EN

Unequal Access, Unequal Impact? The Role of Open Access Policies in Publishing and Citation Trends Across Three Countries

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Shlomit Hadad, Daphne R. Raban, Noa Aharony

This bibliometric study investigates Open Access (OA) publication and citation trends in Austria, Israel, and Mexico from 2010 to 2020—three countries with comparable research output but differing OA infrastructures.

(1) Background: The study examines how national OA policies, funding mechanisms, and transformative agreements (TAs) shape publication and citation patterns across disciplines.

(2) Methods: Using Scopus data, the analysis focuses on four broad subject areas (health, physical, life, and social sciences), applying both three-way ANOVA and a Weighted OA Citation Impact index that adjusts citation shares based on the proportional representation of each subject area in national research output. An OA Engagement Score was also developed to assess each country’s policy and infrastructure support.

(3) Results: OA publications consistently receive more citations than closed-access ones, confirming a robust OA citation advantage. Austria leads in both OA publication volume and weighted impact, reflecting its strong policy frameworks and TA coverage. Israel, while publishing fewer OA articles, achieves high citation visibility in specific disciplines. Mexico demonstrates strengths in repositories and Diamond OA journals but lags in transformative agreements.

(4) Conclusions: National differences in OA policy maturity, infrastructure, and publishing models shape both visibility and citation impact. Structural limitations and indexing disparities may further affect how research from different regions and disciplines is represented globally, emphasizing the need for inclusive and context-sensitive frameworks for evaluating OA engagement.

URL : Unequal Access, Unequal Impact? The Role of Open Access Policies in Publishing and Citation Trends Across Three Countries

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13020020

EN

Geographical and disciplinary coverage of open access journals: OpenAlex, Scopus, and WoS

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Abdelghani Maddi, Marion Maisonobe, Chérifa Boukacem-Zeghmouri

This study aims to compare the geographical and disciplinary coverage of OA journals in three databases: OpenAlex, Scopus and the Web of Science (WoS). We used the Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources (ROAD), provided by the ISSN International Centre, as a reference to identify OA active journals (as of May 2024). Among the 62,701 active OA journals listed in ROAD, the WoS indexes 6,157 journals, Scopus indexes 7,351, while OpenAlex indexes 34,217.

A striking observation is the presence of 24,976 OA journals exclusively in OpenAlex, whereas only 182 journals are exclusively present in the WoS and 373 in Scopus. The geographical analysis focuses on two levels: continents and countries. As for disciplinary comparison, we use the ten disciplinary levels of the ROAD database. Moreover, our findings reveal a similarity in OA journal coverage between the WoS and Scopus. However, while OpenAlex offers better inclusivity and indexing, it is not without biases.

The WoS and Scopus predictably favor journals from Europe, North America and Oceania. Although OpenAlex presents a much more balanced indexing, certain regions and countries remain relatively underrepresented. Typically, Africa is proportionally as under-represented in OpenAlex as it is in Scopus, and some emerging countries are proportionally less represented in OpenAlex than in the WoS and Scopus.

These results underscore a marked similarity in OA journal indexing between WoS and Scopus, while OpenAlex aligns more closely with the distribution observed in the ROAD database, although it also exhibits some representational biases.

URL : Geographical and disciplinary coverage of open access journals: OpenAlex, Scopus, and WoS

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320347

 

EN

Where Will AI Take Scholarly Communication? Voices From the Research Frontline

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : David Nicholas, Blanca Rodríguez-Bravo, Abdullah Abrizah, Jorge Revez, Eti Herman, David Clark, Marzena Swigon, Jie Xu, Anthony Watkinson

Early career researchers (ECRs) are in an ideal position to soothsay. Yet, much of what we know about the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) comes from vested interest groups, such as publishers, tech companies and industry leaders, which are strong on hyperbole, are superficial and, at best, narrow surveys.

This paper seeks to redress this by providing deep empirical data from researchers, allowing us to hear researchers’ views and ‘voices’. The data comes from a project, which focuses on the impact of AI on scholarly communications.

From this study, we report on the perceived transformations to the scholarly communications system by AI and other forces. We were especially interested in discovering what future ECRs foresaw for the established pillars of the system—journals and libraries.

The interview-based study covers a convenience sample of 91 ECRs from all disciplines and half a dozen countries. The main findings being that while the large majority thought there would be a transformation there was no consensus as to what a transformation would look like, but there was agreement on it being one shaped by AI.

The future appears rosy for journals, but less so for libraries and, importantly, for most ECRs, too.

URL : Where Will AI Take Scholarly Communication? Voices From the Research Frontline

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.2008

EN

Does open access foster interdisciplinary citations? Decomposing open access citation advantage

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Kai Nishikawa, Akiyoshi Murakami

The existence of an open access (OA) citation advantage—that is, whether OA increases citations—has been a topic of interest for many years. Although numerous studies have focused on whether OA increases citations, expectations for OA go beyond that. One such expectation is the promotion of knowledge transfer across various fields.

This study aimed to clarify what effects OA, particularly gold OA, has on knowledge transfer across fields. Specifically, we measure the effect of OA on interdisciplinary and within-discipline citation counts by decomposing an existing OA citation advantage metric.

OA increased both interdisciplinary and within-discipline citations in many fields studied, and only interdisciplinary citations in chemistry, computer science, and clinical medicine. In these three fields, clinical medicine showed a tendency toward interdisciplinary citations, independent of journal or paper.

These findings suggest that OA fosters knowledge transfer across disciplines.

URL : Does open access foster interdisciplinary citations? Decomposing open access citation advantage

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-025-05297-z

EN

Evaluation of Open Science for co-creation of Social Innovations: Aconceptual framework

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Monika Maciuliene

Open Science is a rapidly expanding and diversifying field of social innovation with significant implications for and potential benefits to society, policy and various academic research areas. However, much is still unknown about the co-creation processes in Open Science and an overall conceptual framework which aids such understanding is missing.

The article aims to address these limitations and identify the key dimensions of an ecosystem allowing co-creation in Open Science to unfold its social and economic impact. The research presented integrates the literature analysis on co-creation in multi-stakeholder ecosystems and suggest that three important dimensions have to be considered in evaluation of Open Science ecosystems: framework conditions, system conditions and outcomes.

The proposed model was applied in qualitative analysis of thirty-three Open Science case studies. Based on the results of evaluation, it can be concluded that Open Science landscape is highly heterogenous, fragmented and not fully coordinated. The fragmentation appeared in all dimensions of evaluation.

The outcomes of the research provide a first exploratory step in proposing innovative measures to determine the elements of co-creation practices within Open Science context.

URL : Evaluation of Open Science for co-creation of Social Innovations: Aconceptual framework

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2022-167

EN

The time for action is now: Equity and sustainability for diamond publishing in Aotearoa New Zealand

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Luqman Hayes, Craig Murdoch

Diamond open access journals make a significant contribution to scholarship globally while enduring a precarious existence due to a lack of funding. The purpose of this study was to identify the necessary characteristics of a shared service that would deliver improved sustainability for diamond journals in Aotearoa New Zealand.

We conducted semi-structured interviews with several of the editors of journals hosted by Tuwhera, Auckland University of Technology’s diamond hosting service. We sought to understand their experiences, both positive and negative, via thematic analysis of the interview transcripts. These themes indicate that our diamond journal editors face significant burdens due to lack of funding, which threaten the unique contribution they make as journals of and from Aotearoa.

We conclude that a shared open infrastructure is the most appropriate way to ensure the sustainability of diamond journals in Aotearoa, but that it must be accompanied by shared services that address the administrative and journal production load currently experienced by editors.

We propose that such an endeavor should be funded by shifting a small percentage of existing library subscription expenditure from profit-making publishers to diamond journals.

URL : The time for action is now: Equity and sustainability for diamond publishing in Aotearoa New Zealand

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.18311

EN

From Fees to Free: Comparing APC-Based and Diamond Open Access Journals in Engineering

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Luís Eduardo Pilatti, Luiz Alberto Pilatti, Gustavo Dambiski Gomes de Carvalho, Luis Mauricio Martins de Resende

This study analyzes the impact of different Open Access (OA) publication models in engineering, comparing journals that charge Article Processing Charges (APCs) with those operating under the Diamond OA model.

A total of 757 engineering OA journals, comprising 504 APC-based and 253 Diamond OA journals, were examined using bibliometric data from 2020 to 2023. The analysis focused on four key metrics: CiteScore, total citations, number of published articles, and the percentage of cited articles. The results indicate that APC-based journals dominate the upper quartiles (Q1 and Q2) regarding absolute citation counts, primarily driven by high-volume mega-journals such as IEEE Access.

However, Diamond OA journals exhibit a higher proportion of cited articles (88.8% compared to 83.4% in APC-based journals) within the top 10% category. Despite their benefits in providing cost-free dissemination, Diamond OA journals account for only 8.4% of the 3012 active engineering journals indexed in Scopus, highlighting sustainability and visibility challenges.

The findings suggest that, while APC-based journals achieve higher absolute citation counts, editorial reputation and visibility strategies significantly influence citation performance.

This study contributes to the ongoing discussion on the financial sustainability and equity of OA publishing in engineering.

URL : From Fees to Free: Comparing APC-Based and Diamond Open Access Journals in Engineering

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13020016