Content deleted Content added
Helping2248 (talk | contribs) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit App section source |
Citation bot (talk | contribs) Added article-number. Removed parameters. Some additions/deletions were parameter name changes. | Use this bot. Report bugs. | Suggested by Abductive | Category:Academic publishing | #UCB_Category 169/201 |
||
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 ====
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 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 }}{{registration required}}</ref>
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 250:
=== 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>
| |||