Content deleted Content added
m →top |
|||
| (44 intermediate revisions by 32 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|
{{distinguish|Open source}}
{{other uses}}
Line 6:
[[File:PhD Comics Open Access Week 2012.ogv|thumb|thumbtime=5:44|A [[Piled Higher and Deeper|''PhD Comics'']] introduction to open access]]
'''Open access''' ('''OA''') is a set of principles and a range of practices through which nominally [[copyright]]able publications are delivered to readers free of access charges or other barriers.<ref name="suber overview">{{Cite web |last=Suber |first=Peter |title=Open Access Overview |url=
The main focus of the open access movement has been on "[[peer review]]ed research literature", and more specifically on [[academic journal]]s.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |last=Swan |first=Alma |date=2012 |title=Policy guidelines for the development and promotion of open access |url=https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000215863 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190414001646/https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000215863 |archive-date=14 April 2019 |access-date=14 April 2019 |website=UNESCO}}</ref> This is because:
Whereas non-open access journals cover publishing costs through [[Subscription business model|access tolls]] such as subscriptions, site licenses or [[pay-per-view]] charges, open-access journals are characterised by funding models which do not require the reader to pay to read the journal's contents, relying instead on [[author fees]] or on public funding, subsidies and sponsorships. Open access can be applied to all forms of published research output, including [[peer-reviewed]] and non peer-reviewed [[academic journal]] articles, [[conference papers]], [[theses]],<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Schöpfel |first1=Joachim |last2=Prost |first2=Hélène |year=2013 |title=Degrees of secrecy in an open environment. The case of electronic theses and dissertations |url=http://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/article/view/214 |url-status=live |journal=ESSACHESS – Journal for Communication Studies |volume=6 |issue=2(12) |pages=65–86 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140101042356/http://www.essachess.com/index.php/jcs/article/view/214 |archive-date=1 January 2014}}</ref> book chapters,<ref name="suber overview" /> [[monograph]]s,<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Schwartz |first=Meredith |year=2012 |title=Directory of Open Access Books Goes Live |url=http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2012/04/academic-libraries/directory-of-open-access-books-goes-live/ |url-status=live |journal=Library Journal |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131004231707/http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2012/04/academic-libraries/directory-of-open-access-books-goes-live/ |archive-date=4 October 2013}}</ref> [[research report]]s and images.<ref name="esatc">{{Cite news |date=July 2014 |title=Terms and conditions for the use and redistribution of Sentinel data|publisher=European Space Agency |issue=version 1.0 |url=https://scihub.copernicus.eu/twiki/pub/SciHubWebPortal/TermsConditions/TC_Sentinel_Data_31072014.pdf |url-status=live |access-date=28 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200208083453/https://scihub.copernicus.eu/twiki/pub/SciHubWebPortal/TermsConditions/TC_Sentinel_Data_31072014.pdf |archive-date=8 February 2020}}</ref>
Line 45:
==== Hybrid OA ====
[[Hybrid open-access journal]]s contain a mixture of open access articles and closed access articles.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Laakso |first1=Mikael |last2=Björk |first2=Bo-Christer |date=2016 |title=Hybrid open access—A longitudinal study |journal=Journal of Informetrics |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=919–932 |doi=10.1016/j.joi.2016.08.002 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Suber|2012|pp=140–141}}</ref> A publisher following this model is partially funded by subscriptions, and only provide open access for those individual articles for which the authors (or research sponsor) pay a publication fee.<ref name="Suber2012">{{harvnb|Suber|2012|p=140}}</ref> Hybrid OA generally costs more than gold OA and can offer a lower quality of service.<ref name="auto">{{Cite web |last=Trust |first=Wellcome |date=23 March 2016 |title=Wellcome Trust and COAF Open Access Spend, 2014-15 |url=https://wellcometrust.wordpress.com/2016/03/23/wellcome-trust-and-coaf-open-access-spend-2014-15/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191027120604/https://wellcometrust.wordpress.com/2016/03/23/wellcome-trust-and-coaf-open-access-spend-2014-15/ |archive-date=27 October 2019 |access-date=27 October 2019 |website=Wellcome Trust Blog |language=en}}</ref> A particularly controversial practice in hybrid open access journals is "[[Double dipping (publishing)|double dipping]]", where both authors and subscribers are charged.<ref name="Open access double dipping policy">{{Cite web |title=Open access double dipping policy |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/open-access-policies/open-access-journals/double-dipping-policy |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200831011413/https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/open-access-policies/open-access-journals/double-dipping-policy |archive-date=31 August 2020 |access-date=12 March 2018 |website=Cambridge Core}}</ref> For these reasons, hybrid open access journals have been called a "[[Mephistophelian]] invention",<ref>{{cite journal | pmc=5624290 | date=2017 | last1=Björk | first1=B. C. | title=Growth of hybrid open access, 2009–2016 | journal=PeerJ | volume=5 |
==== Bronze OA ====
Bronze open access articles are free to read only on the publisher page, but lack a clearly identifiable license.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Piwowar |first1=Heather |last2=Priem |first2=Jason |last3=Larivière |first3=Vincent |last4=Alperin |first4=Juan Pablo |last5=Matthias |first5=Lisa |last6=Norlander |first6=Bree |last7=Farley |first7=Ashley |last8=West |first8=Jevin |last9=Haustein |first9=Stefanie |date=13 February 2018 |title=The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles |journal=PeerJ |volume=6 |
==== Diamond/platinum OA ====
{{See also|Diamond open access}}
Journals that publish open access without charging authors article processing charges are sometimes referred to as diamond<ref name="fuchs2013" /><ref name="Gaj" /><ref name=":1" /> or platinum<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Machovec |first=George |year=2013 |title=An Interview with Jeffrey Beall on Open Access Publishing |journal=The Charleston Advisor |volume=15 |issue=1 |pages=50 |doi=10.5260/chara.15.1.50}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Öchsner |first=A. |title=Introduction to Scientific Publishing |year=2013 |isbn=978-3-642-38645-9 |series=SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology |pages=23–29 |chapter=Publishing Companies, Publishing Fees, and Open Access Journals |publisher=Springer |___location=Berlin, Heidelberg |doi=10.1007/978-3-642-38646-6_4}}</ref> OA. Since they do not charge either readers or authors directly, such publishers often require funding from external sources such as the sale of [[advertisements]], [[academic institution]]s, [[learned society|learned societies]], [[philanthropist]]s or [[government grant]]s.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Normand |first=Stephanie |date=4 April 2018 |title=Is Diamond Open Access the Future of Open Access? |url=https://theijournal.ca/index.php/ijournal/article/view/29482 |url-status=live |journal=The IJournal: Graduate Student Journal of the Faculty of Information |volume=3 |issue=2 |issn=2561-7397 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200529090738/https://theijournal.ca/index.php/ijournal/article/view/29482 |archive-date=29 May 2020 |access-date=25 June 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Rosenblum |first1=Brian |last2=Greenberg |first2=Marc |last3=Bolick |first3=Josh |last4=Emmett |first4=Ada |last5=Peterson |first5=A. Townsend |date=17 June 2016 |title=Subsidizing truly open access |journal=Science |volume=352 |issue=6292 |pages=1405 |bibcode=2016Sci...352.1405P |doi=10.1126/science.aag0946 |issn=0036-8075 |pmid=27313033 |hdl-access=free |hdl=1808/20978 |s2cid=206650745}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=By |date=1 June 2017 |title=Diamond Open Access, Societies and Mission |url=https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/06/01/diamond-open-access-societies-mission/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190624133849/https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/06/01/diamond-open-access-societies-mission/ |archive-date=24 June 2019 |access-date=25 June 2019 |website=The Scholarly Kitchen}}</ref> There are now over 350 platinum OA journals with [[impact factors]] over a wide variety of academic disciplines, giving most academics options for OA with no APCs.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pearce |first=Joshua M. |date=2022 |title=The Rise of Platinum Open Access Journals with Both Impact Factors and Zero Article Processing Charges |journal=Knowledge |language=en |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=209–224 |doi=10.3390/knowledge2020013 |issn=2673-9585|doi-access=free }}</ref> Diamond OA journals are available for most disciplines, and are usually small (<25 articles per year) and more likely to be multilingual (38%); thousands of such journals exist.<ref name=":1">{{Cite report|url=https://zenodo.org/record/4558704|title=OA Diamond Journals Study. Part 1: Findings|last1=Bosman|first1=Jeroen|last2=Frantsvåg|first2=Jan Erik|date=2021-03-09|doi=10.5281/zenodo.4558704|last3=Kramer|first3=Bianca|last4=Langlais|first4=Pierre-Carl|last5=Proudman|first5=Vanessa|journal= }}</ref>
==== Black OA ====
Line 60:
=== Gratis and libre ===
{{main|Gratis versus libre}}
Similar to the [[free content]] definition, the terms [[Gratis versus libre|'gratis' and 'libre']] were used in the [[Budapest Open Access Initiative]] definition to distinguish between free to read versus free to reuse.<ref name="Gratis and Libre Open Access">{{Cite web |last=Suber |first=Peter |date=2008 |title=Gratis and Libre Open Access |url=
{{anchor|Free access}}Gratis open access ({{free access}}) refers to free online access, to read, free of charge, without re-use rights.<ref name="Gratis and Libre Open Access" />
Line 68:
=== FAIR ===
{{Main|FAIR data}}
[[FAIR data|FAIR]] is an acronym for 'findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable', intended to more clearly define what is meant by the term 'open access' and make the concept easier to discuss.<ref name="FAIR principles 2016">{{Cite journal |last1=Wilkinson |first1=Mark D. |last2=Dumontier |first2=Michel |last3=Aalbersberg |first3=IJsbrand Jan |last4=Appleton |first4=Gabrielle |last5=Axton |first5=Myles |last6=Baak |first6=Arie |last7=Blomberg |first7=Niklas |last8=Boiten |first8=Jan-Willem |last9=da Silva Santos |first9=Luiz Bonino |last10=Bourne |first10=Philip E. |last11=Bouwman |first11=Jildau |display-authors=4 |date=15 March 2016 |title=The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship |journal=Scientific Data |volume=3 |pages=160018 |bibcode=2016NatSD...360018W |doi=10.1038/sdata.2016.18 |oclc=961158301 |pmc=4792175 |pmid=26978244 |last12=Brookes |first12=Anthony J. |last13=Clark |first13=Tim |last14=Crosas |first14=Mercè |last15=Dillo |first15=Ingrid |last16=Dumon |first16=Olivier |last17=Edmunds |first17=Scott |last18=Evelo |first18=Chris T. |last19=Finkers |first19=Richard |last20=Gonzalez-Beltran |first20=Alejandra |last21=Gray |first21=Alasdair J.G. |last22=Groth |first22=Paul |last23=Goble |first23=Carole |last24=Grethe |first24=Jeffrey S. |last25=Heringa |first25=Jaap |last26='t Hoen |first26=Peter A.C |last27=Hooft |first27=Rob |last28=Kuhn |first28=Tobias |last29=Kok |first29=Ruben |last30=Kok |first30=Joost |last31=Lusher |first31=Scott J. |last32=Martone |first32=Maryann E. |last33=Mons |first33=Albert |last34=Packer |first34=Abel L. |last35=Persson |first35=Bengt |last36=Rocca-Serra |first36=Philippe |last37=Roos |first37=Marco |last38=van Schaik |first38=Rene |last39=Sansone |first39=Susanna-Assunta |last40=Schultes |first40=Erik |last41=Sengstag |first41=Thierry |last42=Slater |first42=Ted |last43=Strawn |first43=George |last44=Swertz |first44=Morris A. |last45=Thompson |first45=Mark |last46=van der Lei |first46=Johan |last47=van Mulligen |first47=Erik |last48=Velterop |first48=Jan |last49=Waagmeester |first49=Andra |last50=Wittenburg |first50=Peter |last51=Wolstencroft |first51=Katherine |last52=Zhao |first52=Jun |last53=Mons |first53=Barend|issue=1 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Wilkinson |first1=Mark D. |last2=da Silva Santos |first2=Luiz Olavo Bonino |last3=Dumontier |first3=Michel |last4=Velterop |first4=Jan |last5=Neylon |first5=Cameron |last6=Mons |first6=Barend |date=1 January 2017 |title=Cloudy, increasingly FAIR; revisiting the FAIR Data guiding principles for the European Open Science Cloud |journal=Information Services & Use |volume=37 |issue=1 |pages=49–56 |doi=10.3233/ISU-170824 |issn=0167-5265 |doi-access=free |hdl=20.500.11937/53669|hdl-access=free }}</ref> Initially proposed in March 2016, it has subsequently been endorsed by organisations such as the [[European Commission]] and the [[G20]].<ref>{{Cite web |date=20 April 2016 |title=European Commission embraces the FAIR principles |url=https://www.dtls.nl/2016/04/20/european-commission-allocates-e2-billion-to-make-research-data-fair/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180720134337/https://www.dtls.nl/2016/04/20/european-commission-allocates-e2-billion-to-make-research-data-fair/ |archive-date=20 July 2018 |access-date=31 July 2019 |website=Dutch Techcentre for Life Sciences}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=G20 Leaders' Communique Hangzhou Summit |url=https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-16-2967_en.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190731041057/https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-16-2967_en.htm |archive-date=31 July 2019 |access-date=31 July 2019 |website=europa.eu}}</ref> Note, however, that FAIR principles include "A1.2: The protocol allows for an authentication and authorisation procedure where necessary."<ref>{{cite web | title=A1.2: The protocol allows for an authentication and authorisation procedure where necessary | website=GO FAIR | date=2022-06-14 | url=https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/a1-2-protocol-allows-authentication-authorisation-required/ }}</ref> This means that a FAIR dataset may be either closed (restricted access) or open (no access restrictions). So, only FAIR data without access restrictions are open access.
== Features ==
Line 76:
Scholarly publishing invokes various positions and passions. For example, authors may spend hours struggling with diverse article submission systems, often converting document formatting between a multitude of journal and conference styles, and sometimes spend months waiting for peer review results. The drawn-out and often contentious societal and technological transition to Open Access and Open Science/Open Research, particularly across North America and Europe (Latin America has already widely adopted "Acceso Abierto" since before 2000<ref name="Alperin 2015">{{Cite web |title=Hecho En Latinoamérica. Acceso Abierto, Revistas Académicas e Innovaciones Regionales |url=http://www.clacso.org.ar/libreria-latinoamericana/buscar_libro_detalle.php?id_libro=988&campo=&texto= |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200806005445/http://www.clacso.org.ar/libreria-latinoamericana/buscar_libro_detalle.php?id_libro=988&campo=&texto= |archive-date=6 August 2020 |access-date=31 August 2020}}</ref>) has led to increasingly entrenched positions and much debate.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Vuong|first1=Quan-Hoang|date=2018|title=The (ir)rational consideration of the cost of science in transition economies |journal=Nature Human Behaviour|volume=2|issue=1|pages=5|doi=10.1038/s41562-017-0281-4|pmid=30980055 |s2cid=256707733 |doi-access=free}}</ref>
The area of (open) scholarly practices increasingly sees a role for policy-makers and research funders<ref name="Ross-Hellauer 2018">{{cite journal | doi=10.1177/2158244018816717 | title=Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea? | year=2018 | last1=Ross-Hellauer | first1=Tony | last2=Schmidt | first2=Birgit | last3=Kramer | first3=Bianca | journal=SAGE Open | volume=8 | issue=4 | doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Vincent‐Lamarre 2016">{{Cite journal |last1=Vincent-Lamarre |first1=Philippe |last2=Boivin |first2=Jade |last3=Gargouri |first3=Yassine |last4=Larivière |first4=Vincent |last5=Harnad |first5=Stevan |year=2016 |title=Estimating Open Access Mandate Effectiveness: The MELIBEA Score |url=https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/370203/1/MelibeaFIN4.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology |volume=67 |issue=11 |pages=2815–2828 |arxiv=1410.2926 |doi=10.1002/asi.23601 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160923015455/http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/370203/1/MelibeaFIN4.pdf |archive-date=23 September 2016 |access-date=28 August 2019 |s2cid=8144721}}</ref><ref name="Union 2019">{{Cite book |date=30 January 2019 |title=Future of Scholarly Publishing and Scholarly Communication : Report of the Expert Group to the European Commission. |publisher=Publications Office of the European Union |isbn=9789279972386 |url=https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/464477b3-2559-11e9-8d04-01aa75ed71a1 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190603183000/https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/464477b3-2559-11e9-8d04-01aa75ed71a1 |archive-date=3 June 2019 |access-date=28 August 2019}}</ref> giving focus to issues such as career incentives, research evaluation and business models for publicly funded research. [[Plan S]] and [[AmeliCA]]<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Aguado-López |first1=Eduardo |last2=Becerril-Garcia |first2=Arianna |date=2019-08-08 |title=AmeliCA before Plan S – The Latin American Initiative to develop a cooperative, non-commercial, academic led, system of scholarly communication |url=https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/08/08/amelica-before-plan-s-the-latin-american-initiative-to-develop-a-cooperative-non-commercial-academic-led-system-of-scholarly-communication/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191101025852/https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/08/08/amelica-before-plan-s-the-latin-american-initiative-to-develop-a-cooperative-non-commercial-academic-led-system-of-scholarly-communication/ |archive-date=2019-11-01 |access-date=2022-11-26 |website=Impact of Social Sciences}}</ref> (Open Knowledge for Latin America) caused a wave of debate in scholarly communication in 2019 and 2020.<ref name="Johnson 2019">{{Cite journal |last=Johnson |first=Rob |year=2019 |title=From Coalition to Commons: Plan S and the Future of Scholarly Communication |journal=Insights: The UKSG Journal |volume=32 |doi=10.1629/uksg.453 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|date=2020-09-01|title=The growth of open access publishing in geochemistry|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666277920300010|journal=Results in Geochemistry|language=en|volume=1|
=== Licenses ===
Line 97:
Charges typically range from $1,000–$3,000 ($5,380 for [[Nature Communications]])<ref name="GOA4" /><ref name="Khing Phyo San"/><ref>{{Cite journal|doi = 10.6087/kcse.227|title = Influence of open access journals on the research community in Journal Citation Reports|year = 2021|last1 = Kim|first1 = Sang-Jun|last2 = Park|first2 = Kay Sook|journal = Science Editing|volume = 8| issue=1 |pages = 32–38|s2cid = 233380569|doi-access = free}}</ref> but can be under $10,<ref>{{Cite web |date=6 March 2012 |title=An efficient journal |url=http://blogs.harvard.edu/pamphlet/2012/03/06/an-efficient-journal/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191118220214/http://blogs.harvard.edu/pamphlet/2012/03/06/an-efficient-journal/ |archive-date=18 November 2019 |access-date=27 October 2019 |website=The Occasional Pamphlet |language=en-US}}</ref> close to $5,000<ref>{{Cite web |title=Article processing charges |url=https://www.nature.com/ncomms/about/article-processing-charges |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191027110805/https://www.nature.com/ncomms/about/article-processing-charges |archive-date=27 October 2019 |access-date=27 October 2019 |publisher=Nature Communications |language=en}}</ref> or well over $10,000.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Publishing options |url=https://www.nature.com/nature/for-authors/publishing-options | publisher=Nature |language=en}}</ref> APCs vary greatly depending on subject and region and are most common in scientific and medical journals (43% and 47% respectively), and lowest in arts and humanities journals (0% and 4% respectively).<ref name="Kozak&Hartley">{{Cite journal |last1=Kozak |first1=Marcin |last2=Hartley |first2=James |date=December 2013 |title=Publication fees for open access journals: Different disciplines-different methods |journal=Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology |volume=64 |issue=12 |pages=2591–2594 |doi=10.1002/asi.22972}}</ref> APCs can also depend on a journal's impact factor.<ref name="Björk 2015">{{Cite journal |last1=Björk |first1=Bo-Christer |last2=Solomon |first2=David |year=2015 |title=Article Processing Charges in OA Journals: Relationship between Price and Quality |journal=Scientometrics |volume=103 |issue=2 |pages=373–385 |doi=10.1007/s11192-015-1556-z |s2cid=15966412}}</ref><ref name="Lawson 2014">{{Citation|last=Lawson |first=Stuart |year=2014 |title=APC Pricing |publisher=Figshare |doi=10.6084/m9.figshare.1056280.v3}}</ref><ref name="Björk 2014">{{Cite web |title=Developing an Effective Market for Open Access Article Processing Charges. |url=https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/developing-effective-market-for-open-access-article-processing-charges-mar14.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181003011716/https://wellcome.ac.uk/sites/default/files/developing-effective-market-for-open-access-article-processing-charges-mar14.pdf |archive-date=3 October 2018 |access-date=28 August 2019}}</ref><ref name="Schönfelder 2018">{{Cite web|last=Schönfelder |first=Nina |year=2018 |title=APCs—Mirroring the Impact Factor or Legacy of the Subscription-Based Model? |url=https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2931061 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191222093225/https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2931061 |archive-date=22 December 2019 |access-date=28 August 2019}}</ref> Some publishers (e.g. [[eLife]] and [[Ubiquity Press]]) have released estimates of their direct and indirect costs that set their APCs.<ref>{{Cite web |date=29 September 2016 |title=Setting a fee for publication |url=https://elifesciences.org/inside-elife/b6365b76/setting-a-fee-for-publication |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171107002917/https://elifesciences.org/inside-elife/b6365b76/setting-a-fee-for-publication |archive-date=7 November 2017 |access-date=27 October 2019 |website=eLife |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Ubiquity Press |url=https://www.ubiquitypress.com/site/publish/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191021065134/https://www.ubiquitypress.com/site/publish/ |archive-date=21 October 2019 |access-date=27 October 2019 |website=www.ubiquitypress.com}}</ref> Hybrid OA generally costs more than gold OA and can offer a lower quality of service.<ref name="auto"/> A particularly controversial practice in hybrid open access journals is "[[Double dipping (publishing)|double dipping]]", where both authors and subscribers are charged.<ref name="Open access double dipping policy"/>
By comparison, journal subscriptions equate to $3,500–$4,000 per article published by an institution, but are highly variable by publisher (and some charge page fees separately). This has led to the assessment that there is enough money "within the system" to enable full transition to OA.<ref name="Schimmer 2015">{{Cite journal |last1=Schimmer |first1=Ralf |last2=Geschuhn |first2=Kai Karin |last3=Vogler |first3=Andreas |year=2015 |title=Disrupting the Subscription Journals" Business Model for the Necessary Large-Scale Transformation to Open Access |journal=MPG.PuRe Repository |doi=10.17617/1.3}}</ref> However, there is ongoing discussion about whether the change-over offers an opportunity to become more cost-effective or promotes more equitable participation in publication.<ref name="TenMyths">{{Cite journal |last1=Vanholsbeeck |first1=Marc |last2=Thacker |first2=Paul |last3=Sattler |first3=Susanne |last4=Ross-Hellauer |first4=Tony |last5=Rivera-López |first5=Bárbara S. |last6=Rice |first6=Curt |last7=Nobes |first7=Andy |last8=Masuzzo |first8=Paola |last9=Martin |first9=Ryan |last10=Kramer |first10=Bianca |last11=Havemann |first11=Johanna |date=11 March 2019 |title=Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing |journal=Publications |volume=7 |issue=2 |pages=34 |doi=10.3390/publications7020034 |doi-access=free |first12=Asura |last12=Enkhbayar |first13=Jacinto |last13=Davila |first14=Tom |last14=Crick |first15=Harry |last15=Crane |first16=Jonathan P. |last16=Tennant}}</ref> Concern has been noted that increasing subscription journal prices will be mirrored by rising APCs, creating a barrier to less financially privileged authors.<ref name="Björk 2017b">{{Cite journal |last=Björk |first=B. C. |year=2017 |title=Growth of Hybrid Open Access |journal=PeerJ |volume=5 |pages=e3878 |doi=10.7717/peerj.3878 |pmc=5624290 |pmid=28975059 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Pinfield 2015">{{Cite journal |last1=Pinfield |first1=Stephen |last2=Salter |first2=Jennifer |last3=Bath |first3=Peter A. |year=2016 |title=The 'Total Cost of Publication" in a Hybrid Open-Access Environment: Institutional Approaches to Funding Journal Article-Processing Charges in Combination with Subscriptions |url=http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/81227/1/TCP%20and%20OA%20revised%20JASIST%20WRRO.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology |volume=67 |issue=7 |pages=1751–1766 |doi=10.1002/asi.23446 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190605221816/http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/81227/1/TCP%20and%20OA%20revised%20JASIST%20WRRO.pdf |archive-date=5 June 2019 |access-date=9 September 2019 |s2cid=17356533}}</ref><ref name="Green 2019">{{Cite journal |last=Green |first=Toby |year=2019 |title=Is Open Access Affordable? Why Current Models Do Not Work and Why We Need Internet-Era Transformation of Scholarly Communications |journal=Learned Publishing |volume=32 |issue=1 |pages=13–25 |doi=10.1002/leap.1219|doi-access=free |s2cid=67869151 }}</ref>
The inherent bias of the current APC-based OA publishing perpetuates this inequality through the '[[Matthew effect]]' (the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer). The switch from pay-to-read to pay-to-publish has left essentially the same people behind, with some academics not having enough purchasing power (individually or through their institutions) for either option.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Pourret|first1=Olivier|last2=Hedding|first2=David William|last3=Ibarra|first3=Daniel Enrique|last4=Irawan|first4=Dasapta Erwin|last5=Liu|first5=Haiyan|last6=Tennant|first6=Jonathan Peter|date=2021-06-10|title=International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences|url=https://ese.arphahub.com/article/63663/|journal=European Science Editing|volume=47|pages=e63663|doi=10.3897/ese.2021.e63663|s2cid=236300530|issn=2518-3354 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Some gold OA publishers will waive all or part of the fee for authors from [[Developing country|less developed economies]]. Steps are normally taken to ensure that [[peer review]]ers do not know whether authors have requested, or been granted, fee waivers, or to ensure that every paper is approved by an independent editor with no financial stake in the journal.{{citation needed|date=June 2018}} The main argument against requiring authors to pay a fee, is the risk to the [[peer review]] system, diminishing the overall quality of scientific journal publishing.{{Citation needed|date=October 2019}}
====Subsidized or no-fee{{anchor|No-fee}}====
Line 109:
[[File:Preprint postprint published.svg|thumb|Typical publishing workflow for an academic journal article ([[preprint]], [[postprint]], and [[Version of record|published]]) with open access sharing rights per [[SHERPA/RoMEO]]]]
A "[[preprint]]" is typically a version of a research paper that is shared on an online platform prior to, or during, a formal peer review process.<ref name="Ginsparg 2016">{{Cite journal |last=Ginsparg |first=P. |year=2016 |title=Preprint Déjà Vu |journal=The EMBO Journal |volume=35 |issue=24 |pages=2620–2625 |doi=10.15252/embj.201695531 |pmc=5167339 |pmid=27760783}}</ref><ref name="Tennant 2018b">{{Cite report |last1=Tennant |first1=Jonathan |last2=Bauin |first2=Serge |last3=James |first3=Sarah |last4=Kant |first4=Juliane |year=2018 |title=The Evolving Preprint Landscape: Introductory Report for the Knowledge Exchange Working Group on Preprints |doi=10.17605/OSF.IO/796TU |url=https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/796TU}}</ref><ref name="Neylon 2017">{{Cite journal |last1=Neylon |first1=Cameron |last2=Pattinson |first2=Damian |last3=Bilder |first3=Geoffrey |last4=Lin |first4=Jennifer |year=2017 |title=On the Origin of Nonequivalent States: How We Can Talk about Preprints |journal=F1000Research |volume=6 |pages=608 |doi=10.12688/f1000research.11408.1 |pmc=5461893 |pmid=28620459 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Preprint platforms have become popular due to the increasing drive towards open access publishing and can be publisher- or community-led. A range of discipline-specific or cross-___domain platforms now exist.<ref name="Balaji 2019">{{Cite journal |last1=Balaji |first1=B. |last2=Dhanamjaya |first2=M. |year=2019 |title=Preprints in Scholarly Communication: Re-Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures |journal=Publications |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=6 |doi=10.3390/publications7010006 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The posting of pre-prints (
==== Effect of preprints on later publication ====
Line 117:
However, preprints, in fact, protect against scooping.<ref name="Sarabipour 2019b">{{Cite journal |last1=Sarabipour |first1=Sarvenaz |last2=Debat |first2=Humberto J. |last3=Emmott |first3=Edward |last4=Burgess |first4=Steven J. |last5=Schwessinger |first5=Benjamin |last6=Hensel |first6=Zach |year=2019 |title=On the Value of Preprints: An Early Career Researcher Perspective |journal=PLOS Biology |volume=17 |issue=2 |pages=e3000151 |doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.3000151 |pmc=6400415 |pmid=30789895 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Considering the differences between traditional peer-review based publishing models and deposition of an article on a preprint server, "scooping" is less likely for manuscripts first submitted as preprints. In a traditional publishing scenario, the time from manuscript submission to acceptance and to final publication can range from a few weeks to years, and go through several rounds of revision and resubmission before final publication.<ref name="Powell 2016">{{Cite journal |last=Powell |first=Kendall |year=2016 |title=Does It Take Too Long to Publish Research? |journal=Nature |volume=530 |issue=7589 |pages=148–151 |bibcode=2016Natur.530..148P |doi=10.1038/530148a |pmid=26863966 |doi-access=free |s2cid=1013588}}</ref> During this time, the same work will have been extensively discussed with external collaborators, presented at conferences, and been read by editors and reviewers in related areas of research. Yet, there is no official open record of that process (e.g., peer reviewers are normally anonymous, reports remain largely unpublished), and if an identical or very similar paper were to be published while the original was still under review, it would be impossible to establish provenance.{{cn|date=March 2024}}
Preprints provide a time-stamp at the time of publication, which helps to establish the "priority of discovery" for scientific claims.<ref>{{Cite
There is no evidence that "scooping" of research via preprints exists, not even in communities that have broadly adopted the use of the [[arXiv]] server for sharing preprints since 1991. If the unlikely case of scooping emerges as the growth of the preprint system continues, it can be dealt with as academic malpractice. [[ASAPbio]] includes a series of hypothetical scooping scenarios as part of its preprint FAQ, finding that the overall benefits of using preprints vastly outweigh any potential issues around scooping.<ref group="note">{{Cite web |title=ASAPbio FAQ |url=
=== Archiving ===
The "green" route to OA refers to author self-archiving, in which a version of the article (often the peer-reviewed version before editorial typesetting, called "postprint") is posted online to an institutional
==== Embargo periods ====
Line 136:
* Rather than applying traditional notions of [[copyright]] to academic publications, they could be [[wikt:libre#Adjective|libre]] or "free to build upon".<ref name="Suber29-43" />
An obvious advantage of open access journals is the free access to scientific papers regardless of affiliation with a subscribing library and improved access for the general public; this is especially true in developing countries. Lower costs for research in academia and industry have been claimed in the [[Budapest Open Access Initiative]],<ref>{{Cite web |date=31 March 2015 |title=The Life and Death of an Open Access Journal: Q&A with Librarian Marcus Banks |url=
=== Stakeholders and concerned communities ===
Line 188:
| width = 440
| image1 = OA by year.png
| caption1 = The number and proportion of open access articles split between Gold, Green, Hybrid, Bronze and closed access (1950–2016)<ref name="Piwowar2018">{{Cite journal |last1=Piwowar |first1=Heather |last2=Priem |first2=Jason |last3=Larivière |first3=Vincent |last4=Alperin |first4=Juan Pablo |last5=Matthias |first5=Lisa |last6=Norlander |first6=Bree |last7=Farley |first7=Ashley |last8=West |first8=Jevin |last9=Haustein |first9=Stefanie |date=13 February 2018 |title=The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles |journal=PeerJ |volume=6 |
| image2 = OA by subject.png
| caption2 = Ratios of article access types for different subjects (averaged 2009–2015)<ref name="Piwowar2018" />
Line 203:
|<div style="float:left;margin-right:0.5em">[[File:interactive icon.svg|18px|link=File:Gold vs green OA at individual universities by year.webm|The image above is animated when clicked|alt=The image above is interactive when clicked]]</div> Gold OA vs green OA by institution for 2017 (size indicates number of outputs, colour indicates region). Note: articles may be both green and gold OA so x and y values do not sum to total OA.<ref>{{Cite Q|Q99410785|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Institutions' open access over time: Evolution of green and gold OA|url=https://storage.googleapis.com/oaspa_talk_files/institution_scatter.html|access-date=2021-10-13|website=storage.googleapis.com|publisher=Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative}}</ref> |link=File:Gold vs green OA at individual universities by year.webm]]
A 2013-2018 report (GOA4) found that in 2018 over 700,000 articles were published in gold open access in the world, of which 42% was in journals with no author-paid fees.<ref name="GOA4" /> The figure varies significantly depending on region and kind of publisher: 75% if university-run, over 80% in Latin America, but less than 25% in Western Europe.<ref name="GOA4">{{Cite book |last=Walt Crawford |url=https://waltcrawford.name/goa4.pdf |title=Gold Open Access 2013-2018: Articles in Journals (GOA4) |publisher=Cites & Insights Books |year=2019 |isbn=978-1-329-54713-1 |access-date=30 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190506181508/https://waltcrawford.name/goa4.pdf |archive-date=6 May 2019 |url-status=live}}</ref> However, Crawford's study did not count open access articles published in "hybrid" journals (subscription journals that allow authors to make their individual articles open in return for payment of a fee). More comprehensive analyses of the scholarly literature suggest that this resulted in a significant underestimation of the prevalence of author-fee-funded OA publications in the literature.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Piwowar |first1=H. |last2=Priem |first2=J. |last3=Larivière |first3=V. |last4=Alperin |first4=J. P. |last5=Matthias |first5=L. |last6=Norlander |first6=B. |last7=Farley |first7=A. |last8=West |first8=J. |last9=Haustein |first9=S. |year=2018 |title=The state of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles |journal=PeerJ |volume=6 |
According to [[Scopus]] database in August, 2024, 46.2% of works, indexed therein and published in 2023, had some form of open access. More than half of the OA publications (27.5% of all indexed works in 2023) were in fully Gold Open Access sources, 16.7% of all were in Green OA sources (i.e. which allow for self-archiving by authors), 9.2 % in Hybrid Gold OA sources (such as journals, which have open access and behind-paywall articles in the same issue), and 10.6 % were in Bronze OA sources (free-to-read on the publishers' websites).<ref>{{cite web |title=Scopus Advanced Search |url-access=registration|url=https://www.scopus.com/results/results.uri?sort=plf-f&src=s&sid=7c069198c393343d11b72b903c0e4a02&sot=a&sdt=a&sl=14&s=PUBYEAR+%3D+2023&origin=searchadvanced&editSaveSearch=&txGid=45ccd8149540fa063d893d60c4e835dc&sessionSearchId=7c069198c393343d11b72b903c0e4a02&limit=10 }}{{
[[File:Percentage of Open Access articles from 8 oldest journal publishers, WebOfScience data.png|thumb|Percentage of Open Access articles from 8 oldest journal publishers. The data were extracted from Web of Science database on 2023-01-30.]]
Line 221:
==== Readership ====
OA articles are generally viewed online and downloaded more often than paywalled articles and that readership continues for longer.<ref name=":10"/><ref name=":9" /> Readership is especially higher in demographics that typically lack access to subscription journals (in addition to the general population, this includes many medical practitioners, patient groups, policymakers, non-profit sector workers, industry researchers, and independent researchers).<ref name=":5">{{Cite journal |last=ElSabry |first=ElHassan |date=1 August 2017 |title=Who needs access to research? Exploring the societal impact of open access |url=
==== Citation rate ====
Line 228:
[[File:How Open Access Empowered a 16-Year-Old to Make Cancer Breakthrough.ogv|thumb|A 2013 interview on [[paywall]]s and open access with [[National Institutes of Health|NIH]] Director [[Francis Collins]] and inventor [[Jack Andraka]]]]
A main reason authors make their articles openly accessible is to maximize their [[citation impact]].<ref>Swan, Alma (2006) [http://www.woodheadpublishing.com/en/book.aspx?bookID=1719&ChandosTitle=1 The culture of Open Access: researchers' views and responses] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120522085011/http://www.woodheadpublishing.com/en/book.aspx?bookID=1719&ChandosTitle=1 |date=22 May 2012}}. In: Neil Jacobs (Ed.) ''Open access: key strategic, technical and economic aspects'', Chandos.</ref> Open access articles are typically [[Citation|cited]] more often than equivalent articles requiring subscriptions.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Piwowar |first1=Heather |last2=Priem |first2=Jason |last3=Larivière |first3=Vincent |last4=Alperin |first4=Juan Pablo |last5=Matthias |first5=Lisa |last6=Norlander |first6=Bree |last7=Farley |first7=Ashley |last8=West |first8=Jevin |last9=Haustein |first9=Stefanie |date=13 February 2018 |title=The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles |journal=PeerJ |language=en |volume=6 |
Citation advantage is most pronounced in OA articles in hybrid journals (compared to the non-OA articles in those same journals),<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Eysenbach |first=Gunther |date=16 May 2006 |editor-last=Tenopir |editor-first=Carol |title=Citation Advantage of Open Access Articles |journal=PLOS Biology |language=en |volume=4 |issue=5 |pages=e157 |doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0040157 |issn=1545-7885 |pmc=1459247 |pmid=16683865 |doi-access=free }}</ref> and with articles deposited in green OA repositories.<ref name="doi10.1371/journal.pone.0011273" /> Notably, green OA articles show similar benefits to citation counts as gold OA articles.<ref name="Clayson 103–111"/><ref name=":11" /> Articles in gold OA journals are typically cited at a similar frequency to paywalled articles.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Björk |first1=Bo-Christer |last2=Solomon |first2=David |date=17 July 2012 |title=Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact |journal=BMC Medicine |volume=10 |issue=1 |pages=73 |doi=10.1186/1741-7015-10-73 |issn=1741-7015 |pmc=3398850 |pmid=22805105 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Citation advantage increases the longer an article has been published.<ref name=":10" />
Line 246:
{{See also|Scholarly peer review}}
[[Scholarly peer review|Peer review]] of research articles prior to publishing has been common since the 18th century.<ref name="Csiszar 2016">{{Cite journal |last=Csiszar |first=Alex |year=2016 |title=Peer Review: Troubled from the Start |journal=Nature |volume=532 |issue=7599 |pages=306–308 |bibcode=2016Natur.532..306C |doi=10.1038/532306a |pmid=27111616 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="Moxham 2017">{{Cite journal |last1=Moxham |first1=Noah |last2=Fyfe |first2=Aileen |year=2018 |title=The Royal Society and the Prehistory of Peer Review, 1665–1965 |url=https://kar.kent.ac.uk/65042/3/Peer%20review%20v30%20AAM%20SUBMTD.pdf |url-status=live |journal=The Historical Journal |volume=61 |issue=4 |pages=863–889 |doi=10.1017/S0018246X17000334 |s2cid=164984479 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200831011420/https://kar.kent.ac.uk/65042/3/Peer%20review%20v30%20AAM%20SUBMTD.pdf |archive-date=31 August 2020 |access-date=28 August 2019}}</ref> Commonly reviewer comments are only revealed to the authors and reviewer identities kept anonymous.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Tennant |first1=Jonathan P. |last2=Dugan |first2=Jonathan M. |last3=Graziotin |first3=Daniel |last4=Jacques |first4=Damien C. |last5=Waldner |first5=François |last6=Mietchen |first6=Daniel |last7=Elkhatib |first7=Yehia |last8=B. Collister |first8=Lauren |last9=Pikas |first9=Christina K. |last10=Crick |first10=Tom |last11=Masuzzo |first11=Paola |date=29 November 2017 |title=A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review |journal=F1000Research |volume=6 |pages=1151 |doi=10.12688/f1000research.12037.3 |issn=2046-1402 |pmc=5686505 |pmid=29188015 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Tennant |first=Jonathan P. |date=1 October 2018 |title=The state of the art in peer review |url= https://academic.oup.com/femsle/article/365/19/fny204/5078345|journal=FEMS Microbiology Letters |language=en |volume=365 |issue=19 |doi=10.1093/femsle/fny204 |issn=0378-1097 |pmc=6140953 |pmid=30137294 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200224175402/https://academic.oup.com/femsle/article/365/19/fny204/5078345 |archive-date=24 February 2020 |access-date=3 January 2020}}</ref> The rise of OA publishing has also given rise to experimentation in technologies and processes for peer review.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Noorden |first=Richard Van |date=4 March 2019 |title=Peer-review experiments tracked in online repository |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00777-8 |url-status=live |journal=Nature |language=en |doi=10.1038/d41586-019-00777-8 |s2cid=86845470 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191212063450/https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00777-8 |archive-date=12 December 2019 |access-date=3 January 2020}}</ref> Increasing transparency of peer review and quality control includes posting results to [[preprint server]]s,<ref>{{cite journal | doi=10.1371/journal.pgen.1008565 | title=Technical and social issues influencing the adoption of preprints in the life sciences | year=2020 | last1=Penfold | first1=Naomi C. | last2=Polka | first2=Jessica K. | journal=PLOS Genetics | volume=16 | issue=4 | pages=e1008565 | pmid=32310942 | pmc=7170218 | doi-access=free }}</ref> [[Preregistration (pharmaceutical)|preregistration]] of studies,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Nosek |first1=Brian A. |last2=Ebersole |first2=Charles R. |last3=DeHaven |first3=Alexander C. |last4=Mellor |first4=David T. |date=12 March 2018 |title=The preregistration revolution |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |language=en |volume=115 |issue=11 |pages=2600–2606 |doi=10.1073/pnas.1708274114 |issn=0027-8424 |pmc=5856500 |pmid=29531091|bibcode=2018PNAS..115.2600N |doi-access=free }}</ref> [[open peer review|open publishing of peer reviews]],<ref name=":15">{{Cite journal |last=Ross-Hellauer |first=Tony |date=31 August 2017 |title=What is open peer review? A systematic review |journal=F1000Research |language=en |volume=6 |pages=588 |doi=10.12688/f1000research.11369.2 |issn=2046-1402 |pmc=5437951 |pmid=28580134 |doi-access=free }}</ref> open publishing of full datasets and analysis code,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Munafò |first1=Marcus R. |last2=Nosek |first2=Brian A. |last3=Bishop |first3=Dorothy V. M. |last4=Button |first4=Katherine S. |last5=Chambers |first5=Christopher D. |last6=Percie du Sert |first6=Nathalie |last7=Simonsohn |first7=Uri |last8=Wagenmakers |first8=Eric-Jan |last9=Ware |first9=Jennifer J. |last10=Ioannidis |first10=John P. A. |date=10 January 2017 |title=A manifesto for reproducible science |journal=Nature Human Behaviour |language=en |volume=1 |issue=1 |page=0021 |doi=10.1038/s41562-016-0021 |pmid=33954258 |pmc=7610724 |issn=2397-3374 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Pawlik |first1=Mateusz |last2=Hütter |first2=Thomas |last3=Kocher |first3=Daniel |last4=Mann |first4=Willi |last5=Augsten |first5=Nikolaus |date=1 July 2019 |title=A Link is not Enough – Reproducibility of Data |journal=Datenbank-Spektrum |language=en |volume=19 |issue=2 |pages=107–115 |doi=10.1007/s13222-019-00317-8 |issn=1610-1995 |pmc=6647556 |pmid=31402850}}</ref> and other open science practices.<ref name="Munafò 2017b">{{Cite journal |last1=Munafò |first1=Marcus R. |last2=Nosek |first2=Brian A. |last3=Bishop |first3=Dorothy V. M. |last4=Button |first4=Katherine S. |last5=Chambers |first5=Christopher D. |last6=Percie Du Sert |first6=Nathalie |last7=Simonsohn |first7=Uri |last8=Wagenmakers |first8=Eric-Jan |last9=Ware |first9=Jennifer J. |last10=Ioannidis |first10=John P. A. |year=2017 |title=A Manifesto for Reproducible Science |url=
=== Predatory publishing ===
[[Predatory publishing|Predatory publishers]] present themselves as academic journals but use lax or no peer review processes coupled with aggressive advertising in order to generate revenue from article processing charges from authors. The definitions of 'predatory', 'deceptive', or 'questionable' publishers/journals are often vague, opaque, and confusing, and can also include fully legitimate journals, such as those indexed by PubMed Central.<ref>{{Cite journal|date=2020-06-15|title=Comments on "Factors affecting global flow of scientific knowledge in environmental sciences" by Sonne et al. (2020)|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969719364502|journal=Science of the Total Environment|language=en|volume=721|
In this way, predatory journals exploit the OA model by deceptively removing the main value added by the journal (peer review) and parasitize the OA movement, occasionally hijacking or impersonating other journals.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Dadkhah |first1=Mehdi |last2=Borchardt |first2=Glenn |date=1 June 2016 |title=Hijacked Journals: An Emerging Challenge for Scholarly Publishing |url=https://academic.oup.com/asj/article/36/6/739/2664479 |url-status=live |journal=Aesthetic Surgery Journal |language=en |volume=36 |issue=6 |pages=739–741 |doi=10.1093/asj/sjw026 |issn=1090-820X |pmid=26906349 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190608193750/https://academic.oup.com/asj/article/36/6/739/2664479 |archive-date=8 June 2019 |access-date=5 January 2020 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Dadkhah |first1=Mehdi |last2=Maliszewski |first2=Tomasz |last3=Teixeira da Silva |first3=Jaime A. |date=24 June 2016 |title=Hijacked journals, hijacked web-sites, journal phishing, misleading metrics, and predatory publishing: actual and potential threats to academic integrity and publishing ethics |journal=Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology |volume=12 |issue=3 |pages=353–362 |doi=10.1007/s12024-016-9785-x |issn=1547-769X |pmid=27342770 |s2cid=38963478}}</ref> The rise of such journals since 2010<ref name="Shen 2015">{{Cite journal |last1=Shen |first1=Cenyu |last2=Björk |first2=Bo-Christer |year=2015 |title='Predatory" Open Access: A Longitudinal Study of Article Volumes and Market Characteristics |journal=BMC Medicine |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=230 |doi=10.1186/s12916-015-0469-2 |pmc=4589914 |pmid=26423063 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Perlin 2018">{{Cite journal |last1=Perlin |first1=Marcelo S. |last2=Imasato |first2=Takeyoshi |last3=Borenstein |first3=Denis |year=2018 |title=Is Predatory Publishing a Real Threat? Evidence from a Large Database Study |journal=Scientometrics |volume=116 |issue=1 |pages=255–273 |doi=10.1007/s11192-018-2750-6 |hdl-access=free |hdl=10183/182710 |s2cid=4998464|url=http://americanae.aecid.es/americanae/es/registros/registro.do?tipoRegistro=MTD&idBib=2674999 }}</ref> has damaged the reputation of the OA publishing model as a whole, especially via sting operations where fake papers have been successfully published in such journals.<ref name="Bohannon 2013">{{Cite journal |last=Bohannon |first=John |year=2013 |title=Who's Afraid of Peer Review? |journal=Science |volume=342 |issue=6154 |pages=60–65 |bibcode=2013Sci...342...60B |doi=10.1126/science.342.6154.60 |pmid=24092725 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Although commonly associated with OA publishing models, subscription journals are also at risk of similar lax quality control standards and poor editorial policies.<ref name="Olivarez 2018">{{Cite journal |last1=Olivarez |first1=Joseph |last2=Bales |first2=Stephen |last3=Sare |first3=Laura |last4=Vanduinkerken |first4=Wyoma |year=2018 |title=Format Aside: Applying Beall's Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of Both OA and Non-OA Library and Information Science Journals |journal=College & Research Libraries |volume=79 |issue=1 |doi=10.5860/crl.79.1.52 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="Shamseer 2017">{{Cite journal |last1=Shamseer |first1=Larissa |last2=Moher |first2=David |last3=Maduekwe |first3=Onyi |last4=Turner |first4=Lucy |last5=Barbour |first5=Virginia |last6=Burch |first6=Rebecca |last7=Clark |first7=Jocalyn |last8=Galipeau |first8=James |last9=Roberts |first9=Jason |last10=Shea |first10=Beverley J. |year=2017 |title=Potential Predatory and Legitimate Biomedical Journals: Can You Tell the Difference? A Cross-Sectional Comparison |journal=BMC Medicine |volume=15 |issue=1 |pages=28 |doi=10.1186/s12916-017-0785-9 |pmc=5353955 |pmid=28298236 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Eisen |first=Michael |date=3 October 2013 |title=I confess, I wrote the Arsenic DNA paper to expose flaws in peer-review at subscription based journals |url=http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1439 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180924121850/http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1439 |archive-date=24 September 2018 |access-date=5 January 2020 |website=www.michaeleisen.org}}</ref> OA publishers therefore aim to ensure quality via auditing by registries such as [[DOAJ]], [[Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association|OASPA]] and [[SciELO]] and comply to a standardised set of conditions. A blacklist of predatory publishers is also maintained by [[Cabell's blacklist]] (a successor to [[Beall's List]]).<ref name="Silver 2017">{{Cite journal |last=Silver |first=Andrew |year=2017 |title=Pay-to-View Blacklist of Predatory Journals Set to Launch |journal=Nature |doi=10.1038/nature.2017.22090}}</ref><ref name="Strinzel 2019">{{cite journal | doi=10.1128/mBio.00411-19 | title=Blacklists and Whitelists to Tackle Predatory Publishing: A Cross-Sectional Comparison and Thematic Analysis | year=2019 | last1=Strinzel | first1=Michaela | last2=Severin | first2=Anna | last3=Milzow | first3=Katrin | last4=Egger | first4=Matthias | journal=mBio | volume=10 | issue=3 | pmid=31164459 | pmc=6550518 }}</ref> Increased transparency of the peer review and publication process has been proposed as a way to combat predatory journal practices.<ref name="TenMyths" /><ref name=":15" /><ref name="Polka 2018">{{Cite journal |last1=Polka |first1=Jessica K. |last2=Kiley |first2=Robert |last3=Konforti |first3=Boyana |last4=Stern |first4=Bodo |last5=Vale |first5=Ronald D. |year=2018 |title=Publish Peer Reviews |journal=Nature |volume=560 |issue=7720 |pages=545–547 |bibcode=2018Natur.560..545P |doi=10.1038/d41586-018-06032-w |pmid=30158621 |doi-access=free}}</ref>
=== Open irony ===
Open irony refers to the situation where a scholarly journal article advocates open access but the article itself is only accessible by paying a fee to the journal publisher to read the article.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Hull |first1=Duncan |title=The Open Access Irony Awards: Naming and shaming them |url=https://duncan.hull.name/2012/02/15/open-irony/ |website=O'Really? |date=15 February 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Duncan |first1=Green |title=Whatever happened to the Academic Spring? (Or the irony of hiding papers on transparency and accountability behind a paywall) |url=https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/whatever-happened-to-the-academic-spring-or-the-irony-of-being-prevented-from-reading-papers-on-transparency-and-accountability/ |website=From Poverty to Power |date=7 August 2013 |access-date=30 October 2020 |archive-date=20 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201020235834/https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/whatever-happened-to-the-academic-spring-or-the-irony-of-being-prevented-from-reading-papers-on-transparency-and-accountability/ |url-status=
== Infrastructure ==
Line 266:
There are also a number of [[preprint server]]s which host articles that have not yet been reviewed as open access copies.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Peiperl |first1=Larry |date=16 April 2018 |title=Preprints in medical research: Progress and principles |journal=PLOS Medicine |volume=15 |issue=4 |pages=e1002563 |doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002563 |issn=1549-1676 |pmc=5901682 |pmid=29659580 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Elmore |first=Susan A. |year=2018 |title=Preprints: What Role do These Have in Communicating Scientific Results? |journal=Toxicologic Pathology |volume=46 |issue=4 |pages=364–365 |doi=10.1177/0192623318767322 |pmc=5999550 |pmid=29628000}}</ref> These articles are subsequently submitted for peer review by both open access and subscription journals, however the preprint always remains openly accessible. A list of preprint servers is maintained at ResearchPreprints.<ref>{{Cite web |date=9 March 2017 |title=A List of Preprint Servers |url=https://researchpreprints.com/2017/03/09/a-list-of-preprint-servers/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190309101709/http://researchpreprints.com/2017/03/09/a-list-of-preprint-servers/ |archive-date=9 March 2019 |access-date=10 March 2019 |website=Research Preprints}}</ref>
For articles that are published in closed access journals, some authors will deposit a postprint copy in an [[open-access repository]], where it can be accessed for free.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Eve |first=Martin |title=Open access and the humanities |title-link=wikisource:Open access and the humanities/Chapter 1 |date=2014 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=9781107484016 |___location=Cambridge |pages=9–10}}</ref><ref>[[Stevan Harnad|Harnad, S]]. 2007. [http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/15753 "The Green Road to Open Access: A Leveraged Transition"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100312170036/http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/15753/|date=12 March 2010}}. In: ''The Culture of Periodicals from the Perspective of the Electronic Age'', pp. 99–105, L'Harmattan. Retrieved 3 December 2011.</ref><ref name="greenandgold2">{{Cite journal |last1=Harnad |first1=S. |last2=Brody |first2=T. |last3=Vallières |first3=F. O. |last4=Carr |first4=L. |last5=Hitchcock |first5=S. |last6=Gingras |first6=Y. |last7=Oppenheim |first7=C. |last8=Stamerjohanns |first8=H. |last9=Hilf |first9=E. R. |year=2004 |title=The Access/Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access |journal=Serials Review |volume=30 |issue=4 |pages=310–314 |doi=10.1016/j.serrev.2004.09.013}}</ref><ref name="roar2" /><ref name="DemystifyingOpenAccess2">{{Cite web |last1=Fortier |first1=Rose |last2=James |first2=Heather G. |last3=Jermé |first3=Martha G. |last4=Berge |first4=Patricia |last5=Del Toro |first5=Rosemary |date=14 May 2015 |title=Demystifying Open Access Workshop |url=http://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=rsch_inst |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150518162648/http://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=rsch_inst |archive-date=18 May 2015 |access-date=18 May 2015 |website=e-Publications@Marquette }}</ref> Most subscription journals place restrictions on which version of the work may be shared
==== Representativeness in proprietary databases ====
Line 278:
Access to online content requires Internet access, and this distributional consideration presents physical and sometimes financial barriers to access.
There are various open access aggregators that list open access journals or articles. [[Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources|ROAD]] (the Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Welcome - ROAD |url=http://road.issn.org/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170515214110/http://road.issn.org/ |archive-date=15 May 2017 |access-date=12 May 2017 |website=road.issn.org}}</ref> synthesizes information about open access journals and is a subset of the [[ISSN]] register. [[SHERPA/RoMEO]] lists international publishers that allow the published version of articles to be deposited in [[institutional repositories]]. The [[Directory of Open Access Journals]] (DOAJ) contains over 12,500 peer-reviewed open access journals for searching and browsing.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Martin |first=Greg |title=Research Guides: Open Access: Finding Open Access Content |url=
Open access articles can be found with a [[Web search timeline|web search]], using any general [[search engine]] or those specialized for the scholarly and scientific literature, such as [[Google Scholar]], [[OAIster]], [[BASE (search engine)|base-search.net]],<ref name="base-search">{{Cite web |title=BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine | What is BASE? |url=http://www.base-search.net/about/en/ |url-status=bot: unknown |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160216120421/http://www.base-search.net/about/en/ |archive-date=16 February 2016 |access-date=16 January 2018}}</ref> and [[CORE (research service)|CORE]]<ref>{{Cite web |title=Search CORE |url=https://core.ac.uk/search/ |url-status=bot: unknown |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160312113305/https://core.ac.uk/search/ |archive-date=12 March 2016 |access-date=11 March 2016}}</ref> Many open-access repositories offer a programmable interface to query their content. Some of them use a generic protocol, such as [[Protocol for Metadata Harvesting|OAI-PMH]] (e.g., base-search.net<ref name="base-search" />). In addition, some repositories propose a specific API, such as the [[arXiv]] API, the Dissemin API, the [[Unpaywall]]/oadoi API, or the base-search API.
Line 294:
In 2002, the University of Southampton's School of Electronics & Computer Science became one of the first schools to implement a meaningful mandatory open access policy, in which authors had to contribute copies of their articles to the school's repository. More institutions followed suit in the following years.<ref name=":0" /> In 2007, Ukraine became the first country to create a national policy on open access, followed by Spain in 2009. Argentina, Brazil, and Poland are currently in the process of developing open access policies. Making master's and doctoral theses open access is an increasingly popular mandate by many educational institutions.<ref name=":0" />
In the US, the [[NIH Public Access Policy]] has required since 2008 that papers describing research funded by the National Institutes of Health must be available to the public free through [[PubMed Central]] (PMC) within 12 months of publication. In 2022, US President [[Joe Biden|Joe Biden's]] [[Office of Science and Technology Policy]] issued a memorandum calling for the removal of the 12-month embargo.<ref>{{Cite web |title=OSTP Issues Guidance to Make Federally Funded Research Freely Available Without Delay {{!}} OSTP |url=https://
In 2023, the Council of the [[European Union]] recommended the implementation of an open-access and not-for-profit model for research publishing by the [[European Commission]] and member states. These recommendations are not legally binding and received mixed reactions. While welcomed by some members of the academic community, [[Academic publishing|publishers]] argued that the suggested model is unrealistic due to the lack of crucial funding details. Furthermore, the council's recommendations raised concerns within the publishing industry regarding the potential implications, and they also emphasized the importance of research integrity and the need for member states to address [[Predatory publishing|predatory journals]] and [[paper mill]]s.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Sanderson |first=Katharine |date=2023-06-02 |title=EU council's 'no pay' publishing model draws mixed response |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01810-7 |journal=Nature |language=en |doi=10.1038/d41586-023-01810-7|pmid=37264131 |s2cid=259023820 }}</ref>
Line 303:
As of March 2021, [[open-access mandate]]s have been registered by over 100 research funders and 800 universities worldwide, compiled in the [[Registry of Open Access Repository Mandates and Policies]].<ref>{{Cite web|title=Browse by Policymaker Type|url=http://roarmap.eprints.org/view/policymaker_type/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190312001632/http://roarmap.eprints.org/view/policymaker_type/|archive-date=12 March 2019|access-date=5 March 2019|website=ROARMAP}}</ref> As these sorts of mandates increase in prevalence, collaborating researchers may be affected by several at once. Tools such as [[SWORD (protocol)|SWORD]] can help authors manage sharing between repositories.<ref name=":0" />
Compliance rates with ''voluntary'' open access policies remain low (as low as 5%).<ref name=":0" /> However it has been demonstrated that more successful outcomes are achieved by policies that are compulsory and more specific, such as specifying maximum permissible embargo times.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Pontika|first1=Nancy|last2=Rozenberga|first2=Dace|date=2015-03-05|title=Developing strategies to ensure compliance with funders' open access policies|journal=Insights: The UKSG Journal|language=en|volume=28|issue=1|pages=32–36|doi=10.1629/uksg.168|issn=2048-7754 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Compliance with compulsory open-access mandates varies between funders from 27% to 91% (averaging 67%).<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web|last1=Kirkman|first1=Noreen|last2=Haddow|first2=Gaby|date=2020-06-15|title=Compliance with the first funder open access policy in Australia|url=
== Inequality and open access ==
=== Gender inequality ===
▲In terms of citation and authorship position, gender differences favoring men can be found in many disciplines such as political science, economics and neurology, and critical care research. For instance, in critical care research, 30.8% of the 18,483 research articles published between 2008 and 2018 were led by female authors and were more likely to be published in lower-impact journals than those led by male authors.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Vranas |first1=Kelly C. |last2=Ouyang |first2=David |last3=Lin |first3=Amber L. |last4=Slatore |first4=Christopher G. |last5=Sullivan |first5=Donald R. |last6=Kerlin |first6=Meeta Prasad |last7=Liu |first7=Kathleen D. |last8=Baron |first8=Rebecca M. |last9=Calfee |first9=Carolyn S. |last10=Ware |first10=Lorraine B. |last11=Halpern |first11=Scott D. |last12=Matthay |first12=Michael A. |last13=Herridge |first13=Margaret S. |last14=Mehta |first14=Sangeeta |last15=Rogers |first15=Angela J. |date=2020-04-01 |title=Gender Differences in Authorship of Critical Care Literature |journal=American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine |volume=201 |issue=7 |pages=840–847 |doi=10.1164/rccm.201910-1957OC |issn=1073-449X |pmc=7124723 |pmid=31968182}}</ref> Such disparity can adversely affect the scientific career of women and underrate their scientific impacts for promotion and funding. Open access (OA) publishing can be a tool to help female researchers increase their publications' visibility, measure impact, and help close the gendered citation gap. OA publishing is a well-advocated practice for providing better accessibility to knowledge (especially for researchers in low- and middle-income countries) as well as increasing transparency along with the publishing procedure [21,22]. Publications' visibility can be enhanced through OA publishing due to its high accessibility by removing paywalls compared to non-OA publishing.
=== High-income–low-income country inequality ===
Line 322 ⟶ 318:
* [[Open access in Belgium|Belgium]]
* [[Open access in Canada|Canada]]
* [[Open access in China|China]]
* [[Open access in Denmark|Denmark]]
* [[Open access in France|France]]
Line 328 ⟶ 325:
* [[Open access in Hungary|Hungary]]
* [[Open access in India|India]]
* [[Open access in the Republic of Ireland|
* [[Open access in Italy|Italy]]
* [[Open access in Japan|Japan]]
Line 350 ⟶ 347:
* [[Freedom of information]]
* [[Guerilla Open Access]]
* [[Lists of academic journals]]
* [[List of open access journals]]
* [[Open Access Button]]
Line 358 ⟶ 356:
* [[Open educational resources]]
* [[Open government]]
* [[Open Journal Systems]]
* [[Predatory open access publishing]]
* [[Right to Internet access]]
Line 388 ⟶ 387:
==Further reading==
* [[Robert Darnton|Darnton, Robert]], "The Dream of a Universal Library" (review of [[Peter Baldwin (professor)|Peter Baldwin]], ''Athena Unbound: Why and How Scholarly Knowledge Should Be Free for All'', [[MIT Press]], 2023, 405 pp.), ''[[The New York Review of Books]]'', vol. LXX, no. 20 (21 December 2023), pp. 73–74. Reviewer [[Robert Darnton|Darnton]] writes: "[[Peter Baldwin (professor)|Baldwin]] warns: [[scientific journal|journal]] publishers are gouging their customers, scholarly [[monograph]]s reach a tiny audience, [[libraries]] are floundering under [[budget]] pressures, [[academic]]s are pursuing [[career]]s rather than [[truth]], and readers are not getting all the [[information]] they deserve." (p. 74.) Writes Darnton: "Most scientific research is subsidized by the federal government." Under a 2022 [[White House]] directive, "As of December 31, 2025, all agencies... must require immediate open access... The [[G7]] leaders took a similar stand on May 14, 2023, as did the [[European Council]] on May 23. The tide is turning in favor of unrestricted access, but the countervailing forces are so complex that the future remains cloudy." (p. 73.)
* {{Cite book |last=Suber |first=Peter |url=
* Kirsop, Barbara, and Leslie Chan. (2005) [https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/handle/1807/4416 Transforming access to research literature for developing countries.] Serials Reviews, 31(4): 246–255.
* {{Cite journal |last1=Laakso |first1=Mikael |last2=Welling |first2=Patrik |last3=Bukvova |first3=Helena |last4=Nyman |first4=Linus |last5=Björk |first5=Bo-Christer |last6=Hedlund |first6=Turid |year=2011 |title=The Development of Open Access Journal Publishing from 1993 to 2009 |journal=PLOS ONE |volume=6 |issue=6 |page=e20961 |bibcode=2011PLoSO...620961L |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0020961 |pmc=3113847 |pmid=21695139|doi-access=free }}
* {{Cite journal |last1=Hajjem |first1=C. |last2=Harnad |first2=S |author-link2=Stevan Harnad |last3=Gingras |first3=Y. |year=2005 |title=Ten-Year Cross-Disciplinary Comparison of the Growth of Open Access and How It Increases Research Citation Impact |url=http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/11688/ |journal=IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin |volume=28 |issue=4 |pages=39–47 |arxiv=cs/0606079 |bibcode=2006cs........6079H}}
* {{Cite journal |last1=Tötösy |last2=de Zepetnek |first2=S. |last3=Joshua |first3=Jia |year=2014 |title=Electronic Journals, Prestige, and the Economics of Academic Journal Publishing |journal=CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture |volume=16 |issue=1 |page=2014 |doi=10.7771/1481-4374.2426 |doi-access=free}}
* [
* {{Cite web |last=Mietchen |first=Daniel |date=15 January 2014 |title=Wikimedia and Open Access — a rich history of interactions |url=https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/01/15/wikimedia-and-open-access/ |access-date=10 January 2015 |website=Wikimedia Blog |publisher=Wikimedia Foundation}}
* {{Cite book |last1=Okerson, Ann |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=InDgAAAAMAAJ |title=Scholarly Journals at the Crossroads: A Subversive Proposal for Electronic Publishing |last2=O'Donnell, James (Eds.) |date=June 1995 |publisher=[[Association of Research Libraries]] |isbn=978-0-918006-26-4 |___location=Washington, DC}}.
| |||