DOCSLIB.ORG

Do Authors Comply with Mandates for Open Access?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Do Authors Comply with Mandates for Open Access? COMMENT GOVERNANCE Make more ART Pre-Raphaelites LAB LIFE Memoir of PUBLISHING Engage more voices use of the patenting system interpreted discoveries neuroscientist and equality in the debate over Europe’s to regulate gene editing p.486 of a fecund age p.490 advocate Ben Barres p.492 open-access plan p.494 ILLUSTRATION BY SÉBASTIEN THIBAULT SÉBASTIEN BY ILLUSTRATION Do authors comply with mandates for open access? The first large-scale analysis of compliance with open-access rules reveals that rates vary greatly by funder, report Vincent Larivière and Cassidy R. Sugimoto. ast month, European research funders is open access1–4. Here, we report the first They highlight the importance to open access collectively called for research publica- large-scale analysis of compliance, focusing of enforcement, timeliness and infrastructure. tions to be made free, fully and immedi- on 12 selected funding agencies. Biblio metric And they underline the need to establish sus- Lately; so far, 14 funders have signed up. Before data are fraught with idiosyncrasies (see tainable and equitable systems as the financial that, at least 50 funders and 700 research insti- ‘Analysis methods’), but the trends are clear. burdens for science publishing shift from tutions worldwide had already mandated Of the more than 1.3 million papers we research libraries to authors’ research funds. some form of open access for the work they identified as subject to the selected funders’ support. Federally funded agencies and insti- open-access mandates, we found that some FREE FOR ALL tutions argue that taxpayers should be able two-thirds were indeed freely available to read. Funders with open-access mandates have to read publicly funded research, and that Rates varied greatly, from around 90% for varying incentives, opt-out mechanisms, broader accessibility will allow researchers work funded by the US National Institutes of copyright protections, deposit guidelines whose institutions do not subscribe to a par- Health (NIH) and UK biomedical funder the and other associated infrastructures and ticular journal to build on existing research. Wellcome Trust, to 23% for work supported by requirements. These affect when, how and However, few empirical analyses have the Social Sciences and Humanities Research how much work is made open. Our analysis examined whether work supported by fund- Council of Canada (see ‘Mandates matter’). did not assess licensing and instead counted ing agencies with such mandates actually Our findings have policy implications. articles found to be freely available to ©2018 Spri nger Nature Li mited. All ri ghts reserved25. OCTOBER 2018 | VOL 562 | NATURE | 483 COMMENT MANDATES MATTER About two-thirds of papers under open-access (OA) mandates are free to read*, either from repositories (green OA) or journal websites (gold OA), with US funders favouring repositories. Of open papers, about half are available by both routes. VERY VARIED ACCESS GREEN AND GOLD Rates of compliance vary greatly by funder, although they mostly trend Since 2009, the proportion of papers available to read* as both gold and green upwards. Dips in 2017 are due to embargoes (which delay access for has soared, even as the proportion of green-only access has stayed relatively xed periods after publication). constant, and gold-only has dropped. Before mandate adoption Gold only Green and gold Green only No open access identied UNITED KINGDOM AND EUROPEAN UNION 19% in 2016 16% 21% 12% (69% in 2009) (5%) (51%) (10%) 100 Wellcome Trust 80 MRC EPSRC ESRC BBSRC 60 United United EPSRC Kingdom Kingdom 40 ESRC ERC 20 Finch report published Other UK 25% 40% 19% 48% (20%) (6%) (22%) (17%) Other EU 0 Papers under OA mandates (%) under OA Papers 10% 4% 8% 3% (33%) (18%) (21%) (11%) UNITED STATES AND CANADA & C.R.S. V.L. ANALYSIS: WEB OF SCIENCE/ROARMAP. ANALYTICS UNPAYWALL/CLARIVATE SOURCES: DATA 100 NIH Wellcome Gates MRC 80 Trust United CIHR United Many papers under embargo Kingdom 60 NSF Kingdom NSERC 40 Other Canadian 10% 76% 9% 80% (9%) (40%) (11%) (57%) 20 Other US SSHRC 0 Papers under OA mandates (%) under OA Papers 53% 6% 12% 2% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 (53%) (8%) (10%) (3%) FUNDER EFFECT Even within the same discipline, access varies greatly by funder. NSF 17% NIH Of chemistry papers supported by the NIH, 81% were open United (17%) United access; 24% of NSF’s chemistry papers were. States States Papers available (%) 24% 20 50 100 0 25 50 75 100 46% 40% (22%) (42%) (45%) 17% 9% 27% 7% (27%) (13%) (54%) (8%) Biomedical research Clinical medicine Health Mathematics Earth and space Psychology Physics Biology Professional elds Social sciences Chemistry Engineering and technology All disciplines Gates ERC Wellcome Trust Multicountry Multicountry NIH MRC Gates 11% 63% 29% 37% (17%) (43%) (19%) (19%) BBSRC ESRC 79% 7% 45% 12% ERC (75%) (7%) (46%) (23%) CIHR 7% EPSRC (7%) NSF SSHRC CIHR NSERC Canada Canada SSHRC 7% All funded papers (11%) 9% 34% MRC, Medical Research Council (UK); BBSRC, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (7%) (24%) (UK); EPSRC, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (UK); ESRC, Economic and Social Research Council (UK); ERC, European Research Council; NIH, US National Institutes of Health; Gates, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; NSF, US National Science Foundation; CIHR, Canadian Institutes of *Our analysis counted papers freely available to read on publishers’ websites as gold and those in Health Research; NSERC, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (Canada); SSHRC, Social repositories as green. It did not consider conditions of reuse or whether free access happened at the Sciences and Humanities Research Council (Canada). same time as publication. Shown over time in Supplementary Information Figure S3. 484 | NATURE | VOL 562 | 25 OCTOBER 2018©2018 Spri nger Nature Li mited. All ri ghts reserved. ©2018 Spri nger Nature Li mited. All ri ghts reserved. COMMENT read. We assessed whether access was gold (available on a journal website) or green ANALYSIS METHODS (available in a repository, such as PubMed Central, the preprint server arXiv or else- How we mined data on open-access compliance where, sometimes with a delay or ‘embargo’ of up to a year after publication). About half We first identified the funding sources as on Sci-Hub). As of April 2018, Unpaywall (47.5%) of open papers are both green and of papers using the published provided the open-access status of nearly gold (see ‘Green and gold’). acknowledgements (mandated by most 96 million scholarly documents. Both the NIH and the Wellcome Trust state funders). These have been indexed by Of the 12,495,074 journal articles we that they will withhold or suspend payments the Web of Science (WoS) since 2008 for matched with Unpaywall using DOIs, if articles are not made open access, although science and medicine, and since 2015 for 1,352,918 acknowledged funding from it is unclear whether they have done so. These social-sciences articles. There is no uniform 1 of the 12 funders we identified. agencies provide convenient repositories for format, so we looked for variations of To determine rates of compliance, we depositing articles: PubMedCentral for NIH- agency names (such as ‘NSF’ and ‘National matched Unpaywall data to our set of WoS funded work, and Europe PubMed Central in Science Foundation’) and aggregated these. articles and analysed them by funder and the case of Wellcome. Their policies encour- Next, we used Unpaywall, a platform discipline. WoS includes papers published age compliance and allow authors to publish that helps researchers to find open-access in about 12,500 journals annually, so some in journals that do not permit articles to be articles. It identifies the population of funded work is in journals not covered available immediately without a subscription. scholarly papers using the list of unique by our analysis, especially in the social Although articles must be in a repository at digital object identifiers (DOIs) registered by sciences and humanities. Our ability to the time of publication, free access can occur Crossref, a non-profit indexing organization. assign funders to papers is imperfect, later. For example, a paper with a 12-month Unpaywall mines all journal websites listed in given the various ways in which funder embargo published in the March 2016 issue the Directory of Open Access Journals, along names appear and because authors do not of a journal would become freely available in with databases such as PubMed Central always provide funding information. Rates the repository in March 2017. and 50,000 other journal websites and of estimated compliance are likely to be Funders that allow authors to deposit repositories. It intentionally excludes papers conservative; there might be funded papers papers after publication see lower rates of that are available on social-networking sites that are freely available online but which compliance, presumably because authors (such as ResearchGate) or illegally (such could not be found by Unpaywall. V.L. & C.R.S. lose track of this obligation. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) man- dated deposit on publication from 2008 to between 2009 and 2016; the Engineering and NEXT STEPS 2015, but dropped this requirement when Physical Sciences Research Council went If funding agencies have their own data on the three main Canadian research councils up by 50 percentage points. This follows the compliance, the information should be adopted a joint, harmonized policy. Com- publication of the Finch report in 2012 (see openly published so that it can be used in pliance for CIHR-funded studies went from go.nature.com/2yojrkc) by a working group assessments of the march of open access, such around 60% in 2014 to around 40% in 2017. of academics, funders and publishers that as ours. That would also allow comparisons Other funders that have lower rates of was established in 2011 by David Willetts, to be drawn.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Scientometric Analysis
    Tropical Ecology 59(3): 431–443, 2018 ISSN 0564-3295 © International Society for Tropical Ecology www.tropecol.com Global research trends in ‘Ecology’: A scientometric analysis 1* 2 ANWESHA BORTHAKUR & PARDEEP SINGH 1Centre for Studies in Science Policy, Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi-110067, India 2Department of Environmental Studies, PGDAV College, University of Delhi, New Delhi-110065, India Abstract: Ecological research has observed a near constant growth during the past few decades. Considering the significance and diversity of ecological research with regard to both its vastness and specificity, this paper is an attempt to map out the research activities in ‘ecology’ through a ‘scientometric analysis’ of the world research outputs. The aim was to identify and document the historical and current research trajectories in the subject. We recognize the fact that in the absence of an in-depth analysis of the trends in research, it is utterly possible that some areas of research get more than adequate attention from the global research and policy community while some equally important areas of the subject remain completely unaddressed or neglected. The study was carried out using two major databases – Scopus and SCImago for the 21 years period from 1996 to 2016 by means of a defined scientific method. Among the several interesting observations, we have found that apart from China, no countries and research institutes from the global south are listed among the top 10 research producing countries/institutes on ecology. Considering the fact that majority of the ecologically sensitive areas and biodiversity hotspots of the world are located in the developing world and have significance influences on the ecological processes across the globe, this calls for immediate attention from the research community.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Text and Figures
    SUPPLEMENTARY TEXT John P.A. Ioannidis1, Richard Klavans2, Kevin W. Boyack2 1 Departments of Medicine, of Health Research and Policy, of Biomedical Data Science, and of Statistics, and Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS), Stanford University 2 SciTech Strategies, Inc. Contents Technical note on methods 1 References 7 Figures: trends over time and effects of co-authorship 8 Survey to hyperprolific authors for calendar years 2016: text of e-mail 12 Survey to hyperprolific authors for calendar year 2016: open responses 14 Request to contribute comments sent to all listed hyperprolific authors 18 Comments contributed by hyperprolific authors 20 Acknowledgments 119 Technical note on methods An author publishing the equivalent of one full paper every 5 days will end up publishing 73 papers in a calendar year. We selected this number as a threshold to define and study outlier, hyperprolific authors. Of course, published papers may reflect the final presentation of work that has happened over many years, but focusing on calendar years allows to study peaks in productivity and to use a clearly definable time unit. 1 We identified all author records in Scopus that included 73 or more published full papers in any single calendar year between 2000 and 2016. Full papers included in our analysis are the ones classified as Articles, Conference Papers and Reviews in Scopus. All other Scopus categories of published items (Editorials, Letters, Notes, Short Surveys, Errata, and so forth) were excluded. Papers take variable amounts of effort to produce. For items such as editorials, notes, letters to the editor, in theory large numbers of publications are possible to produce by authors who have a talent, proclivity or obsession for writing; such works may occasionally be very important and influential, but they take, on average, substantially less time to produce than Articles, Conference Papers and Reviews.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliometric Analysis of Document Ow on Academic Social Networks in Web of Science
    Bibliometric analysis of document ow on academic social networks in Web of Science Tatyana Busygina ( [email protected] ) State Public Scientic-Technological Library of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0329-414X Anna Yuklyaevskaya State Public Scientic-Technological Library of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9837-9423 Research Article Keywords: Scientometrics, Academic social network, Web of Science, Altmetrics, Documents co-citation analysis, co-word analysis, CiteSpace Posted Date: February 3rd, 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-196204/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Page 1/34 Abstract Analysis of a document array on academic social networks (ASNs) in Web of Science for the period from 2005 to 2020 was carried out with use of analytical services data of the WoS and CiteSpace (the program for visualization of patterns and trends in scientic literature). The following parameters of the array were analyzed: publication dynamics; document types structure; countries, organizations and authors leading in the number of publications; thematic categories to which documents of the array are assigned; publications (journals, monographs) in which the documents of the array are published; most cited publications. An increase in the number of publications on the ASNs in WoS was established since 2005. The largest number of ASNs studies is conducted in the USA (University of Pittsburgh), UK (Wolverhampton University, Manchester University), China, Spain (University of Granada), Germany (Max Planck Society for Scientic Research), Canada, India and the Netherlands (Leiden University).
    [Show full text]
  • Incites Lunedi’ 26 Ottobre 14.30-15.30 Questa Sessione Tratta Le Nozioni Basiche Di Utilizzo Di Incites
    NOZIONI DI BASE InCites Lunedi’ 26 ottobre 14.30-15.30 Questa sessione tratta le nozioni basiche di utilizzo di InCites. InCites dataset: come e quando viene creato e dove CNR trovare le informazioni relative. Come esportare un set di dati da Web of Science a InCites e come visualizzare un set di papers da InCites su Web of Science. Altre possibilità di caricamento di un dataset. Come funzionano i filtri e come selezionare i vari indicatori. Come visualizzare i diversi tipi di grafici, come salvare e/o condividere un “tile”. Come esportare le tabelle, i grafici e le metriche a livello di articolo. Registrazione → LE PRINCIPALI CARATTERISTICHE DEI VARI MODULI E DEI SYSTEM REPORTS Martedi’ 27 ottobre 14.30-15.30 Questa sessione prende in considerazione le principali caratteristiche dei 6 moduli Explorer e dei due tipi di report di sistema. Le differenze tra i vari moduli e come è possibile passare da un modulo all’altro (refocus). Le unificazioni sottostanti (organizzazioni, editori, agenzie di finanziamento): limiti e caratteristiche. Le baselines, ovverosia come crearsi un proprio benchmark. La classificazione per aree geografiche NUTS. Limiti ed esempi. Le collaborazioni internazionali e con l’industria. Le analisi sull’Open Access. Registrazione → LA VALUTAZIONE DI UN PAPER, DI UN AUTORE O DI UNA ISTITUZIONE Mercoledi’ 28 ottobre 11.00-12.00 Questa sessione presenta l’utilizzo dei dati di Web of Science Core Collection per le valutazioni: il concetto di citazione (e indicatore) normalizzato, l’importanza della categorizzazione, i principali ranking internazionali, la passata e la presente VQR, i percentili, la posizione degli autori, i dati per la ASN (con ESCI) e l’analisi dei profili personali, il problema delle autocitazioni, i Web Services.
    [Show full text]
  • Working on Scopus.Com What We Will Do for You in 2021
    Working on Scopus.com What we will do for you in 2021 Marcel Vonder Sr Product Director, Scopus 2 Increase success for users in their most important tasks! Size of bubble indicates the proportion of visits undertaking this task (106-932) MOST Scopus.com visitors were asked about the purpose of their visit and how successful their SUCCESSFUL visit was overall. (R12M, N=3024) Refer to academic performance Identify/assess/track potential metrics in reviewing an research collaborators or application commercial partners Track my own performance Track my peers or colleagues Review relevant scholarly output Choose a reviewer for a Identify an appropriate journal to on a topic, in reviewing a manuscript submit my manuscript to manuscript Keep up-to-date with the latest developments in my own field Assess specific published papers Find inspiration for new Confirm ideas for Obtain information on a subject research/ product or research/products or innovations outside my area of expertise innovation idea are novel Search for a specific article or set of articles VISITSUCCESS Perform bibliometric analysis on a set of publications, authors, Identify leading journals in a etc particular research area Gain an in-depth understanding of a topic within my field LEAST LOW HIGH SUCCESSFUL Importance of task (NPS from users that undertake this task) Use cases with n<100 excluded Enriching our Researcher Profiles Increasingly helping users look at the world in researcher centric way 3 SCOPUS REDESIGN Author Profile page (launched in Q3, 2020) Objectives: 1. Easier to scan and clearer call-to-actions 2. Drive users to the Author Feedback Wizard to improve our overall data quality 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access Initiatives and Networking in the Global South Iryna Kuchma
    Open Access Initiatives and Networking in the Global South Iryna Kuchma This short study highlights the impact of open access in the Global South. Featuring collaborative open access initiatives in Algeria, Kenya, Myanmar, Nigeria, Nepal, Palestine, Tanzania, Uganda and Latin American countries, it showcases success and describes the challenges that we still face. It also questions a notion of a journal article – perhaps already becoming obsolete – and discusses the growing preprints initiatives to speed up the availability of research results. The value of regional journal and repository networks enhancing open access content in Europe and Latin America is also discussed as well as the impact human networks make in the Global South. Health research dissemination Dr. Bessie Mukami is a general physician at Embu General Provincial Hospital, a relatively large teaching hospital in Embu, a town located approximately 120 kilometres northeast of Nairobi towards Mount Kenya. Embu serves as the provincial headquarters of Eastern Province in Kenya and is also the county headquarters of Embu County. “You have, maybe, one doctor to ten thousand people”, says Dr. Mukami. And as she speaks, her fingers click through pages of open access medical journals on a laptop. Subscribing to medical journals is very expensive, and it can be difficult for doctors to consult each other because of the long distances between hospitals. Open access is solving one of the biggest problems Dr. Mukami has: “Instead of calling other doctors for information, the information is open and available, and you search for what you really want”, she says. Dr. Gerald Nderitu, the medical superintendent at the same hospital and an experienced surgeon of 16 years, also relies on open access research output to help his patients.
    [Show full text]
  • Characteristics of the Most Cited, Most Downloaded, and Most Mentioned Articles in General Medical Journals: a Comparative Bibliometric Analysis
    healthcare Article Characteristics of the Most Cited, Most Downloaded, and Most Mentioned Articles in General Medical Journals: A Comparative Bibliometric Analysis Ji Hyun Hong , Dae Young Yoon *, Kyoung Ja Lim, Ji Yoon Moon, Sora Baek, Young Lan Seo and Eun Joo Yun Department of Radiology, Kangdong Seong-Sim Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, Seoul 134-701, Korea; [email protected] (J.H.H.); [email protected] (K.J.L.); [email protected] (J.Y.M.); [email protected] (S.B.); [email protected] (Y.L.S.); [email protected] (E.J.Y.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 26 September 2020; Accepted: 16 November 2020; Published: 18 November 2020 Abstract: We compared the characteristics of the most cited, most downloaded, and most mentioned (the highest Altmetric Attention Score) articles published in general medical journals. We identified the 640 most frequently cited, 662 most frequently downloaded, and 652 most mentioned articles from 48 general medical journals. A comparison was made of the following characteristics of articles in the most cited, most downloaded, and most mentioned articles: medical specialty, publication type, country of origin, year of publication, and accessibility. There was only a 2.5% overlap in these three groups. Original articles were the more frequent among the most mentioned articles, whereas reviews, case reports, and guidelines/consensus statements were more frequent among the most downloaded articles. The most cited articles were more frequently published in 2010 and before, whereas the most downloaded articles were published in 2017 2018. The most mentioned articles were more − frequently open-access articles, compared to the most downloaded articles.
    [Show full text]
  • Elevating the Impacts of Research in Agricultural Education
    Journal of Agricultural Education, 61(2), 249-262 https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2020.02249 Elevating the Impacts of Research in Agricultural Education James R. Lindner,1 Amy Harder2, and T. Grady Roberts3 Abstract Dissemination of research is a critical part of the research process. Researchers in agricultural education have long embraced this process. However, the Internet has changed the ways in which research is disseminated, with the potential for much broader impacts around the world. The purpose of this study was to provide a benchmark of the current impact of research in agricultural education by examining how journals and researchers in the field fare on commonly used research metrics. It was concluded that many of the common journals in agricultural education are not even listed in the indices that provide metrics to assess journals. It was also concluded that many researchers in agricultural education are not taking steps to provide public profiles of their research and thus do not have individual researcher metrics. In some ways, we are invisible to the broader scientific community. Practical suggestions are provided to elevate the reputations of our journals and the reputations of our researchers. Keywords: research; journals; metrics; impacts; academics Author Note: Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to James Lindner, Professor Agriscience Education, Auburn University, AL 36849; email: [email protected] Introduction There is perhaps nothing that defines and ties together the agricultural education discipline more than the concept of change. For our purposes, we are using agricultural education as an inclusive term to describe our broader discipline that includes faculty in teacher education, extension education, agricultural communications, and agricultural leadership.
    [Show full text]
  • Preprints in Scholarly Communication: Re-Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures
    publications Article Preprints in Scholarly Communication: Re-Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures B. Preedip Balaji 1,* and M. Dhanamjaya 2 1 Indian Institute for Human Settlements Library and School of Library and Information Science, REVA University, Bengaluru 560064, India 2 School of Library and Information Science, REVA University, Yelahanka, Bengaluru 560064, India; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +91-080-6760-6661 Received: 2 September 2018; Accepted: 8 January 2019; Published: 14 January 2019 Abstract: Digital scholarship and electronic publishing within scholarly communities change when metrics and open infrastructures take center stage for measuring research impact. In scholarly communication, the growth of preprint repositories as a new model of scholarly publishing over the last three decades has been one of the major developments. As it unfolds, the landscape of scholarly communication is transitioning—with much being privatized as it is made open—and turning towards alternative metrics, such as social media attention, author-level, and article-level metrics. Moreover, the granularity of evaluating research impact through new metrics and social media changes the objective standards of evaluating research performance. Using preprint repositories as a case study, this article situates them in a scholarly web, examining their salient features, benefits, and futures. Moves towards scholarly web development and publishing on the semantic and social web with open infrastructures, citations, and alternative metrics—how preprints advance building the web as data—is discussed. We determine that this will viably demonstrate new metrics and, by enhancing research publishing tools in the scholarly commons, facilitate various communities of practice. However, for preprint repositories to be sustainable, scholarly communities and funding agencies should support continued investment in open knowledge, alternative metrics development, and open infrastructures in scholarly publishing.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Ground in the Global Quest for Open Research
    OSI POLICY PERSPECTIVES COMMON GROUND IN THE GLOBAL QUEST FOR OPEN RESEARCH OSI POLICY PERSPECTIVE 2 APRIL 2020 EDITION OPEN SCHOLARSHIP INITIATIVE ABOUT OSI POLICY PERSPECTIVES The OSI Policy Perspectives series offers broad, common ground perspectives on key issues in scholarly communication. Each report summarizes the current state of a particular issue and what we know about it, and also attempts to articulate the per- spectives and lessons of experience from all stake¬holder groups in scholarly communication on this issue (particularly but not exclusively as expressed in OSI conversations) and identify what common ground might exist for building broadly acceptable policy. OSI is not a democratic body that speaks with one voice on any particular issue. Trying to reconcile the views, intentions, and motivations of all the different actors, communities and groups in the scholarly communication space—which are very rarely entirely aligned—is challenging. We acknowledge, therefore, that these reports may be (and in fact, probably are) an imperfect reflection of the many perspectives and ideas in this group. The fact that these reports sometimes need to be published in a rush, in response to policy commenting deadlines and other pressures only makes this imperfection more likely. We also acknowledge, however, that OSI often considers a wider range of perspectives than established policy making bodies in scholarly communication, and that our relative strength is showcasing this range of perspectives and noting how they differ, and importantly, how they share common ground. To this end, we hope it is valuable to produce these reports, however imper- fect, and share them with the scholarly communication community and beyond.
    [Show full text]
  • Bias Against Novelty in Science: a Cautionary Tale for Users of Bibliometric Indicators
    Bias against Novelty in Science: A Cautionary Tale for Users of Bibliometric Indicators Jian Wang1, Reinhilde Veugelers2 and Paula Stephan3 1 KU Leuven 2 KU Leuven, Bruegel and CEPR 3 Georgia State University and NBER April 2016 ABSTRACT Research which explores unchartered waters has a high potential for major impact but also carries a higher uncertainty of having impact. Such explorative research is often described as taking a novel approach. This study examines the complex relationship between pursuing a novel approach and impact. Viewing scientific research as a combinatorial process, we measure novelty in science by examining whether a published paper makes first time ever combinations of referenced journals, taking into account the difficulty of making such combinations. We apply this newly developed measure of novelty to all Web of Science research articles published in 2001 across all scientific disciplines. We find that highly novel papers, defined to be those that make more (distant) new combinations, deliver high gains to science: they are more likely to be a top 1% highly cited paper in the long run, to inspire follow on highly cited research, and to be cited in a broader set of disciplines. At the same time, novel research is also more risky, reflected by a higher variance in its citation performance. In addition, we find that novel research is significantly more highly cited in “foreign” fields but not in its “home” field. We also find strong evidence of delayed recognition of novel papers and that novel papers are less likely to be top cited when using a short time window.
    [Show full text]
  • PREVALENCE of POTENTIALLY PREDATORY PUBLISHING in SCOPUS on the COUNTRY LEVEL 1 Prevalence of Potentially Predatory Publishing in Scopus on the Country Level
    PREVALENCE OF POTENTIALLY PREDATORY PUBLISHING IN SCOPUS ON THE COUNTRY LEVEL 1 Prevalence of Potentially Predatory Publishing in Scopus on the Country Level Tatiana Savinay∗ Ivan Sterligovy y National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia ∗Russian Foundation for Basic Research, Moscow, Russia. [email protected] [email protected] F Abstract—We present results of a large-scale study of po- of various degree of competence as well as by tentially predatory journals (PPJ) represented in the Scopus researchers themselves [Leydesdorff et al., 2016]. database, which is widely used for research evaluation. Both In short, research evaluation has become substan- journal metrics and country/disciplinary data have been evalu- tially more formalized relying on various indicators, ated for different groups of PPJ: those listed by Jeffrey Beall which are mostly based on publication and citation and those discontinued by Scopus because of “publication con- counts. This metrics explosion is partially attributed cerns”. Our results show that even after years of discontinuing, hundreds of active potentially predatory journals are still highly to the priorities of many nations and organizations visible in the Scopus database. PPJ papers are continuously to reproduce the success of world leaders in science produced by all major countries, but with different prevalence. and technology. Most ASJC (All Science Journal Classification) subject areas In this paper, we provide a bird’s eye view of the are affected. The largest number of PPJ papers are in engineer- growth of articles in potentially predatory journals ing and medicine. On average, PPJ have much lower citation (PPJ), a global phenomenon stemming from both metrics than other Scopus-indexed journals.
    [Show full text]