientific and Technology Policy (CSTP). It has been prepared jointly by the OECD Secretariat (Giulia Ajmone Marsan and Mario Cervantes, Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation) and members of the TIP steering group on Open Science: Alexandre Bourque-Viens (Canada), Päivi Rauste and Pirjo-Leena Forsström (Finland), Wojtek Sylwestrzak, Lukasz Bolikowski and Krzysztof Siewicz (Poland), Dirk Meissner (Russian Federation), Fernando Mérida Martín (Spain), Nick Seaford and Micheal Reda (United Kingdom), and Jerry Sheehan (United States). Lucie Guibault and Thomas Margoni (University of Amsterdam) have prepared a background paper to this report, containing detailed analysis of the legal aspects of open science and open data; this has been used in drafting the sections on the legal aspects of open science in this report. Barbara Ubaldi (OECD Secretariat, Directorate for Public Governance and Territorial Development), Fernando Galindo-Rueda, Brunella Boselli, Claire Jolly and Brigitte Van Beuzekom (OECD Secretariat, Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation) provided additional input. Salvatore Mele, Vasco Vaz, Bo-Christer Björk and Mikael Laasko provided comments and data. Dominique Guellec, Head of the OECD Science and Technology Policy Division provided overall guidance and comments. Katjusha Boffa prepared this report for publication. In addition to the above-mentioned authors, who also provided the country notes relative to their countries, additional country notes were prepared by: • Eric Laureys (Belgium) • Patricia Muñoz and Paula González Frías (Chile) • Viktor Muuli (Estonia) • Mark Asch, Alain Colas, Marie-Pascale Lizée, Laure Menetrier, Justin Quemener, Romain Tales and Frédérique Sachwald (France) • The Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Germany) • Evi Sachini (Greece) • Usha Munshi and Devika Madalli (India) • Claudio Artusio, Juan Carlos De Martin, Federico Cinquepalmi and Giulietta Iorio (Italy) OECD SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRY POLICY PAPERS 5 MAKING OPEN SCIENCE A REALITY • Kazuhiro Hayashi (Japan) • Jeong Hyop Lee and Seokjong Lim (Korea) • Margarita Ontiveros (Mexico) • Rene Daane, Marjan
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Analysis of Comments and Implementation of the Nih Public Access Policy 2008
    ANALYSIS OF COMMENTS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NIH PUBLIC ACCESS POLICY 2008 Executive Summary BACKGROUND The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy requires investigators funded by the NIH to submit, or have submitted for them, an electronic version of their final, peer‐reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication to the National Library of Medicine’s digital archive, PubMed Central, to be posted publicly within 12 months after the official date of publication. Congress required the NIH to implement this funding limitation in Division G, Title II, Section 218 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (“Section 218”). The Policy is intended to advance science, provide public access to the published results of NIH‐funded research, and improve human health. The current Public Access Policy is the culmination of years of effort and community interaction. Prior to passage of Section 218, NIH undertook extraordinary public outreach concerning the issue of public access to the published results of NIH‐funded research. These outreach efforts included a review of over six thousand public comments and the establishment of an independent advisory group to review NIH’s implementation of a voluntary Public Access Policy. Additionally, as part of the process to implement Section 218 in a transparent and participatory manner, NIH formally sought public input through an open meeting and a Request for Information (RFI) seeking public comment. This open meeting occurred on March 20, 2008 and was designed to ensure that a discussion of stakeholder issues could occur. The feedback from the open meeting helped define questions for an RFI, which was published on the NIH web site on March 28, 2008 and in the Federal Register on March 31, 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • The Realized Benefits from Bioprospecting in the Wake of the Convention on Biological Diversity
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Washington University St. Louis: Open Scholarship Washington University Journal of Law & Policy Volume 47 Intellectual Property: From Biodiversity to Technical Standards 2015 The Realized Benefits from Bioprospecting in the Wake of the Convention on Biological Diversity James S. Miller Missouri Botanical Garden Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Environmental Law Commons, and the Plant Sciences Commons Recommended Citation James S. Miller, The Realized Benefits from Bioprospecting in the Wake of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 47 WASH. U. J. L. & POL’Y 051 (2015), https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_policy/vol47/iss1/10 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Journal of Law & Policy by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Realized Benefits from Bioprospecting in the Wake of the Convention on Biological Diversity James S. Miller MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN In the mid-1980s, the convergence of several technological advances led to a serious resurgence of interest in surveying plant species for drug development. The emergence of methods to miniaturize in-vitro bioassays (a test used to quantify the biological effect of a chemical compound or extract against a specific disease target) run the bioassays with robotic equipment, and isolate and identify active compounds with a speed and precision never before possible.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Search for Academic Journal Articles Online
    How to search for Academic Journal Articles Online While you CAN get to the online resources from the library page, I find that getting onto MyUT and clicking the LIBRARY TAB is much easier and much more familiar. I will start from there: Within the Library tab, there is a box called “Electronic Resources” and within that box is a hyperlink that will take you to “Research Databases by Name.” Click that link as shown below: The page it will take you looks like the picture below. Click “Listed by Name.” This will take you to a list starting with A, and the top selection is the one you want, it is called “Academic Search Complete.” Click it as pictured below: THIS SECTION IS ONLY IF YOU ARE ON AN OFF-CAMPUS COMPUTER: You will be required to log-in if you are off campus. The First page looks like this: Use the pull-down menu to find “University of Toledo” The Branch should default to “Main Campus,” which is what you want. Then click “Submit.” Next it will ask for you First and Last Name and your Rocket ID. If you want to use your social security number, that is also acceptable (but a little scary.). If you use your rocket ID, be sure to include the R at the beginning of the number. Then click Submit again and you are IN. The opening page has the searchbox right in the middle. When searching, start narrow and then get broader if you do not find enough results. For Example, when researching Ceremony by Leslie Silko, you may want your first search to be “Silko, Ceremony.” If you don’t find enough articles, you may then want to just search “Silko.” Finally, you may have to search for “Native American Literature.” And so on and so forth.
    [Show full text]
  • CNRS ROADMAP for OPEN SCIENCE 18 November 2019
    CNRS ROADMAP FOR OPEN SCIENCE 18 November 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 4 1. Publications 6 2. Research data 8 3. Text and data mining and analysis 10 4. Individual evaluation of researchers and Open Science 11 5. Recasting Scientific and Technical Information for Open Science 12 6. Training and skills 13 7. International positioning 14 INTRODUCTION The international movement towards Open Science started more than 30 years ago and has undergone unprecedented development since the web made it possible on a global scale with reasonable costs. The dissemination of scientific production on the Internet, its identification and archiving lift the barriers to permanent access without challenging the protection of personal data or intellectual property. Now is the time to make it “as open as possible, as closed as necessary”. Open Science is not only about promoting a transversal approach to the sharing of scientific results. By opening up data, processes, codes, methods or protocols, it also offers a new way of doing science. Several scientific, civic and socio-economic reasons make Just over a year ago, France embarked on this vast transfor- the development of Open Science essential today: mation movement. Presented on 4 July 2018 by the Minister • Sharing scientific knowledge makes research more ef- of Higher Education,Research and Innovation, the “Natio- fective, more visible, and less redundant. Open access to nal Plan for Open Science”1 aims, in the words of Frédérique data and results is a sea change for the way research is Vidal, to ensure that “the results of scientific research are done, and opens the way to the use of new tools.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Educational Practices and Resources
    Open Educational Practices and Resources OLCOS Roadmap 2012 Edited by Guntram Geser Salzburg Research EduMedia Group Project information and imprint Project information and imprint Open e-Learning Content Observatory Services (OLCOS) OLCOS is a Transversal Action funded by the European Commission under the eLearning Programme. Duration: January 2006 – December 2007 Website: www.olcos.org Project partners European Centre for Media Competence, Germany European Distance and E-Learning Network, Hungary FernUniversitaet in Hagen, Germany Mediamaisteri Group, Finland Open University of Catalonia, Spain Salzburg Research, Austria Project coordinator Salzburg Research / EduMedia Group Veronika Hornung-Prähauser Jakob Haringer Straße 5/III, A-5020 Salzburg, Austria [email protected] Tel. 0043-662-2288-405 OLCOS roadmap editor Guntram Geser, Salzburg Research / EduMedia Group, Austria Contributors to the OLCOS roadmap FernUniversitaet in Hagen: Peter Baumgartner and Viola Naust Open University of Catalonia: Agustí Canals, Núria Ferran, Julià Minguillón and Mireia Pascual Mediamaisteri Group: Mats Rajalakso and Timo Väliharju Salzburg Research: Wernher Behrendt, Andreas Gruber, Veronika Hornung-Prähauser and Sebastian Schaffert Graphics & layout Jesper Visser, Salzburg Research 3 Project information and imprint Images Based on copyright-free photographs from www.imageafter.com Print version ISBN 3-902448-08-3 Printed in Austria January 2007 Online A digital version of this report can be freely downloaded from www.olcos.org Copyright This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–ShareAlike 2.5 License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ Disclaimer This publication was produced by the OLCOS Project with the financial support of the European Commission. The content of this report is the sole responsibility of OLCOS and its project partners.
    [Show full text]
  • When Is Open Access Not Open Access?
    Editorial When Is Open Access Not Open Access? Catriona J. MacCallum ince 2003, when PLoS Biology Box 1. The Bethesda Statement on Open-Access Publishing was launched, there has been This is taken from http:⁄⁄www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/bethesda.htm. a spectacular growth in “open- S 1 access” journals. The Directory of An Open Access Publication is one that meets the following two conditions: Open Access Journals (http:⁄⁄www. 1. The author(s) and copyright holder(s) grant(s) to all users a free, irrevocable, doaj.org/), hosted by Lund University worldwide, perpetual right of access to, and a license to copy, use, distribute, transmit Libraries, lists 2,816 open-access and display the work publicly and to make and distribute derivative works, in any digital journals as this article goes to press medium for any responsible purpose, subject to proper attribution of authorship2, as (and probably more by the time you well as the right to make small numbers of printed copies for their personal use. read this). Authors also have various 2. A complete version of the work and all supplemental materials, including a copy of “open-access” options within existing the permission as stated above, in a suitable standard electronic format is deposited subscription journals offered by immediately upon initial publication in at least one online repository that is supported traditional publishers (e.g., Blackwell, by an academic institution, scholarly society, government agency, or other well- Springer, Oxford University Press, and established organization that seeks to enable open access, unrestricted distribution, many others). In return for a fee to interoperability, and long-term archiving (for the biomedical sciences, PubMed Central the publisher, an author’s individual is such a repository).
    [Show full text]
  • Three Years of Stem Cell Research & Therapy
    Locke et al. Stem Cell Research & Therapy 2013, 4:46 http://stemcellres.com/content/4/3/46 EDITORIAL Three years of Stem Cell Research & Therapy Philippa Locke1*, Timothy O’Brien2 and Rocky S Tuan3 Editorial A responsible and respected publisher This year we celebrate three years of publication of Stem Since 2000, BioMed Central has been a pioneer of the Cell Research & Therapy. In this short space of time, as open access publishing model. A member of the Com- the number of journals in the stem cell and regenerative mittee on Publication Ethics (COPE), BioMed Central medicine field has grown and continues to grow dramat- regularly reviews its editorial policies and processes to ically, Stem Cell Research & Therapy has become ensure that they meet the highest standards [4]. All of established as the destination for high quality open ac- the research published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy cess research into stem cell therapeutics. is thoroughly peer-reviewed and deposited in a number of open access archives to ensure its continual availabil- ity [5]. Why Stem Cell Research & Therapy? When submitting work to a journal, authors understand- Our international, multidisciplinary Editorial Board ’ ably wish to be assured of the journal s quality. So what As well as assisting in the review of manuscripts, the Stem Cell Research & Therapy makes the leading forum Stem Cell Research & Therapy Editorial Board offers in- for translational stem cell research? valuable guidance on the journal’s commissioned con- tent and development. The Editorial Board members reflect the diversity in the field, from basic scientists to Scope, indexing, and impact clinicians, including surgeons [6].
    [Show full text]
  • Sci-Hub Provides Access to Nearly All Scholarly Literature
    Sci-Hub provides access to nearly all scholarly literature A DOI-citable version of this manuscript is available at https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3100. This manuscript was automatically generated from greenelab/scihub-manuscript@51678a7 on October 12, 2017. Submit feedback on the manuscript at git.io/v7feh or on the analyses at git.io/v7fvJ. Authors • Daniel S. Himmelstein 0000-0002-3012-7446 · dhimmel · dhimmel Department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, University of Pennsylvania · Funded by GBMF4552 • Ariel Rodriguez Romero 0000-0003-2290-4927 · arielsvn · arielswn Bidwise, Inc • Stephen Reid McLaughlin 0000-0002-9888-3168 · stevemclaugh · SteveMcLaugh School of Information, University of Texas at Austin • Bastian Greshake Tzovaras 0000-0002-9925-9623 · gedankenstuecke · gedankenstuecke Department of Applied Bioinformatics, Institute of Cell Biology and Neuroscience, Goethe University Frankfurt • Casey S. Greene 0000-0001-8713-9213 · cgreene · GreeneScientist Department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, University of Pennsylvania · Funded by GBMF4552 PeerJ Preprints | https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.3100v2 | CC BY 4.0 Open Access | rec: 12 Oct 2017, publ: 12 Oct 2017 Abstract The website Sci-Hub provides access to scholarly literature via full text PDF downloads. The site enables users to access articles that would otherwise be paywalled. Since its creation in 2011, Sci- Hub has grown rapidly in popularity. However, until now, the extent of Sci-Hub’s coverage was unclear. As of March 2017, we find that Sci-Hub’s database contains 68.9% of all 81.6 million scholarly articles, which rises to 85.2% for those published in toll access journals.
    [Show full text]
  • Enabling Research Through Open Access Policies
    THE SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING & ACADEMIC RESOURCES COALITION 21 Dupont Circle NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 296-2296 www.arl.org/sparc Enabling Research through Open Access Policies Heather Joseph, Executive Director SPARC Washington, DC USA The Issue • Funders invest in research with the expectation that it will result in improvements to the public good. • They increasingly recognize that dissemination is an essential component of the research process. • Research is cumulative - it advances through sharing results. The value of an investment in research is maximized only through use of its findings. www.arl.org/sparc 2 The Issue • Too often, the research results (either publicly or privately funded ) are simply not widely available to the community of potential users. • Internet provides new opportunity to bring information broader audience at virtually no marginal cost, and use it new, innovative ways. Result: Call for new framework designed to allow research results to be more easily accessed and used. www.arl.org/sparc 3 Without Open Access But Article Isn’t Available….. Usability is Key “By open access, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full text of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software or use them for any other lawful purpose…” - The Budapest Open Access Initiative www.arl.org/sparc 6 Greater Access is a Policy Concern “Governments would boost innovation and get a better return on their investment in publicly funded research by making research findings more widely available….
    [Show full text]
  • History of Badminton
    Facts and Records History of Badminton In 1873, the Duke of Beaufort held a lawn party at his country house in the village of Badminton, Gloucestershire. A game of Poona was played on that day and became popular among British society’s elite. The new party sport became known as “the Badminton game”. In 1877, the Bath Badminton Club was formed and developed the first official set of rules. The Badminton Association was formed at a meeting in Southsea on 13th September 1893. It was the first National Association in the world and framed the rules for the Association and for the game. The popularity of the sport increased rapidly with 300 clubs being introduced by the 1920’s. Rising to 9,000 shortly after World War Π. The International Badminton Federation (IBF) was formed in 1934 with nine founding members: England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Denmark, Holland, Canada, New Zealand and France and as a consequence the Badminton Association became the Badminton Association of England. From nine founding members, the IBF, now called the Badminton World Federation (BWF), has over 160 member countries. The future of Badminton looks bright. Badminton was officially granted Olympic status in the 1992 Barcelona Games. Indonesia was the dominant force in that first Olympic tournament, winning two golds, a silver and a bronze; the country’s first Olympic medals in its history. More than 1.1 billion people watched the 1992 Olympic Badminton competition on television. Eight years later, and more than a century after introducing Badminton to the world, Britain claimed their first medal in the Olympics when Simon Archer and Jo Goode achieved Mixed Doubles Bronze in Sydney.
    [Show full text]
  • Inequalities in Open Source Software Development: Analysis of Contributor’S Commits in Apache Software Foundation Projects
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Inequalities in Open Source Software Development: Analysis of Contributor’s Commits in Apache Software Foundation Projects Tadeusz Chełkowski1☯, Peter Gloor2☯*, Dariusz Jemielniak3☯ 1 Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland, 2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Cognitive Intelligence, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States of America, 3 Kozminski University, New Research on Digital Societies (NeRDS) group, Warsaw, Poland ☯ These authors contributed equally to this work. * [email protected] a11111 Abstract While researchers are becoming increasingly interested in studying OSS phenomenon, there is still a small number of studies analyzing larger samples of projects investigating the structure of activities among OSS developers. The significant amount of information that OPEN ACCESS has been gathered in the publicly available open-source software repositories and mailing- list archives offers an opportunity to analyze projects structures and participant involve- Citation: Chełkowski T, Gloor P, Jemielniak D (2016) Inequalities in Open Source Software Development: ment. In this article, using on commits data from 263 Apache projects repositories (nearly Analysis of Contributor’s Commits in Apache all), we show that although OSS development is often described as collaborative, but it in Software Foundation Projects. PLoS ONE 11(4): fact predominantly relies on radically solitary input and individual, non-collaborative contri- e0152976. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152976 butions. We also show, in the first published study of this magnitude, that the engagement Editor: Christophe Antoniewski, CNRS UMR7622 & of contributors is based on a power-law distribution. University Paris 6 Pierre-et-Marie-Curie, FRANCE Received: December 15, 2015 Accepted: March 22, 2016 Published: April 20, 2016 Copyright: © 2016 Chełkowski et al.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Relation Between the Wos Impact Factor, the Eigenfactor, the Scimago Journal Rank, the Article Influence Score and the Journal H-Index
    1 On the relation between the WoS impact factor, the Eigenfactor, the SCImago Journal Rank, the Article Influence Score and the journal h-index Ronald ROUSSEAU 1 and the STIMULATE 8 GROUP 2 1 KHBO, Dept. Industrial Sciences and Technology, Oostende, Belgium [email protected] 2Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussels, Belgium The STIMULATE 8 Group consists of: Anne Sylvia ACHOM (Uganda), Helen Hagos BERHE (Ethiopia), Sangeeta Namdev DHAMDHERE (India), Alicia ESGUERRA (The Philippines), Nguyen Thi Ngoc HOAN (Vietnam), John KIYAGA (Uganda), Sheldon Miti MAPONGA (Zimbabwe), Yohannis MARTÍ- LAHERA (Cuba), Kelefa Tende MWANTIMWA (Tanzania), Marlon G. OMPOC (The Philippines), A.I.M. Jakaria RAHMAN (Bangladesh), Bahiru Shifaw YIMER (Ethiopia). Abstract Four alternatives to the journal Impact Factor (IF) indicator are compared to find out their similarities. Together with the IF, the SCImago Journal Rank indicator (SJR), the EigenfactorTM score, the Article InfluenceTM score and the journal h- index of 77 journals from more than ten fields were collected. Results show that although those indicators are calculated with different methods and even use different databases, they are strongly correlated with the WoS IF and among each other. These findings corroborate results published by several colleagues and show the feasibility of using free alternatives to the Web of Science for evaluating scientific journals. Keywords: WoS impact factor, Eigenfactor, SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), Article Influence Score, journal h-index, correlations Introduction STIMULATE stands for Scientific and Technological Information Management in Universities and Libraries: an Active Training Environment. It is an international training programme in information management, supported by the Flemish Interuniversity Council (VLIR), aiming at young scientists and professionals from 2 developing countries.
    [Show full text]