Field-specific gold open access dynamics in the Chinese mainland: Overviews, disparities, and strategic insights

Authors : Xinyi ChenZhiqiang Liu

Gold Open Access (OA) journals are crucial for scholarly communication, highlighting the need for a thorough evaluation of their academic influence on different research fields. This study leverages the InCites platform to examine article-level characteristics relating to 22 Essential Science Indicators (ESI) research fields, with a focus on the dynamics of gold OA articles, including gold OA uptake in the Chinese mainland and gold OA adoption in the domestic English-language academic journal publishing of the Chinese mainland.

The findings reveal that disparities in gold OA adoption across 22 ESI fields are more pronounced in the Chinese mainland compared with the world scenario. In the Chinese mainland, there is a significant polarization in gold OA publishing volumes across different ESI fields, particularly in Chemistry, Clinical Medicine, and Engineering.

This study builds on the understanding of OA citation advantage (OACA) by incorporating gold OA publishing volume into a two-dimensional framework, resulting in the development of a “distance” metric. It further categorizes gold OA citation effects into four quadrants: positive citation effects (quadrants A and B) and negative citation effects (quadrants C and D), based on category normalized citation impact (CNCI) and journal normalized citation impact (JNCI) indicators from the InCites database.

The findings underscore the importance of developing tailored strategies to address field-specific challenges and promote gold OA dynamics in the Chinese mainland; while prioritizing high-quality gold OA journals is essential for fostering gold OA development in the rest of the world.

URL : Field-specific gold open access dynamics in the Chinese mainland: Overviews, disparities, and strategic insights

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1630

Transformative agreements, publication venues and Open Access policies at the University of Milan

Authors : Laura BerniFrancesco Zucchini

Starting from July 2020 at the University of Milan, one of the largest and most important Italian universities, the first transformative agreements with some major international scientific publishers have come into effect.

These agreements allow corresponding authors to publish in open access without directly bearing the publication costs. From the perspective of corresponding authors, these agreements could increase the dissemination of their scientific output and, thereby, the impact on the scientific community.

However, transformative agreements are part of a rapidly changing publishing market that already includes open access articles in both so-called ‘Diamond’ and ‘Gold’ journals.

The aim of our study is to understand to what extent the positioning of journals in impact rankings, the disciplinary field of the article, together with the career stage of the corresponding author, influence the choice to publish in a journal covered by transformative agreements rather than in other open access or hybrid journals.

The results of our investigation draw attention to the importance of rules in Italy governing scientific careers in different disciplinary fields and potential unforeseen effects of policies favouring open access.

URL : Transformative agreements, publication venues and Open Access policies at the University of Milan

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1627

Is open access disrupting the journal business? A perspective from comparing full adopters, partial adopters, and non-adopters

Author : Xijie Zhang

Two decades after the inception of open access publishing (OA), its impact has remained a focal point in academic discourse. This study adopted a disruptive innovation framework to examine OA’s influence on the traditional subscription market. It assesses the market power of gold journals (OA full adopters) in comparison with hybrid journals and closed-access journals (partial adopters and non-adopters). Additionally, it contrasts the market power between hybrid journals (partial adopters) and closed-access journals (non-adopters).

Using the Lerner index to measure market power through price elasticity of demand, this study employs difference tests and multiple regressions. These findings indicate that OA full adopters disrupt the market power of non-adopting incumbents. However, by integrating the OA option into their business models, partial adopters can effectively mitigate this disruption and expand their influence from the traditional subscription market to the emerging OA paradigm.

URL : Is open access disrupting the journal business? A perspective from comparing full adopters, partial adopters, and non-adopters

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2024.101574

Closing the Loop: Automating Links to Open Access Versions of Articles in Faculty Profiles at a Large Research Institution

Authors : Andrew M. Johnson, Don Elsborg

Introduction

Universities implement faculty profile systems for a variety of reasons, including to increase visibility of research produced at the institution. These profiles often connect with other campus systems, particularly institutional repositories.

This article describes a collaboration at the University of Colorado Boulder aimed at integrating the institutional repository with the faculty profile system, which then expanded to encompass the automated creation of profile links to open access versions of faculty articles from any journal or repository.

Description of Program

To achieve the initial project goals, a cross-campus team from the University Libraries and the Faculty Information System developed a strategy of using Unpaywall as an intermediary data source to connect the institutional repository with the faculty profile system.

This also allowed for the development of an automated process for generating links to open access content from any journal or repository, which resulted in the creation of over 35,000 links to openly available content in faculty profiles, including over 2,900 links to content in the institutional repository.

These links provide public users of the faculty profile system with a simple way to access all openly available research produced at the university. This article describes the development and implementation of this project as well as lessons learned.

Next Steps

The ongoing collaboration provides additional opportunities to unlock data for monitoring rates of open access publishing and self-archiving, informing library collection development decisions, and connecting to other data sources to reveal further insights.

URL : Closing the Loop: Automating Links to Open Access Versions of Articles in Faculty Profiles at a Large Research Institution

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.17242

La valorisation de HAL. Finalités, outils et process

Auteur.ices/Authors : Joachim Schöpfel, Hélène Prost, Bernard Jacquemin, Éric Kergosien, Florence Thiault

L’article présente les résultats d’une analyse qualitative de l’utilisation de la plateforme HAL par les laboratoires de recherche. L’analyse s’appuie sur des entretiens semi-directifs avec des représentants de 50 laboratoires affiliés aux dix universités de recherche Udice. Elle porte sur la fonction que remplit HAL pour les laboratoires, sur sa valeur ajoutée pour leur fonctionnement et leur développement.

En particulier, nous interrogeons les finalités de l’utilisation de HAL par les laboratoires, le recours à des outils internes et externes, et les trajectoires des pratiques. Nous discutons les résultats sous trois angles : les discours et les communautés de pratiques dans les laboratoires ; le périmètre et les enjeux des dispositifs mis en place par les laboratoires en amont et en aval de HAL ; et la transformation de HAL d’une plateforme d’auto-archivage et de communication scientifique directe vers une infrastructure de suivi et d’évaluation de la performance scientifique. Il s’agit du premier d’une série de trois articles issus du projet HAL/LO.

URL : La valorisation de HAL. Finalités, outils et process

DOI : https://doi.org/10.46298/jdmdh.13051

The societal impact of Open Science: a scoping review

Authors : Nicki Lisa Cole, Eva Kormann, Thomas Klebel, Simon Apartis, Tony Ross-Hellauer

Open Science (OS) aims, in part, to drive greater societal impact of academic research. Government, funder and institutional policies state that it should further democratize research and increase learning and awareness, evidence-based policy-making, the relevance of research to society’s problems, and public trust in research. Yet, measuring the societal impact of OS has proven challenging and synthesized evidence of it is lacking.

This study fills this gap by systematically scoping the existing evidence of societal impact driven by OS and its various aspects, including Citizen Science (CS), Open Access (OA), Open/FAIR Data (OFD), Open Code/Software and others. Using the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews and searches conducted in Web of Science, Scopus and relevant grey literature, we identified 196 studies that contain evidence of societal impact. The majority concern CS, with some focused on OA, and only a few addressing other aspects.

Key areas of impact found are education and awareness, climate and environment, and social engagement. We found no literature documenting evidence of the societal impact of OFD and limited evidence of societal impact in terms of policy, health, and trust in academic research. Our findings demonstrate a critical need for additional evidence and suggest practical and policy implications.

URL : https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.240286

An open dataset of article processing charges from six large scholarly publishers

Authors : Leigh-Ann Butler, Madelaine Hare, Nina Schönfelder, Eric Schares, Juan Pablo Alperin, Stefanie Haustein

This paper introduces a dataset of article processing charges (APCs) produced from the price lists of six large scholarly publishers – Elsevier, Frontiers, PLOS, MDPI, Springer Nature and Wiley – between 2019 and 2023.

APC price lists were downloaded from publisher websites each year as well as via Wayback Machine snapshots to retrieve fees per journal per year. The dataset includes journal metadata, APC collection method, and annual APC price list information in several currencies (USD, EUR, GBP, CHF, JPY, CAD) for 8,712 unique journals and 36,618 journal-year combinations.

The dataset was generated to allow for more precise analysis of APCs and can support library collection development and scientometric analysis estimating APCs paid in gold and hybrid OA journals.

URL : An open dataset of article processing charges from six large scholarly publishers

Arxiv : https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.08356