fbpx
Wikipedia

Open access

January 10, 2023

Not to be confused with Open source. For other uses, see Open access (disambiguation).

Open access (OA) is a set of principles and a range of practices through which research outputs are distributed online, free of access charges or other barriers.[1] With open access strictly defined (according to the 2001 definition), or libre open access, barriers to copying or reuse are also reduced or removed by applying an open license for copyright.[1]

Open access logo, originally designed by Public Library of Science.
A PhD Comics introduction to open access

The main focus of the open access movement is "peer reviewed research literature".[2] Historically, this has centered mainly on print-based academic journals. Whereas non-open access journals cover publishing costs through 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,[3] book chapters,[1] monographs,[4] research reports and images.[5]

Since the revenue of most open access journals is earned from publication fees charged to the authors, OA publishers are motivated to increase their profits by accepting low-quality papers and by not performing thorough peer review.[6][7] On the other hand, the prices for OA publications in the most prestigious journals have exceeded 5,000 US$, making such publishing model unaffordable to a large number of researchers. This increase in publishing cost has been called the "Open-Access Sequel to [the] Serials Crisis".[8]

Definitions

There are different models of open access publishing and publishers may use one or more of these models.

Colour naming system

Different open access types are currently commonly described using a colour system. The most commonly recognised names are "green", "gold", and "hybrid" open access; however, a number of other models and alternative terms are also used.

Gold OA

 
Number of Gold open access journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals[9][10]
 
Number of Gold and Hybrid open access journals listed in PubMed Central[11][12]

In the gold OA model, the publisher makes all articles and related content available for free immediately on the journal's website. In such publications, articles are licensed for sharing and reuse via Creative Commons licenses or similar.[1]

Almost all gold OA publishers charge an article processing charge (APC), which is typically paid through institutional or grant funding. The majority of gold open access journals charging APCs follow an "author-pays" model,[13] although this is not an intrinsic property of gold OA.[14]

Green OA

 
Venn diagram highlighting the key features of different types of open access in scholarly publishing.[15]

Self-archiving by authors is permitted under green OA. Independently from publication by a publisher, the author also posts the work to a website controlled by the author, the research institution that funded or hosted the work, or to an independent central open repository, where people can download the work without paying.[16]

Green OA is gratis for the author. Some publishers (less than 5% and decreasing as of 2014) may charge a fee for an additional service[16] such as a free license on the publisher-authored copyrightable portions of the printed version of an article.

If the author posts the near-final version of their work after peer review by a journal, the archived version is called a "postprint". This can be the accepted manuscript as returned by the journal to the author after successful peer review.

Hybrid OA

Hybrid open-access journals contain a mixture of open access articles and closed access articles.[17][18] 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.[19] Hybrid OA generally costs more than gold OA and can offer a lower quality of service.[20] A particularly controversial practice in hybrid open access journals is "double dipping", where both authors and subscribers are charged.[21]

Bronze OA

Bronze open access articles are free to read only on the publisher page, but lack a clearly identifiable license.[22] Such articles are typically not available for reuse.

Diamond/platinum OA

See also: Diamond open access

Journals which publish open access without charging authors article processing charges are sometimes referred to as diamond[23][24][25] or platinum[26][27] 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 institutions, learned societies, philanthropists or government grants.[28][29][30] Diamond OA journals are available for most disciplines, and are usually small (<25 articles per year) and more likely to be multilingual (38%).[25]

Black OA

See also: Shadow library
 
Download rate for articles on Sci-Hub (black open access)[31]

The growth of unauthorized digital copying by large-scale copyright infringement has enabled free access to paywalled literature.[32][33] This has been done via existing social media sites (e.g. the #ICanHazPDF hashtag) as well as dedicated sites (e.g. Sci-Hub).[32] In some ways this is a large-scale technical implementation of pre-existing practice, whereby those with access to paywalled literature would share copies with their contacts.[34][35][36][37] However, the increased ease and scale from 2010 onwards have changed how many people treat subscription publications.[38]

Gratis and libre

Main article: Gratis versus libre

Similar to the free content definition, the terms 'gratis' and 'libre' were used in the BOAI definition to distinguish between free to read versus free to reuse.[39] Gratis open access ( ) refers to online access free of charge, and libre open access ( ) refers to online access free of charge plus some additional re-use rights.[39] Libre open access covers the kinds of open access defined in the Budapest Open Access Initiative, the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities. The re-use rights of libre OA are often specified by various specific Creative Commons licenses;[40] all of which require as a minimum attribution of authorship to the original authors.[39][41] In 2012, the number of works under libre open access was considered to have been rapidly increasing for a few years, though most open-access mandates did not enforce any copyright license and it was difficult to publish libre gold OA in legacy journals.[2] However, there are no costs nor restrictions for green libre OA as preprints can be freely self-deposited with a free license, and most open-access repositories use Creative Commons licenses to allow reuse.[42]

FAIR

Main article: 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.[43][44] Initially proposed in March 2016, it has subsequently been endorsed by organisations such as the European Commission and the G20.[45][46]

Features

The emergence of open science or open research has brought to light a number of controversial and hotly-debated topics.

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[47]) has led to increasingly entrenched positions and much debate.

The area of (open) scholarly practices increasingly see a role for policy-makers and research funders[48][49][50] giving focus to issues such as career incentives, research evaluation and business models for publicly funded research. Plan S and AmeliCA[51] (Open Knowledge for Latin America) caused a wave of debate in scholarly communication in 2019 and 2020.[52][53]

Licenses

 
Licenses used by gold and hybrid OA journals in DOAJ[54]

Subscription-based publishing typically requires transfer of copyright from authors to the publisher so that the latter can monetise the process via dissemination and reproduction of the work.[55][56][57][58] With OA publishing, typically authors retain copyright to their work, and license its reproduction to the publisher.[59] Retention of copyright by authors can support academic freedoms by enabling greater control of the work (e.g. for image re-use) or licensing agreements (e.g. to allow dissemination by others).[60]

The most common licenses used in open access publishing are Creative Commons.[61] The widely used CC BY license is one of the most permissive, only requiring attribution to be allowed to use the material (and allowing derivations, commercial use).[62] A range of more restrictive creative commons licenses are also used. More rarely, some of the smaller academic journals use custom open access licenses.[61][63] Some publishers (e.g. Elsevier) use "author nominal copyright" for OA articles, where the author retains copyright in name only and all rights are transferred to the publisher.[64][65][66]

Funding

Since open access publication does not charge readers, there are many financial models used to cover costs by other means.[67] Open access can be provided by commercial publishers, who may publish open access as well as subscription-based journals, or dedicated open-access publishers such as Public Library of Science (PLOS) and BioMed Central. Another source of funding for open access can be institutional subscribers. One example of this is the Subscribe to Open publishing model introduced by Annual Reviews; if the subscription revenue goal is met, the given journal's volume is published open access.[68]

Advantages and disadvantages of open access have generated considerable discussion amongst researchers, academics, librarians, university administrators, funding agencies, government officials, commercial publishers, editorial staff and society publishers.[69] Reactions of existing publishers to open access journal publishing have ranged from moving with enthusiasm to a new open access business model, to experiments with providing as much free or open access as possible, to active lobbying against open access proposals. There are many publishers that started up as open access-only publishers, such as PLOS, Hindawi Publishing Corporation, Frontiers in... journals, MDPI and BioMed Central.

Article processing charges

 
Article processing charges by gold OA journals in DOAJ[54]
See also: Article processing charge

Some open access journals (under the gold, and hybrid models) generate revenue by charging publication fees in order to make the work openly available at the time of publication.[70][23][24] The money might come from the author but more often comes from the author's research grant or employer.[71] While the payments are typically incurred per article published (e.g. BMC or PLOS journals), some journals apply them per manuscript submitted (e.g. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics until recently) or per author (e.g. PeerJ).

Charges typically range from $1,000–$3,000 ($5,380 for Nature Communications) ([72][54][73] but can be under $10[74] or over $5,000.[75] 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).[76] APCs can also depend on a journal's impact factor.[77][78][79][80] Some publishers (e.g. eLife and Ubiquity Press) have released estimates of their direct and indirect costs that set their APCs.[81][82] Hybrid OA generally costs more than gold OA and can offer a lower quality of service.[83] A particularly controversial practice in hybrid open access journals is "double dipping", where both authors and subscribers are charged.[21]

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).[84][failed verification] This has led to the assessment that there is enough money "within the system" to enable full transition to OA.[84] 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.[85] Concern has been noted that increasing subscription journal prices will be mirrored by rising APCs, creating a barrier to less financially privileged authors.[86][87][88]

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.[89] Some gold OA publishers will waive all or part of the fee for authors from less developed economies. Steps are normally taken to ensure that peer reviewers 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] 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]

Subsidized or no-fee

No-fee open access journals, also known as "platinum" or "diamond"[23][24] do not charge either readers or authors.[90] These journals use a variety of business models including subsidies, advertising, membership dues, endowments, or volunteer labour.[91][85] Subsidising sources range from universities, libraries and museums to foundations, societies or government agencies.[91] Some publishers may cross-subsidise from other publications or auxiliary services and products.[91] For example, most APC-free journals in Latin America are funded by higher education institutions and are not conditional on institutional affiliation for publication.[85] Conversely, Knowledge Unlatched crowdsources funding in order to make monographs available open access.[92]

Estimates of prevalence vary, but approximately 10,000 journals without APC are listed in DOAJ[93] and the Free Journal Network.[94][95] APC-free journals tend to be smaller and more local-regional in scope.[96][97] Some also require submitting authors to have a particular institutional affiliation.[96]

Preprint use

 
Typical publishing workflow for an academic journal article (preprint, postprint, and 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.[98][99][100] 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.[101]

Effect of preprints on later publication

A persistent concern surrounding preprints is that work may be at risk of being plagiarised or "scooped" – meaning that the same or similar research will be published by others without proper attribution to the original source – if publicly available but not yet associated with a stamp of approval from peer reviewers and traditional journals.[102] These concerns are often amplified as competition increases for academic jobs and funding, and perceived to be particularly problematic for early-career researchers and other higher-risk demographics within academia.

However, preprints, in fact, protect against scooping.[103] 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.[104] 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.

Preprints provide a time-stamp at the time of publication, which helps to establish the "priority of discovery" for scientific claims (Vale and Hyman 2016). This means that a preprint can act as proof of provenance for research ideas, data, code, models, and results.[105] The fact that the majority of preprints come with a form of permanent identifier, usually a digital object identifier (DOI), also makes them easy to cite and track. Thus, if one were to be "scooped" without adequate acknowledgement, this would be a case of academic misconduct and plagiarism, and could be pursued as such.

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.[note 1] Indeed, the benefits of preprints, especially for early-career researchers, seem to outweigh any perceived risk: rapid sharing of academic research, open access without author-facing charges, establishing priority of discoveries, receiving wider feedback in parallel with or before peer review, and facilitating wider collaborations.[103]

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 and/or subject repository. This route is often dependent on journal or publisher policies,[note 2] which can be more restrictive and complicated than respective "gold" policies regarding deposit location, license, and embargo requirements. Some publishers require an embargo period before deposition in public repositories,[106] arguing that immediate self-archiving risks loss of subscription income.

Embargo periods

 
Length of embargo times for bronze Elsevier journals[107]

Embargoes are imposed by between 20 and 40% of journals,[108][109] during which time an article is paywalled before permitting self-archiving (green OA) or releasing a free-to-read version (bronze OA).[110][111] Embargo periods typically vary from 6–12 months in STEM and >12 months in humanities, arts and social sciences.[85] Embargo-free self-archiving has not been shown to affect subscription revenue,[112] and tends to increase readership and citations.[113][114] Embargoes have been lifted on particular topics for either limited times or ongoing (e.g. Zika outbreaks[115] or indigenous health[116]). Plan S includes zero-length embargoes on self-archiving as a key principle.[85]

Motivations

Main article: Academic journal publishing reform

Open access (mostly green and gratis) began to be sought and provided worldwide by researchers when the possibility itself was opened by the advent of Internet and the World Wide Web. The momentum was further increased by a growing movement for academic journal publishing reform, and with it gold and libre OA.

The premises behind open access publishing are that there are viable funding models to maintain traditional peer review standards of quality while also making the following changes:

  • Rather than making journal articles accessible through a subscription business model, all academic publications could be made free to read and published with some other cost-recovery model, such as publication charges, subsidies, or charging subscriptions only for the print edition, with the online edition gratis or "free to read".[117]
  • Rather than applying traditional notions of copyright to academic publications, they could be libre or "free to build upon".[117]

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,[118] although others have argued that OA may raise the total cost of publication,[119] and further increase economic incentives for exploitation in academic publishing.[120] The open access movement is motivated by the problems of social inequality caused by restricting access to academic research, which favor large and wealthy institutions with the financial means to purchase access to many journals, as well as the economic challenges and perceived unsustainability of academic publishing.[117][121]

Stakeholders and concerned communities

A fictional thank you note from the future to contemporary researchers for sharing their research openly

The intended audience of research articles is usually other researchers. Open access helps researchers as readers by opening up access to articles that their libraries do not subscribe to. One of the great beneficiaries of open access may be users in developing countries, where currently some universities find it difficult to pay for subscriptions required to access the most recent journals.[122] Some schemes exist for providing subscription scientific publications to those affiliated to institutions in developing countries at little or no cost.[123] All researchers benefit from open access as no library can afford to subscribe to every scientific journal and most can only afford a small fraction of them – this is known as the "serials crisis".[124]

Open access extends the reach of research beyond its immediate academic circle. An open access article can be read by anyone – a professional in the field, a researcher in another field, a journalist, a politician or civil servant, or an interested layperson. Indeed, a 2008 study revealed that mental health professionals are roughly twice as likely to read a relevant article if it is freely available.[125]

Research funders and universities

See also: § Policies and mandates
Further information: Open-access mandate § Instances

Research funding agencies and universities want to ensure that the research they fund and support in various ways has the greatest possible research impact.[126] As a means of achieving this, research funders are beginning to expect open access to the research they support. Many of them (including all UK Research Councils) have already adopted open-access mandates, and others are on the way to do so (see ROARMAP).

In the US, the 2008 NIH Public Access Policy, an open-access mandate was put into law, and required that research 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.

Universities

A growing number of universities are providing institutional repositories in which their researchers can deposit their published articles. Some open access advocates believe that institutional repositories will play a very important role in responding to open-access mandates from funders.[127]

In May 2005, 16 major Dutch universities cooperatively launched DAREnet, the Digital Academic Repositories, making over 47,000 research papers available.[128] From 2 June 2008, DAREnet has been incorporated into the scholarly portal NARCIS.[129] By 2019, NARCIS provided access to 360,000 open access publications from all Dutch universities, KNAW, NWO and a number of scientific institutes.[130]

In 2011, a group of universities in North America formed the Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions (COAPI).[131] Starting with 21 institutions where the faculty had either established an open access policy or were in the process of implementing one, COAPI now has nearly 50 members. These institutions' administrators, faculty and librarians, and staff support the international work of the Coalition's awareness-raising and advocacy for open access.

In 2012, the Harvard Open Access Project released its guide to good practices for university open-access policies,[132] focusing on rights-retention policies that allow universities to distribute faculty research without seeking permission from publishers. Rights retention is currently being explored in the UK by UKSCL.[133]

In 2013 a group of nine Australian universities formed the Australian Open Access Strategy Group (AOASG) to advocate, collaborate, raise awareness, and lead and build capacity in the open access space in Australia.[134] In 2015, the group expanded to include all eight New Zealand universities and was renamed the Australasian Open Access Support Group.[135] It was then renamed the Australasian Open Access Strategy Group 10 February 2018 at the Wayback Machine, highlighting its emphasis on strategy. The awareness raising activities of the AOASG include presentations, workshops, blogs, and a webinar series 5 February 2018 at the Wayback Machine on open access issues.[136]

Libraries and librarians

As information professionals, librarians are often vocal and active advocates of open access. These librarians believe that open access promises to remove both the price barriers and the permission barriers that undermine library efforts to provide access to the scholarly record,[137] as well as helping to address the serials crisis. Many library associations have either signed major open access declarations, or created their own. For example, IFLA have produced a Statement on Open Access.[138]

Librarians also lead education and outreach initiatives to faculty, administrators, and others about the benefits of open access. For example, the Association of College and Research Libraries of the American Library Association has developed a Scholarly Communications Toolkit.[139] The Association of Research Libraries has documented the need for increased access to scholarly information, and was a leading founder of the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC).[140][141]

At most universities, the library manages the institutional repository, which provides free access to scholarly work by the university's faculty. The Canadian Association of Research Libraries has a program[142] to develop institutional repositories at all Canadian university libraries.

An increasing number of libraries provide publishing or hosting services for open access journals, with the Library Publishing Coalition as a membership organisation.[143]

In 2013, open access activist Aaron Swartz was posthumously awarded the American Library Association's James Madison Award for being an "outspoken advocate for public participation in government and unrestricted access to peer-reviewed scholarly articles".[144][145] In March 2013, the entire editorial board and the editor-in-chief of the Journal of Library Administration resigned en masse, citing a dispute with the journal's publisher.[146] One board member wrote of a "crisis of conscience about publishing in a journal that was not open access" after the death of Aaron Swartz.[147][148]

The pioneer of the open access movement in France and one of the first librarians to advocate the self-archiving approach to open access worldwide is Hélène Bosc.[149] Her work is described in her "15-year retrospective".[150]

Public

Open access to scholarly research is argued to be important to the public for a number of reasons. One of the arguments for public access to the scholarly literature is that most of the research is paid for by taxpayers through government grants, who therefore have a right to access the results of what they have funded. This is one of the primary reasons for the creation of advocacy groups such as The Alliance for Taxpayer Access in the US.[151] Examples of people who might wish to read scholarly literature include individuals with medical conditions (or family members of such individuals) and serious hobbyists or 'amateur' scholars who may be interested in specialized scientific literature (e.g. amateur astronomers). Additionally, professionals in many fields, such as those doing research in private companies, start-ups , and most hospitals, usually do not have access to publications behind paywalls, and OA publications is the only type that they can access in practice.

Even those who do not read scholarly articles benefit indirectly from open access.[152] For example, patients benefit when their doctor and other health care professionals have access to the latest research. As argued by open access advocates, open access speeds research progress, productivity, and knowledge translation.[153] Every researcher in the world can read an article, not just those whose library can afford to subscribe to the particular journal in which it appears. Faster discoveries benefit everyone. High school and junior college students can gain the information literacy skills critical for the knowledge age. Critics of the various open access initiatives claim that there is little evidence that a significant amount of scientific literature is currently unavailable to those who would benefit from it.[154] While no library has subscriptions to every journal that might be of benefit, virtually all published research can be acquired via interlibrary loan.[155] Note that interlibrary loan may take a day or weeks depending on the loaning library and whether they will scan and email, or mail the article. Open access online, by contrast is faster, often immediate, making it more suitable than interlibrary loan for fast-paced research.

Low-income countries

In developing nations, open access archiving and publishing acquires a unique importance. Scientists, health care professionals, and institutions in developing nations often do not have the capital necessary to access scholarly literature, although schemes exist to give them access for little or no cost. Among the most important is HINARI,[156] the Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative, sponsored by the World Health Organization and part of Research4Life. HINARI, however, also has restrictions. For example, individual researchers may not register as users unless their institution has access,[157] and several countries that one might expect to have access do not have access at all (not even "low-cost" access) (e.g. South Africa).[157]

Many open access projects involve international collaboration. For example, the SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online),[158] is a comprehensive approach to full open access journal publishing, involving a number of Latin American countries. Bioline International, a non-profit organization dedicated to helping publishers in developing countries is a collaboration of people in the UK, Canada, and Brazil; the Bioline International Software is used around the world. Research Papers in Economics (RePEc), is a collaborative effort of over 100 volunteers in 45 countries. The Public Knowledge Project in Canada developed the open-source publishing software Open Journal Systems (OJS), which is now in use around the world, for example by the African Journals Online group, and one of the most active development groups is Portuguese. This international perspective has resulted in advocacy for the development of open-source appropriate technology and the necessary open access to relevant information for sustainable development.[159][160]

History

Main article: History of open access
 
The number and proportion of open access articles split between Gold, Green, Hybrid, Bronze and closed access (1950–2016)[161]
 
Ratios of article access types for different subjects (averaged 2009–2015)[161]
 
Share of hybrid open access (OA) articles in the subscription journals of the top three publishers. JCR, Journal Citation Reports. Reproduced

Extent

Various studies have investigated the extent of open access. A study published in 2010 showed that roughly 20% of the total number of peer-reviewed articles published in 2008 could be found openly accessible.[162] Another study found that by 2010, 7.9% of all academic journals with impact factors were gold open access journals and showed a broad distribution of Gold Open Access journals throughout academic disciplines.[163] A study of random journals from the citations indexes AHSCI, SCI and SSCI in 2013 came to the result that 88% of the journals were closed access and 12% were open access.[23] In August 2013, a study done for the European Commission reported that 50% of a random sample of all articles published in 2011 as indexed by Scopus were freely accessible online by the end of 2012.[164][165][166] A 2017 study by the Max Planck Society put the share of gold access articles in pure open access journals at around 13 percent of total research papers.[167]

In 2009, there were approximately 4,800 active open access journals, publishing around 190,000 articles.[168] As of February 2019, over 12,500 open access journals are listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals.[169]

 
Percentange of Open Access journal articles available from ACS (green), Elsevier (orange) and MDPI (blue) vs. the original publication year accrording to Web Of Science on on 2022-10-28
 
 
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.[170][171]

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.[72] 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.[72] 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.[172] Crawford's study also found that although a minority of open access journals impose charges on authors, a growing majority of open access articles are published under this arrangement, particularly in the science disciplines (thanks to the enormous output of open access "mega journals", each of which may publish tens of thousands of articles in a year and are invariably funded by author-side charges—see Figure 10.1 in GOA4).

The Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR) indexes the creation, location and growth of open access open access-repositories and their contents.[173] As of February 2019, over 4,500 institutional and cross-institutional repositories have been registered in ROAR.[174]

Effects on scholarly publishing

Article impact

 
Comparison of OA publications to non-OA publications for academic citations (n=44),[175] HTML views (n=4),[176][177][154][178] PDF downloads (n=3),[177][154][178] Twitter (n=2),[179][176] Wikipedia (n=1)[179]

Since published articles report on research that is typically funded by government or university grants, the more the article is used, cited, applied and built upon, the better for research as well as for the researcher's career.[180][181]

Some professional organizations have encouraged use of open access: in 2001, the International Mathematical Union communicated to its members that "Open access to the mathematical literature is an important goal" and encouraged them to "[make] available electronically as much of our own work as feasible" to "[enlarge] the reservoir of freely available primary mathematical material, particularly helping scientists working without adequate library access".[182]

Readership

OA articles are generally viewed online and downloaded more often than paywalled articles and that readership continues for longer.[176][183] 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).[184] OA articles are more read on publication management programs such as Mendeley.[179] Open access practices can reduce publication delays, an obstacle which led some research fields such as high-energy physics to adopt widespread preprint access.[185]

Citation rate

See also: FUTON bias
 
Authors may use form language like this to request an open access license when submitting their work to a publisher.
A 2013 interview on paywalls and open access with NIH Director Francis Collins and inventor Jack Andraka

A main reason authors make their articles openly accessible is to maximize their citation impact.[186] Open access articles are typically cited more often than equivalent articles requiring subscriptions.[2][187][188][189][190] This 'citation advantage' was first reported in 2001.[191] Two major studies dispute this claim,[192][183] however the consensus of multiple studies support the effect,[175][193] with measured OA citation advantage varying in magnitude between 1.3-fold to 6-fold depending on discipline.[189][194]

Citation advantage is most pronounced in OA articles in hybrid journals (compared to the non-OA articles in those same journals),[195] and with articles deposited in green OA repositories.[162] Notably, green OA articles show similar benefits to citation counts as gold OA articles.[190] Articles in gold OA journals are typically cited at a similar frequency to paywalled articles.[196] Citation advantage increases the longer an article has been published.[176]

Alt-metrics

In addition to format academic citation, other forms of research impact (altmetrics) may be affected by OA publishing,[184][190] constituting a significant "amplifier" effect for science published on such platforms.[197] Initial studies suggest that OA articles are more referenced in blogs,[198] on Twitter,[179] and on English Wikipedia.[197] The OA advantage in altmetrics may be smaller than the advantage in academic citations, although findings are mixed.[199][190]

Journal impact factor

See also: Impact factor

Journal impact factor (JIF) measures the average number of citations of articles in a journal over a two-year window. It is commonly used as a proxy for journal quality, expected research impact for articles submitted to that journal, and of researcher success.[200][201] In subscription journals, impact factor correlates with overall citation count, however this correlation is not observed in gold OA journals.[202]

Open access initiatives like Plan S typically call on a broader adoption and implementation of the Leiden Manifesto[note 3] and the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) alongside fundamental changes in the scholarly communication system.[note 4]

Peer review processes

See also: Scholarly peer review

Peer review of research articles prior to publishing has been common since the 18th century.[203][204] Commonly reviewer comments are only revealed to the authors and reviewer identities kept anonymous.[205][206] The rise of OA publishing has also given rise to experimentation in technologies and processes for peer review.[207] Increasing transparency of peer review and quality control includes posting results to preprint servers,[208] preregistration of studies,[209] open publishing of peer reviews,[210] open publishing of full datasets and analysis code,[211][212] and other open science practices.[213][214][215] It is proposed that increased transparency of academic quality control processes makes audit of the academic record easier.[210][216] Additionally, the rise of OA megajournals has made it viable for their peer review to focus solely on methodology and results interpretation whilst ignoring novelty.[217][218] Major criticisms of the influence of OA on peer review have included that if OA journals have incentives to publish as many articles as possible then peer review standards may fall (as aspect of predatory publishing), increased use of preprints may populate the academic corpus with un-reviewed junk and propaganda, and that reviewers may self-censor if their identity of open. Some advocates propose that readers will have increased skepticism of preprint studies - a traditional hallmark of scientific inquiry.[85]

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.[219] In this sense, Grudniewicz et al.[220] proposed a consensus definition that needs to be shared: "Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices."

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.[221][222] The rise of such journals since 2010[223][224] 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.[225] Although commonly associated with OA publishing models, subscription journals are also at risk of similar lax quality control standards and poor editorial policies.[226][227][228] OA publishers therefore aim to ensure quality via auditing by registries such as DOAJ, 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).[229][230] Increased transparency of the peer review and publication process has been proposed as a way to combat predatory journal practices.[85][210][231]

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.[232][233][234] This has been noted in many fields, with more than 20 examples appearing since around 2010, including in widely-read journals such as The Lancet, Science and Nature. A Flickr group collected screenshots of examples. In 2012 Duncan Hull proposed the Open Access Irony award to publicly humiliate journals that publish these kinds of papers.[235] Examples of these have been shared and discussed on social media using the hashtag #openirony (e.g. on Twitter). Typically these discussions are humorous exposures of articles/editorials that are pro-open access, but locked behind paywalls. The main concern that motivates these discussions is that restricted access to public scientific knowledge is slowing scientific progress.[234] The practice has been justified as important for raising awareness of open access.[236]

Infrastructure

 
Number of open access repositories listed in the Registry of Open Access Repositories[237]

Databases and repositories

Multiple databases exist for open access articles, journals and datasets. These databases overlap, however each has different inclusion criteria, which typically include extensive vetting for journal publication practices, editorial boards and ethics statements. The main databases of open access articles and journals are DOAJ and PMC. In the case of DOAJ, only fully gold open access journals are included, whereas PMC also hosts articles from hybrid journals.

There are also a number of preprint servers which host articles that have not yet been reviewed as open access copies.[238][239] These articles are subsequently submitted for peer review by both open access or subscription journals, however the preprint always remains openly accessible. A list of preprint servers is maintained at ResearchPreprints.[240]

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.[241][242][243][173][244] Most subscription journals place restrictions on which version of the work may be shared and/or require an embargo period following the original date of publication. What is deposited can therefore vary, either a preprint or the peer-reviewed postprint, either the author's refereed and revised final draft or the publisher's version of record, either immediately deposited or after several years.[245] Repositories may be specific to an institution, a discipline (e.g.arXiv), a scholarly society (e.g. MLA's CORE Repository), or a funder (e.g. PMC). Although the practice was first formally proposed in 1994,[246][247] self-archiving was already being practiced by some computer scientists in local FTP archives in the 1980s (later harvested by CiteSeer).[248] The SHERPA/RoMEO site maintains a list of the different publisher copyright and self-archiving policies[249] and the ROAR database hosts an index of the repositories themselves.[250][251]

Representativeness in proprietary databases

Uneven coverage of journals in the major commercial citation index databases (such as Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed)[252][253][254][255] has strong effects on evaluating both researchers and institutions (e.g. the UK Research Excellence Framework or Times Higher Education ranking[note 5][256][257]). While these databases primarily select based on process and content quality, there has been concern that their commercial nature may skew their assessment criteria and representation of journals outside of Europe and North America.[85][65] However, there are not currently equal, comprehensive, multi-lingual, open source or non-commercial digital infrastructures.[258]

Distribution

See also: Scientific journal § Electronic publishing

Like the self-archived green open access articles, most gold open access journal articles are distributed via the World Wide Web,[1] due to low distribution costs, increasing reach, speed, and increasing importance for scholarly communication. Open source software is sometimes used for open-access repositories,[259] open access journal websites,[260] and other aspects of open access provision and open access publishing.

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. ROAD (the Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources)[261] 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.[262][169]

Open access articles can be found with a web search, using any general search engine or those specialized for the scholarly and scientific literature, such as Google Scholar, OAIster, base-search.net,[263] and CORE[264] Many open-access repositories offer a programmable interface to query their content. Some of them use a generic protocol, such as OAI-PMH (e.g., base-search.net[263]). 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.

In 1998, several universities founded the Public Knowledge Project to foster open access, and developed the open-source journal publishing system Open Journal Systems, among other scholarly software projects. As of 2010, it was being used by approximately 5,000 journals worldwide.[265]

Several initiatives provide an alternative to the English language dominance of existing publication indexing systems, including Index Copernicus (Polish), SciELO (Portuguese, Spanish) and Redalyc (Spanish).

Policies and mandates

Main article: Open access mandate
See also: § Research funders and universities

Many universities, research institutions and research funders have adopted mandates requiring their researchers to make their research publications open access.[266] For example, Research Councils UK spent nearly £60m on supporting their open access mandate between 2013 and 2016.[267] New mandates are often announced during the Open Access Week, that takes place each year during the last full week of October.

The idea of mandating self-archiving was raised at least as early as 1998.[268] Since 2003[269] efforts have been focused on open access mandating by the funders of research: governments,[270] research funding agencies,[271] and universities.[272] Some publishers and publisher associations have lobbied against introducing mandates.[273][274][275]

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.[2] 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.[2]

Compliance

As of March 2021, open-access mandates have been registered by over 100 research funders and 800 universities worldwide, compiled in the Registry of Open Access Repository Mandates and Policies.[276] As these sorts of mandates increase in prevalence, collaborating researchers may be affected by several at once. Tools such as SWORD can help authors manage sharing between repositories.[2]

Compliance rates with voluntary open access policies remain low (as low as 5%).[2] 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.[2][277] Compliance with compulsory open-access mandates varies between funders from 27% to 91% (averaging 67%).[2][278] From March 2021, Google Scholar started tracking and indicating compliance with funders' open-access mandates, although it only checks whether items are free-to-read, rather than openly licensed.[279]

Inequality and open access

Gender inequality

Gender inequality still exists in the modern system of scientific publishing. In terms of citation and authorship position, gender differences favoring men can be found in many disciplinaries such as political science, economics and neurology, and critical care research. For instance, in critical care research, 30.8% of 18,483 research led by female authors is more likely to be published in lower-impact journals than male authors. Such disparity can adversely affect the scientific career of women and underrate their scientific impacts for promotion and funding. Hence, for a healthy and fair scientific community, it is important to mitigate such gender inequality. It is suggested to help women in science by reducing systematic bias, inappropriate institutional practices or unequal domestic work. Increasing the number of female scientists and policies promoting gender equality may help close the gender gap in science. Besides, improving the visibility and representation of women in academic publishing is also essential because underrepresentation of women in scholarly literature can enlarge the gendered citation gap, even in the discipline that has more women than men. Open access (OA) publishing has many advantages in the present publishing system and can help female researchers increase their publications’ visibility and measure impact. 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.

Additionally, because of this high visibility, authors can receive more recognition for their works. OA publishing is also suggested to be advantageous in terms of citation number compared to non-OA publishing, but this aspect is still controversial within the scientific community. The association between OA and a higher number of citations may be because higher-quality articles are self-selected for publication as OA. Considering the gender-based issues in academia and the efforts to improve gender equality, OA can be an important factor when female researchers choose a place to publish their articles. With a proper supporting system and funding, OA publishing is shown to have increased female researchers’ productivity.[280]

High-income–low-income country inequality

A 2022 study has found "most OA articles were written by authors in high-income countries, and there were no articles in Mirror journals by authors in low-income countries."[281] "One of the great ironies of open access is that you grant authors around the world the ability to finally read the scientific literature that was completely closed off to them, but it ends up excluding them from publishing in the same journals" says Emilio Bruna, a scholar at the University of Florida in Gainesville.[282]

By country

See also

Notes

  1. ^ "ASAPbio FAQ". from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 28 August 2019..
  2. ^ "SHERPA/RoMEO". from the original on 30 August 2019. Retrieved 28 August 2019. database.
  3. ^ "The Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics". from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 28 August 2019. 2015.
  4. ^ "Plan S implementation guidelines". from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 28 August 2019., February 2019.
  5. ^ Publications in journals listed in the WoS has a large effect on the UK Research Excellence Framework. Bibliographic data from Scopus represents more than 36% of assessment criteria in THE rankings.

References

  1. ^ a b c d e Suber, Peter. "Open Access Overview". from the original on 19 May 2007. Retrieved 29 November 2014.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i Swan, Alma (2012). "Policy guidelines for the development and promotion of open access". UNESCO. from the original on 14 April 2019. Retrieved 14 April 2019.
  3. ^ Schöpfel, Joachim; Prost, Hélène (2013). "Degrees of secrecy in an open environment. The case of electronic theses and dissertations". ESSACHESS – Journal for Communication Studies. 6 (2(12)): 65–86. from the original on 1 January 2014.
  4. ^ Schwartz, Meredith (2012). "Directory of Open Access Books Goes Live". Library Journal. from the original on 4 October 2013.
  5. ^ "Terms and conditions for the use and redistribution of Sentinel data" (PDF). No. version 1.0. European Space Agency. July 2014. (PDF) from the original on 8 February 2020. Retrieved 28 June 2020.
  6. ^ Beall, Jeffrey. "What the Open-Access Movement Doesn't Want You to Know". AAUP. Retrieved 22 October 2021.
  7. ^ Knox, Richard (3 October 2013). "Some Online Journals Will Publish Fake Science, For A Fee". NPR. Retrieved 22 October 2021.
  8. ^ Khoo, Shaun Yon-Seng (2019). "Article Processing Charge Hyperinflation and Price Insensitivity: An Open Access Sequel to the Serials Crisis". Liber Quarterly: The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries. 29: 1–18. doi:10.18352/lq.10280. S2CID 164265611. Retrieved 30 August 2022.
  9. ^ . doaj.org. 1 May 2013. Archived from the original on 1 May 2013.
  10. ^ Morrison, Heather (31 December 2018). "Dramatic Growth of Open Access". Scholars Portal Dataverse. hdl:10864/10660.
  11. ^ "PMC full journal list download". www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. from the original on 7 March 2019. Retrieved 10 March 2019.
  12. ^ "NLM Catalog". www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. from the original on 14 January 2019. Retrieved 10 March 2019.
  13. ^ Schroter, Sara; Tite, Leanne (2006). "Open access publishing and author-pays business models: a survey of authors' knowledge and perceptions". Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 99 (3): 141–148. doi:10.1177/014107680609900316. PMC 1383760. PMID 16508053.
  14. ^ Eve, Martin Paul. Introduction, or why open access? (Chapter 1) - Open Access and the Humanities. Cambridge Core. pp. 1–42. doi:10.1017/CBO9781316161012.003. ISBN 9781107097896. Retrieved 30 December 2020.
  15. ^ Farquharson, Jamie Ian; Wadsworth, Fabian B. (31 July 2018). "Introducing Volcanica: The first diamond open-access journal for volcanology". Volcanica. 1 (1): i–ix. doi:10.30909/vol.01.01.i-ix. ISSN 2610-3540. S2CID 159022081.
  16. ^ a b Gadd, Elizabeth; Troll Covey, Denise (1 March 2019). "What does 'green' open access mean? Tracking twelve years of changes to journal publisher self-archiving policies". Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. 51 (1): 106–122. doi:10.1177/0961000616657406. ISSN 0961-0006. S2CID 34955879. from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 28 August 2019.
  17. ^ Laakso, Mikael; Björk, Bo-Christer (2016). "Hybrid open access—A longitudinal study". Journal of Informetrics. 10 (4): 919–932. doi:10.1016/j.joi.2016.08.002.
  18. ^ Suber 2012, pp. 140–141
  19. ^ Suber 2012, p. 140
  20. ^ Trust, Wellcome (23 March 2016). . Wellcome Trust Blog. Archived from the original on 27 October 2019. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  21. ^ a b "Open access double dipping policy". Cambridge Core. from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 12 March 2018.
  22. ^ Piwowar, Heather; Priem, Jason; Larivière, Vincent; Alperin, Juan Pablo; Matthias, Lisa; Norlander, Bree; Farley, Ashley; West, Jevin; Haustein, Stefanie (13 February 2018). "The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles". PeerJ. 6: e4375. doi:10.7717/peerj.4375. PMC 5815332. PMID 29456894.
  23. ^ a b c d Fuchs, Christian; Sandoval, Marisol (2013). "The diamond model of open access publishing: Why policy makers, scholars, universities, libraries, labour unions and the publishing world need to take non-commercial, non-profit open access serious". TripleC. 13 (2): 428–443. doi:10.31269/triplec.v11i2.502.
  24. ^ a b c Gajović, S (31 August 2017). "Diamond Open Access in the quest for interdisciplinarity and excellence". Croatian Medical Journal. 58 (4): 261–262. doi:10.3325/cmj.2017.58.261. PMC 5577648. PMID 28857518.
  25. ^ a b Bosman, Jeroen; Frantsvåg, Jan Erik; Kramer, Bianca; Langlais, Pierre-Carl; Proudman, Vanessa (9 March 2021). OA Diamond Journals Study. Part 1: Findings (Report). doi:10.5281/zenodo.4558704.
  26. ^ Machovec, George (2013). "An Interview with Jeffrey Beall on Open Access Publishing". The Charleston Advisor. 15: 50. doi:10.5260/chara.15.1.50.
  27. ^ Öchsner, A. (2013). "Publishing Companies, Publishing Fees, and Open Access Journals". Introduction to Scientific Publishing. SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology. pp. 23–29. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-38646-6_4. ISBN 978-3-642-38645-9.
  28. ^ Normand, Stephanie (4 April 2018). "Is Diamond Open Access the Future of Open Access?". The IJournal: Graduate Student Journal of the Faculty of Information. 3 (2). ISSN 2561-7397. from the original on 29 May 2020. Retrieved 25 June 2019.
  29. ^ Rosenblum, Brian; Greenberg, Marc; Bolick, Josh; Emmett, Ada; Peterson, A. Townsend (17 June 2016). "Subsidizing truly open access". Science. 352 (6292): 1405. Bibcode:2016Sci...352.1405P. doi:10.1126/science.aag0946. hdl:1808/20978. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 27313033. S2CID 206650745.
  30. ^ By (1 June 2017). "Diamond Open Access, Societies and Mission". The Scholarly Kitchen. from the original on 24 June 2019. Retrieved 25 June 2019.
  31. ^ Himmelstein, Daniel S; Romero, Ariel Rodriguez; Levernier, Jacob G; Munro, Thomas Anthony; McLaughlin, Stephen Reid; Greshake Tzovaras, Bastian; Greene, Casey S (1 March 2018). "Sci-Hub provides access to nearly all scholarly literature". eLife. 7. doi:10.7554/eLife.32822. ISSN 2050-084X. PMC 5832410. PMID 29424689. from the original on 21 May 2019. Retrieved 21 May 2019.
  32. ^ a b Björk, Bo-Christer (2017). "Gold, green, and black open access". Learned Publishing. 30 (2): 173–175. doi:10.1002/leap.1096. ISSN 1741-4857.
  33. ^ Green, Toby (2017). "We've failed: Pirate black open access is trumping green and gold and we must change our approach". Learned Publishing. 30 (4): 325–329. doi:10.1002/leap.1116. ISSN 1741-4857.
  34. ^ Bohannon, John (28 April 2016). "Who's downloading pirated papers? Everyone". Science. 352 (6285): 508–12. doi:10.1126/science.352.6285.508. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 27126020. from the original on 13 May 2019. Retrieved 17 May 2019.
  35. ^ Greshake, Bastian (21 April 2017). "Looking into Pandora's Box: The Content of Sci-Hub and its Usage". F1000Research. 6: 541. doi:10.12688/f1000research.11366.1. ISSN 2046-1402. PMC 5428489. PMID 28529712.
  36. ^ Jamali, Hamid R. (1 July 2017). "Copyright compliance and infringement in ResearchGate full-text journal articles". Scientometrics. 112 (1): 241–254. doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2291-4. ISSN 1588-2861. S2CID 189875585.
  37. ^ Swab, Michelle; Romme, Kristen (1 April 2016). "Scholarly Sharing via Twitter: #icanhazpdf Requests for Health Sciences Literature". Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association. 37 (1). doi:10.5596/c16-009. ISSN 1708-6892.
  38. ^ McKenzie, Lindsay (27 July 2017). "Sci-Hub's cache of pirated papers is so big, subscription journals are doomed, data analyst suggests". Science. doi:10.1126/science.aan7164. ISSN 0036-8075. from the original on 17 May 2019. Retrieved 17 May 2019.
  39. ^ a b c Suber, Peter (2008). "Gratis and Libre Open Access". Archived from the original on 10 March 2017. Retrieved 3 December 2011.
  40. ^ Suber 2012, pp. 68–69
  41. ^ Suber 2012, pp. 7–8
  42. ^ Balaji, B.; Dhanamjaya, M. (2019). "Preprints in Scholarly Communication: Re-Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures". Publications. 7: 6. doi:10.3390/publications7010006.>
  43. ^ Wilkinson, Mark D.; Dumontier, Michel; Aalbersberg, IJsbrand Jan; Appleton, Gabrielle; et al. (15 March 2016). "The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship". Scientific Data. 3: 160018. Bibcode:2016NatSD...360018W. doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18. OCLC 961158301. PMC 4792175. PMID 26978244.
  44. ^ Wilkinson, Mark D.; da Silva Santos, Luiz Olavo Bonino; Dumontier, Michel; Velterop, Jan; Neylon, Cameron; Mons, Barend (1 January 2017). "Cloudy, increasingly FAIR; revisiting the FAIR Data guiding principles for the European Open Science Cloud". Information Services & Use. 37 (1): 49–56. doi:10.3233/ISU-170824. hdl:20.500.11937/53669. ISSN 0167-5265.
  45. ^ "European Commission embraces the FAIR principles". Dutch Techcentre for Life Sciences. 20 April 2016. from the original on 20 July 2018. Retrieved 31 July 2019.
  46. ^ "G20 Leaders' Communique Hangzhou Summit". europa.eu. from the original on 31 July 2019. Retrieved 31 July 2019.
  47. ^ "Hecho En Latinoamérica. Acceso Abierto, Revistas Académicas e Innovaciones Regionales". from the original on 6 August 2020. Retrieved 31 August 2020.
  48. ^ Ross-Hellauer, Tony; Schmidt, Birgit; Kramer, Bianca. "Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?". doi:10.7287/peerj.preprints.26954v1. S2CID 49319171. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  49. ^ Vincent-Lamarre, Philippe; Boivin, Jade; Gargouri, Yassine; Larivière, Vincent; Harnad, Stevan (2016). "Estimating Open Access Mandate Effectiveness: The MELIBEA Score" (PDF). Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67 (11): 2815–2828. arXiv:1410.2926. doi:10.1002/asi.23601. S2CID 8144721. (PDF) from the original on 23 September 2016. Retrieved 28 August 2019.
  50. ^ Future of Scholarly Publishing and Scholarly Communication : Report of the Expert Group to the European Commission. 30 January 2019. ISBN 9789279972386. from the original on 3 June 2019. Retrieved 28 August 2019.
  51. ^ Aguado-López, Eduardo; Becerril-Garcia, Arianna (8 August 2019). . Impact of Social Sciences. Archived from the original on 1 November 2019. Retrieved 26 November 2022.
  52. ^ Johnson, Rob (2019). "From Coalition to Commons: Plan S and the Future of Scholarly Communication". Insights: The UKSG Journal. 32. doi:10.1629/uksg.453.
  53. ^ Pourret, Olivier; Irawan, Dasapta Erwin; Tennant, Jonathan P.; Hursthouse, Andrew; Van Hullebusch, Eric D. (1 September 2020). "The growth of open access publishing in geochemistry". Results in Geochemistry. 1: 100001. doi:10.1016/j.ringeo.2020.100001. ISSN 2666-2779. S2CID 219903509.
  54. ^ a b c DOAJ. "Journal metadata". doaj.org. from the original on 27 August 2016. Retrieved 18 May 2019.
  55. ^ Matushek, Kurt J. (2017). "Take Another Look at the Instructions for Authors". Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 250 (3): 258–259. doi:10.2460/javma.250.3.258. PMID 28117640.
  56. ^ Bachrach, S.; Berry, R. S.; Blume, M.; von Foerster, T.; Fowler, A.; Ginsparg, P.; Heller, S.; Kestner, N.; Odlyzko, A.; Okerson, A.; Wigington, R.; Moffat, A. (1998). "Who Should Own Scientific Papers?". Science. 281 (5382): 1459–60. Bibcode:1998Sci...281.1459B. doi:10.1126/science.281.5382.1459. PMID 9750115. S2CID 36290551.
  57. ^ Gadd, Elizabeth; Oppenheim, Charles; Probets, Steve (2003). "RoMEO Studies 4: An Analysis of Journal Publishers" Copyright Agreements" (PDF). Learned Publishing. 16 (4): 293–308. doi:10.1087/095315103322422053. hdl:10150/105141. S2CID 40861778. (PDF) from the original on 28 July 2020. Retrieved 9 September 2019.
  58. ^ Willinsky, John (2002). "Copyright Contradictions in Scholarly Publishing". First Monday. 7 (11). doi:10.5210/fm.v7i11.1006. S2CID 39334346.
  59. ^ Carroll, Michael W. (2011). "Why Full Open Access Matters". PLOS Biology. 9 (11): e1001210. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001210. PMC 3226455. PMID 22140361.
  60. ^ Davies, Mark (2015). "Academic Freedom: A Lawyer's Perspective" (PDF). Higher Education. 70 (6): 987–1002. doi:10.1007/s10734-015-9884-8. S2CID 144222460. (PDF) from the original on 23 December 2019. Retrieved 28 August 2019.
  61. ^ a b Frosio, Giancarlo F. (2014). "Open Access Publishing: A Literature Review". SSRN 2697412.
  62. ^ Peters, Diane; Margoni, Thomas (10 March 2016). "Creative Commons Licenses: Empowering Open Access". SSRN 2746044.
  63. ^ Dodds, Francis (2018). "The Changing Copyright Landscape in Academic Publishing". Learned Publishing. 31 (3): 270–275. doi:10.1002/leap.1157. from the original on 4 February 2020. Retrieved 4 February 2020.
  64. ^ Morrison, Heather (2017). "From the Field: Elsevier as an Open Access Publisher". The Charleston Advisor. 18 (3): 53–59. doi:10.5260/chara.18.3.53. hdl:10393/35779.
  65. ^ a b Pablo Alperin, Juan; Rozemblum, Cecilia (2017). "The Reinterpretation of the Visibility and Quality of New Policies to Assess Scientific Publications". Revista Interamericana de Bibliotecología. 40: 231–241. doi:10.17533/udea.rib.v40n3a04.
  66. ^ W. Frass; J. Cross; V. Gardner (2013). Open Access Survey: Exploring the Views of Taylor & Francis and Routledge Authors (PDF). Taylor & Francis/Routledge.
  67. ^ "OA journal business models". Open Access Directory. 2009–2012. from the original on 18 October 2015. Retrieved 20 October 2015.
  68. ^ "Jisc supports Subscribe to Open model". Jisc. 11 March 2020. Retrieved 6 October 2020.
  69. ^ Markin, Pablo (25 April 2017). "The Sustainability of Open Access Publishing Models Past a Tipping Point". OpenScience. Retrieved 26 April 2017.
  70. ^ Socha, Beata (20 April 2017). "How Much Do Top Publishers Charge for Open Access?". openscience.com. from the original on 19 February 2019. Retrieved 26 April 2017.
  71. ^ Peter, Suber (2012). Open access. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. ISBN 9780262301732. OCLC 795846161.
  72. ^ a b c Walt Crawford (2019). Gold Open Access 2013-2018: Articles in Journals (GOA4) (PDF). Cites & Insights Books. ISBN 978-1-329-54713-1. (PDF) from the original on 6 May 2019. Retrieved 30 August 2019.
  73. ^ Kim, Sang-Jun; Park, Kay Sook (2021). "Influence of open access journals on the research community in Journal Citation Reports". Science Editing. 8: 32–38. doi:10.6087/kcse.227. S2CID 233380569.
  74. ^ "An efficient journal". The Occasional Pamphlet. 6 March 2012. from the original on 18 November 2019. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  75. ^ "Article processing charges". nature.com. Nature Communications. from the original on 27 October 2019. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  76. ^ Kozak, Marcin; Hartley, James (December 2013). "Publication fees for open access journals: Different disciplines-different methods". Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64 (12): 2591–2594. doi:10.1002/asi.22972.
  77. ^ Björk, Bo-Christer; Solomon, David (2015). "Article Processing Charges in OA Journals: Relationship between Price and Quality". Scientometrics. 103 (2): 373–385. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1556-z. S2CID 15966412.
  78. ^ Lawson, Stuart (2014). "APC Pricing". Figshare. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.1056280.v3. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  79. ^ "Developing an Effective Market for Open Access Article Processing Charges" (PDF). (PDF) from the original on 3 October 2018. Retrieved 28 August 2019.
  80. ^ Schönfelder, Nina (2018). "APCs—Mirroring the Impact Factor or Legacy of the Subscription-Based Model?". from the original on 22 December 2019. Retrieved 28 August 2019. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  81. ^ "Setting a fee for publication". eLife. 29 September 2016. from the original on 7 November 2017. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  82. ^ "Ubiquity Press". www.ubiquitypress.com. from the original on 21 October 2019. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  83. ^ Trust, Wellcome (23 March 2016). . Wellcome Trust Blog. Archived from the original on 27 October 2019. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  84. ^ a b Schimmer, Ralf; Geschuhn, Kai Karin; Vogler, Andreas (2015). "Disrupting the Subscription Journals" Business Model for the Necessary Large-Scale Transformation to Open Access". doi:10.17617/1.3. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  85. ^ a b c d e f g h Vanholsbeeck, Marc; Thacker, Paul; Sattler, Susanne; Ross-Hellauer, Tony; Rivera-López, Bárbara S.; Rice, Curt; Nobes, Andy; Masuzzo, Paola; Martin, Ryan; Kramer, Bianca; Havemann, Johanna; Enkhbayar, Asura; Davila, Jacinto; Crick, Tom; Crane, Harry; Tennant, Jonathan P. (11 March 2019). "Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing". Publications. 7 (2): 34. doi:10.3390/publications7020034.
  86. ^ Björk, B. C. (2017). "Growth of Hybrid Open Access". PeerJ. 5: e3878. doi:10.7717/peerj.3878. PMC 5624290. PMID 28975059.
  87. ^ Pinfield, Stephen; Salter, Jennifer; Bath, Peter A. (2016). "The 'Total Cost of Publication" in a Hybrid Open-Access Environment: Institutional Approaches to Funding Journal Article-Processing Charges in Combination with Subscriptions" (PDF). Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67 (7): 1751–1766. doi:10.1002/asi.23446. S2CID 17356533. (PDF) from the original on 5 June 2019. Retrieved 9 September 2019.
  88. ^ Green, Toby (2019). "Is Open Access Affordable? Why Current Models Do Not Work and Why We Need Internet-Era Transformation of Scholarly Communications". Learned Publishing. 32: 13–25. doi:10.1002/leap.1219. S2CID 67869151.
  89. ^ Pourret, Olivier; Hedding, David William; Ibarra, Daniel Enrique; Irawan, Dasapta Erwin; Liu, Haiyan; Tennant, Jonathan Peter (10 June 2021). "International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences". European Science Editing. 47: e63663. doi:10.3897/ese.2021.e63663. ISSN 2518-3354. S2CID 236300530.
  90. ^ Koroso, Nesru H. (18 November 2015). "Diamond Open Access - UA Magazine". UA Magazine. from the original on 18 November 2018. Retrieved 11 May 2018.
  91. ^ a b c Suber, Peter (2 November 2006). "No-fee open-access journals". SPARC open access Newsletter. from the original on 8 December 2008. Retrieved 14 December 2008.
  92. ^ Montgomery, Lucy (2014). "Knowledge Unlatched:A Global Library Consortium Model for Funding Open Access Scholarly Books". Cultural Science. 7 (2). hdl:20.500.11937/12680.
  93. ^ "DOAJ search". from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 30 June 2019.
  94. ^ Wilson, Mark (20 June 2018). "Introducing the Free Journal Network – community-controlled open access publishing". Impact of Social Sciences. from the original on 24 April 2019. Retrieved 17 May 2019.
  95. ^ "Is the EU's open access plan a tremor or an earthquake?". Science|Business. from the original on 17 May 2019. Retrieved 17 May 2019.
  96. ^ a b Bastian, Hilda (2 April 2018). "A Reality Check on Author Access to Open Access Publishing". Absolutely Maybe. from the original on 22 December 2019. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  97. ^ Crotty, David (26 August 2015). "Is it True that Most Open Access Journals Do Not Charge an APC? Sort of. It Depends". The Scholarly Kitchen. from the original on 12 December 2019. Retrieved 27 October 2019.
  98. ^ Ginsparg, P. (2016). "Preprint Déjà Vu". The EMBO Journal. 35 (24): 2620–2625. doi:10.15252/embj.201695531. PMC 5167339. PMID 27760783.
  99. ^ Tennant, Jonathan; Bauin, Serge; James, Sarah; Kant, Juliane (2018). "The Evolving Preprint Landscape: Introductory Report for the Knowledge Exchange Working Group on Preprints". doi:10.17605/OSF.IO/796TU. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  100. ^ Neylon, Cameron; Pattinson, Damian; Bilder, Geoffrey; Lin, Jennifer (2017). "On the Origin of Nonequivalent States: How We Can Talk about Preprints". F1000Research. 6: 608. doi:10.12688/f1000research.11408.1. PMC 5461893. PMID 28620459.
  101. ^ Balaji, B.; Dhanamjaya, M. (2019). "Preprints in Scholarly Communication: Re-Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures". Publications. 7: 6. doi:10.3390/publications7010006.
  102. ^ Bourne, Philip E.; Polka, Jessica K.; Vale, Ronald D.; Kiley, Robert (2017). "Ten simple rules to consider regarding preprint submission". PLOS Computational Biology. 13 (5): e1005473. Bibcode:2017PLSCB..13E5473B. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005473. PMC 5417409. PMID 28472041.
  103. ^ a b Sarabipour, Sarvenaz; Debat, Humberto J.; Emmott, Edward; Burgess, Steven J.; Schwessinger, Benjamin; Hensel, Zach (2019). "On the Value of Preprints: An Early Career Researcher Perspective". PLOS Biology. 17 (2): e3000151. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000151. PMC 6400415. PMID 30789895.
  104. ^ Powell, Kendall (2016). "Does It Take Too Long to Publish Research?". Nature. 530 (7589): 148–151. Bibcode:2016Natur.530..148P. doi:10.1038/530148a. PMID 26863966. S2CID 1013588.
  105. ^ Crick, Tom; Hall, Benjamin A.; Ishtiaq, Samin (2017). "Reproducibility in Research: Systems, Infrastructure, Culture". Journal of Open Research Software. 5: 32. doi:10.5334/jors.73.
  106. ^ Gadd, Elizabeth; Troll Covey, Denise (2019). "What Does "Green" Open Access Mean? Tracking Twelve Years of Changes to Journal Publisher Self-Archiving Policies". Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. 51: 106–122. doi:10.1177/0961000616657406. S2CID 34955879. from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 28 August 2019.
  107. ^ "Journal embargo finder". www.elsevier.com. from the original on 18 May 2019. Retrieved 17 May 2019.
  108. ^ Laakso, Mikael (1 May 2014). "Green open access policies of scholarly journal publishers: a study of what, when, and where self-archiving is allowed". Scientometrics. 99 (2): 475–494. doi:10.1007/s11192-013-1205-3. hdl:10138/157660. ISSN 1588-2861. S2CID 8225450.
  109. ^ Harnad, Stevan (2015), Holbrook, J. Britt; Mitcham, Carl (eds.), Stevan Harnad, J. Britt Holbrook, Carl Mitcham, "Open access: what, where, when, how and why", Ethics, Science, Technology, and Engineering: An International Resource, Macmillan Reference, from the original on 5 August 2020, retrieved 6 January 2020
  110. ^ Laakso, Mikael; Björk, Bo-Christer (2013). "Delayed open access: An overlooked high-impact category of openly available scientific literature". Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64 (7): 1323–1329. doi:10.1002/asi.22856. hdl:10138/157658.
  111. ^ Bjork, Bo-Christer; Roos, Annikki; Lauri, Mari (2009). "Scientific Journal Publishing: Yearly Volume and Open Access Availability". Information Research: An International Electronic Journal. 14 (1). ISSN 1368-1613. from the original on 5 August 2020. Retrieved 6 January 2020.
  112. ^ Swan, Alma; Brown, Sheridan (May 2005). "Open Access Self-Archiving: An Author Study". Departmental Technical Report. UK FE and HE Funding Councils. from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 28 August 2019.
  113. ^ Ottaviani, Jim (22 August 2016). Bornmann, Lutz (ed.). "The Post-Embargo Open Access Citation Advantage: It Exists (Probably), It's Modest (Usually), and the Rich Get Richer (of Course)". PLOS ONE. 11 (8): e0159614. Bibcode:2016PLoSO..1159614O. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0159614. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 4993511. PMID 27548723.
  114. ^ Suber, Peter (2014). "The evidence fails to justify publishers' demand for longer embargo periods on publicly-funded research". LSA impact blog. from the original on 4 March 2020. Retrieved 6 January 2020.
  115. ^ "Global scientific community commits to sharing data on Zika". wellcome.ac.uk. Wellcome. from the original on 21 December 2019. Retrieved 6 January 2020.
  116. ^ "About". Medical Journal of Australia. Australasian Medical Publishing Company. from the original on 5 April 2019. Retrieved 12 June 2019.
  117. ^ a b c Suber 2012, pp. 29–43
  118. ^ "The Life and Death of an Open Access Journal: Q&A with Librarian Marcus Banks". 31 March 2015. from the original on 24 May 2018. Retrieved 23 May 2018., "As the BOAI text expressed it, 'the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination.'"
  119. ^ "Gold open access in practice: How will universities respond to the rising total cost of publication?". 25 March 2015. from the original on 1 January 2016. Retrieved 23 May 2018.
  120. ^ "Reasoning and Interest: Clustering Open Access - LePublikateur". LePublikateur. 4 June 2018. from the original on 18 October 2018. Retrieved 5 June 2018.
  121. ^ Tennant, Jonathan P.; Waldner, François; Jacques, Damien C.; Masuzzo, Paola; Collister, Lauren B.; Hartgerink, Chris. H. J. (21 September 2016). "The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review". F1000Research. 5: 632. doi:10.12688/f1000research.8460.3. PMC 4837983. PMID 27158456.
  122. ^ Sivaraj, S., et al. 2008. "Resource Sharing among Engineering College Libraries in Tamil Nadu in a Networking System" 24 December 2012 at the Wayback Machine. Library Philosophy and Practice.
  123. ^ "Developing World Access to Leading Research" 1 December 2013 at the Wayback Machine. research4life.org. Retrieved on 19 November 2012.
  124. ^ Van Orsdel, Lee C. & Born, Kathleen. 2005. "Periodicals Price Survey 2005: Choosing Sides". Library Journal. 15 April 2005. from the original on 30 June 2017. Retrieved 18 October 2017.
  125. ^ Hardisty, David J.; Haaga, David A.F. (2008). (PDF). Journal of Clinical Psychology. 64 (7): 821–839. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.487.5198. doi:10.1002/jclp.20492. PMID 18425790. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 May 2008. Retrieved 22 April 2008.
  126. ^ "DFID Research: DFID's Policy Opens up a World of Global Research". dfid.gov.uk. from the original on 3 January 2013.
  127. ^ How To Integrate University and Funder Open Access Mandates 16 March 2008 at the Wayback Machine. Openaccess.eprints.org (2 March 2008). Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  128. ^ Libbenga, Jan. (11 May 2005) Dutch academics declare research free-for-all 15 July 2017 at the Wayback Machine. Theregister.co.uk. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  129. ^ Portal NARCIS 5 November 2010 at the Wayback Machine. Narcis.info. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  130. ^ "Open and closed access scholarly publications in NARCIS per year of publication". NARCIS. from the original on 26 April 2019. Retrieved 26 February 2019.
  131. ^ "Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions (COAPI) – SPARC". arl.org. from the original on 18 October 2015. Retrieved 20 October 2015.
  132. ^ "Good practices for university open-access policies". Harvard. from the original on 5 October 2016. Retrieved 4 October 2016.
  133. ^ Baldwin, Julie; Pinfield, Stephen (13 July 2018). "The UK Scholarly Communication Licence: Attempting to Cut through the Gordian Knot of the Complexities of Funder Mandates, Publisher Embargoes and Researcher Caution in Achieving Open Access". Publications. 6 (3): 31. doi:10.3390/publications6030031.
  134. ^ "About the AOASG". Australian Open Access Support Group. 5 February 2013. from the original on 20 December 2014.
  135. ^ "Australian Open Access Support Group expands to become Australasian Open Access Support Group". 17 August 2015. from the original on 17 November 2015.
  136. ^ "Creative Commons Australia partners with Australasian Open Access Strategy Group". Creative Commons Australia. 31 August 2016.
  137. ^ Suber, Peter (2003). "Removing the Barriers to Research: An Introduction to Open Access for Librarians". College & Research Libraries News. 62 (2): 92–94, 113. doi:10.5860/crln.64.2.92. from the original on 20 June 2018. Retrieved 20 June 2018.
  138. ^ "IFLA Statement on Open Access (2011)". IFLA. 6 March 2019. from the original on 31 August 2020.
  139. ^ ALA Scholarly Communication Toolkit 8 September 2005 at the Wayback Machine
  140. ^ Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition 15 August 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Arl.org. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  141. ^ Open Access for Scholarly Publishing 19 May 2014 at the Wayback Machine. Southern Cross University Library. Retrieved on 14 March 2014.
  142. ^ CARL – Institutional Repositories Program 7 June 2013 at the Wayback Machine. Carl-abrc.ca. Retrieved on 12 June 2013.
  143. ^ Lippincott, Sarah (5 July 2016). "The Library Publishing Coalition: organizing libraries to enhance scholarly publishing". Insights. 29 (2): 186–191. doi:10.1629/uksg.296. ISSN 2048-7754. from the original on 21 July 2018. Retrieved 2 September 2019.
  144. ^ Kopfstein, Janus (13 March 2013). "Aaron Swartz to receive posthumous 'Freedom of Information' award for open access advocacy". The Verge. from the original on 15 March 2013. Retrieved 24 March 2013.
  145. ^ "James Madison Award". Ala.org. 17 January 2013. from the original on 22 March 2013. Retrieved 24 March 2013.
  146. ^ Brandom, Russell (26 March 2013). "Entire library journal editorial board resigns, citing 'crisis of conscience' after death of Aaron Swartz". The Verge. from the original on 31 December 2013. Retrieved 1 January 2014.
  147. ^ New, Jake (27 March 2013). "Journal's Editorial Board Resigns in Protest of Publisher's Policy Toward Authors". The Chronicle of Higher Education. from the original on 8 January 2014.
  148. ^ Bourg, Chris (23 March 2013). "My short stint on the JLA Editorial Board". Feral Librarian. from the original on 24 August 2014. It was just days after Aaron Swartz' death, and I was having a crisis of conscience about publishing in a journal that was not open access
  149. ^ Poynder, Richard (2009). "The Open Access Interviews: Hélène Bosc" (PDF). (PDF) from the original on 23 October 2013.
  150. ^ . Open-access.infodocs.eu. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  151. ^ ATA | The Alliance for Taxpayer Access 27 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine. Taxpayeraccess.org (29 October 2011). Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  152. ^ . Eprints.rclis.org. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  153. ^ Eysenbach, Gunther (2006). "The Open Access Advantage". J Med Internet Res. 8 (2): e8. doi:10.2196/jmir.8.2.e8. PMC 1550699. PMID 16867971.
  154. ^ a b c Davis, Philip M. (2010). "Does open access lead to increased readership and citations? A randomized controlled trial of articles published in APS journals". The Physiologist. 53 (6): 197, 200–201. ISSN 0031-9376. PMID 21473414.
  155. ^ Goodman, D (2004). "The Criteria for Open Access". Serials Review. 30 (4): 258–270. doi:10.1016/j.serrev.2004.09.009. hdl:10760/6167.
  156. ^ World Health Organization 27 January 2012 at the Wayback Machine Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative
  157. ^ a b World Health Organization 22 April 2009 at the Wayback Machine: Eligibility
  158. ^ Scientific Electronic Library Online 31 August 2005 at the Wayback Machine. SciELO. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  159. ^ Pearce, J. M. (2012). "The case for open source appropriate technology". Environment, Development and Sustainability. 14 (3): 425–431. doi:10.1007/s10668-012-9337-9.
  160. ^ A. J. Buitenhuis, et al., "Open Design-Based Strategies to Enhance Appropriate Technology Development", Proceedings of the 14th Annual National Collegiate Inventors and Innovators Alliance Conference : Open, 25–27 March 2010, pp.1–12.
  161. ^ a b Piwowar, Heather; Priem, Jason; Larivière, Vincent; Alperin, Juan Pablo; Matthias, Lisa; Norlander, Bree; Farley, Ashley; West, Jevin; Haustein, Stefanie (13 February 2018). "The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles". PeerJ. 6: e4375. doi:10.7717/peerj.4375. ISSN 2167-8359. PMC 5815332. PMID 29456894.
  162. ^ a b Björk, B. C.; Welling, P.; Laakso, M.; Majlender, P.; Hedlund, T.; Guðnason, G. N. (2010). Scalas, Enrico (ed.). "Open Access to the Scientific Journal Literature: Situation 2009". PLOS ONE. 5 (6): e11273. Bibcode:2010PLoSO...511273B. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011273. PMC 2890572. PMID 20585653.
  163. ^ Cummings, J. (2013). "Open access journal content found in commercial full-text aggregation databases and journal citation reports". New Library World. 114 (3/4): 166–178. doi:10.1108/03074801311304078. hdl:2376/4903.
  164. ^ "Open access to research publications reaching 'tipping point'". Press Releases. europa.eu. from the original on 24 August 2013. Retrieved 25 August 2013.
  165. ^ "Proportion of Open Access Peer-Reviewed Papers at the European and World Levels—2004–2011" (PDF). Science-Metrix. August 2013. (PDF) from the original on 3 September 2013. Retrieved 25 August 2013.
  166. ^ Van Noorden, Richard (2013). "Half of 2011 papers now free to read". Nature. 500 (7463): 386–7. Bibcode:2013Natur.500..386V. doi:10.1038/500386a. PMID 23969438.
  167. ^ "Area-wide transition to open access is possible: A new study calculates a redeployment of funds in Open Access". www.mpg.de/en. Max Planck Gesellschaft. 27 April 2015. from the original on 16 June 2017. Retrieved 12 May 2017.
  168. ^ Björk, Bo-Christer (2011). "A Study of Innovative Features in Scholarly Open Access Journals". Journal of Medical Internet Research. 13 (4): e115. doi:10.2196/jmir.1802. PMC 3278101. PMID 22173122.
  169. ^ a b "Directory of Open Access Journals". Directory of Open Access Journals. from the original on 27 August 2016. Retrieved 26 February 2019.
  170. ^ Chun-Kai (Karl) Huang; Cameron Neylon; Richard Hosking; Lucy Montgomery; Katie S Wilson; Alkim Ozaygen; Chloe Brookes-Kenworthy (14 September 2020). "Meta-Research: Evaluating the impact of open access policies on research institutions". eLife. 9. doi:10.7554/ELIFE.57067. ISSN 2050-084X. PMC 7536542. PMID 32924933. Wikidata Q99410785.
  171. ^ "Institutions' open access over time: Evolution of green and gold OA". storage.googleapis.com. Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative. Retrieved 13 October 2021.
  172. ^ Piwowar, H.; Priem, J.; Larivière, V.; Alperin, J. P.; Matthias, L.; Norlander, B.; Farley, A.; West, J.; Haustein, S. (2018). "The state of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles". PeerJ. 6: e4375. doi:10.7717/peerj.4375. PMC 5815332. PMID 29456894.
  173. ^ a b "Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR)" 30 October 2012 at the Wayback Machine. Roar.eprints.org. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  174. ^ "Browse by Repository Type". Registry of Open Access Repositories. from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 26 February 2019.
  175. ^ a b McKiernan, Erin C; Bourne, Philip E; Brown, C Titus; Buck, Stuart; Kenall, Amye; Lin, Jennifer; McDougall, Damon; Nosek, Brian A; Ram, Karthik; Soderberg, Courtney K; Spies, Jeffrey R (7 July 2016). Rodgers, Peter (ed.). "How open science helps researchers succeed". eLife. 5: e16800. doi:10.7554/eLife.16800. ISSN 2050-084X. PMC 4973366. PMID 27387362.
  176. ^ a b c d Wang, Xianwen; Liu, Chen; Mao, Wenli; Fang, Zhichao (1 May 2015). "The open access advantage considering citation, article usage and social media attention". Scientometrics. 103 (2): 555–564. arXiv:1503.05702. Bibcode:2015arXiv150305702W. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1547-0. ISSN 1588-2861. S2CID 14827780.
  177. ^ a b Davis, Philip M. (30 March 2011). "Open access, readership, citations: a randomized controlled trial of scientific journal publishing". The FASEB Journal. 25 (7): 2129–2134. doi:10.1096/fj.11-183988. ISSN 0892-6638. PMID 21450907. S2CID 205367842.
  178. ^ a b Davis, Philip M.; Lewenstein, Bruce V.; Simon, Daniel H.; Booth, James G.; Connolly, Mathew J. L. (31 July 2008). "Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial". BMJ. 337: a568. doi:10.1136/bmj.a568. ISSN 0959-8138. PMC 2492576. PMID 18669565.
  179. ^ a b c d Adie, Euan (24 October 2014). "Attention! A study of open access vs non-open access articles". Figshare. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.1213690.v1. S2CID 155854134. from the original on 3 January 2020. Retrieved 3 January 2020.
  180. ^ Maximising the Return on the UK's Public Investment in Research – Open Access Archivangelism 2 July 2017 at the Wayback Machine. Openaccess.eprints.org (14 September 2005). Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  181. ^ Garfield, E. (1988) Can Researchers Bank on Citation Analysis? 25 October 2005 at the Wayback Machine Current Comments, No. 44, 31 October 1988
  182. ^ Committee on Electronic Information and Communication (CEIC) of the International Mathematical Union (15 May 2001). "Call to All Mathematicians". from the original on 7 June 2011.
  183. ^ a b Davis, P. M. (2011). "Open access, readership, citations: a randomized controlled trial of scientific journal publishing". The FASEB Journal. 25 (7): 2129–34. doi:10.1096/fj.11-183988. PMID 21450907. S2CID 205367842.
  184. ^ a b ElSabry, ElHassan (1 August 2017). "Who needs access to research? Exploring the societal impact of open access". Revue française des sciences de l'information et de la communication (11). doi:10.4000/rfsic.3271. ISSN 2263-0856. from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 3 January 2020.
  185. ^ Gentil-Beccot, Anne; Mele, Salvatore; Brooks, Travis (2009). "Citing and Reading Behaviours in High-Energy Physics. How a Community Stopped Worrying about Journals and Learned to Love Repositories". arXiv:0906.5418 [cs.DL].
  186. ^ Swan, Alma (2006) The culture of Open Access: researchers’ views and responses 22 May 2012 at the Wayback Machine. In: Neil Jacobs (Ed.) Open access: key strategic, technical and economic aspects, Chandos.
  187. ^ Piwowar, Heather; Priem, Jason; Larivière, Vincent; Alperin, Juan Pablo; Matthias, Lisa; Norlander, Bree; Farley, Ashley; West, Jevin; Haustein, Stefanie (13 February 2018). "The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles". PeerJ. 6: e4375. doi:10.7717/peerj.4375. ISSN 2167-8359. PMC 5815332. PMID 29456894.
  188. ^ Swan, Alma (2010). "The Open Access citation advantage: Studies and results to date". eprints.soton.ac.uk. Alma Swan. from the original on 3 January 2020. Retrieved 3 January 2020.
  189. ^ a b Tennant, Jonathan P.; Waldner, François; Jacques, Damien C.; Masuzzo, Paola; Collister, Lauren B.; Hartgerink, Chris. H. J. (21 September 2016). "The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review". F1000Research. 5: 632. doi:10.12688/f1000research.8460.3. ISSN 2046-1402. PMC 4837983. PMID 27158456.
  190. ^ a b c d Clayson, Peter E.; Baldwin, Scott A.; Larson, Michael J. (1 June 2021). "The open access advantage for studies of human electrophysiology: Impact on citations and Altmetrics". International Journal of Psychophysiology. 164: 103–111. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2021.03.006. ISSN 0167-8760. PMID 33774077. S2CID 232409668.
  191. ^ Online or Invisible? Steve Lawrence; NEC Research Institute 16 March 2007 at the Wayback Machine. Citeseer.ist.psu.edu. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  192. ^ Davis, P. M; Lewenstein, B. V; Simon, D. H; Booth, J. G; Connolly, M. J L (2008). "Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial". BMJ. 337: a568. doi:10.1136/bmj.a568. PMC 2492576. PMID 18669565.
  193. ^ Effect of OA on citation impact: a bibliography of studies 2 November 2017 at the Wayback Machine. Opcit.eprints.org. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  194. ^ Swan, Alma (2010). "The Open Access citation advantage: Studies and results to date". eprints.soton.ac.uk. Alma Swan. from the original on 3 January 2020.
  195. ^ Eysenbach, Gunther (16 May 2006). Tenopir, Carol (ed.). "Citation Advantage of Open Access Articles". PLOS Biology. 4 (5): e157. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040157. ISSN 1545-7885. PMC 1459247. PMID 16683865.
  196. ^ Björk, Bo-Christer; Solomon, David (17 July 2012). "Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact". BMC Medicine. 10 (1): 73. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-10-73. ISSN 1741-7015. PMC 3398850. PMID 22805105.
  197. ^ a b Teplitskiy, M.; Lu, G.; Duede, E. (2016). "Amplifying the impact of open access: Wikipedia and the diffusion of science". Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68 (9): 2116. arXiv:1506.07608. doi:10.1002/asi.23687. S2CID 10220883.
  198. ^ Shema, Hadas; Bar-Ilan, Judit; Thelwall, Mike (15 January 2014). "Do blog citations correlate with a higher number of future citations? Research blogs as a potential source for alternative metrics". Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65 (5): 1018–1027. doi:10.1002/asi.23037. ISSN 2330-1635. S2CID 31571840.
  199. ^ Alhoori, Hamed; Ray Choudhury, Sagnik; Kanan, Tarek; Fox, Edward; Furuta, Richard; Giles, C. Lee (15 March 2015). "On the Relationship between Open Access and Altmetrics". IConference 2015 Proceedings. from the original on 3 January 2020. Retrieved 3 January 2020.
  200. ^ Gargouri, Yassine; Hajjem, Chawki; Lariviere, Vincent; Gingras, Yves; Carr, Les; Brody, Tim; Harnad, Stevan (2018). "The Journal Impact Factor: A Brief History, Critique, and Discussion of Adverse Effects". arXiv:1801.08992. Bibcode:2018arXiv180108992L. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  201. ^ Curry, Stephen (2018). "Let's Move beyond the Rhetoric: It's Time to Change How We Judge Research". Nature. 554 (7691): 147. Bibcode:2018Natur.554..147C. doi:10.1038/d41586-018-01642-w. PMID 29420505.
  202. ^ Chua, SK; Qureshi, Ahmad M; Krishnan, Vijay; Pai, Dinker R; Kamal, Laila B; Gunasegaran, Sharmilla; Afzal, MZ; Ambawatta, Lahiru; Gan, JY; Kew, PY; Winn, Than (2 March 2017). "The impact factor of an open access journal does not contribute to an article's citations". F1000Research. 6: 208. doi:10.12688/f1000research.10892.1. ISSN 2046-1402. PMC 5464220. PMID 28649365.
  203. ^ Csiszar, Alex (2016). "Peer Review: Troubled from the Start". Nature. 532 (7599): 306–308. Bibcode:2016Natur.532..306C. doi:10.1038/532306a. PMID 27111616.
  204. ^ Moxham, Noah; Fyfe, Aileen (2018). "The Royal Society and the Prehistory of Peer Review, 1665–1965" (PDF). The Historical Journal. 61 (4): 863–889. doi:10.1017/S0018246X17000334. S2CID 164984479. (PDF) from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 28 August 2019.
  205. ^ Tennant, Jonathan P.; Dugan, Jonathan M.; Graziotin, Daniel; Jacques, Damien C.; Waldner, François; Mietchen, Daniel; Elkhatib, Yehia; B. Collister, Lauren; Pikas, Christina K.; Crick, Tom; Masuzzo, Paola (29 November 2017). "A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review". F1000Research. 6: 1151. doi:10.12688/f1000research.12037.3. ISSN 2046-1402. PMC 5686505. PMID 29188015.
  206. ^ Tennant, Jonathan P. (1 October 2018). . FEMS Microbiology Letters. 365 (19). doi:10.1093/femsle/fny204. ISSN 0378-1097. PMC 6140953. PMID 30137294. Archived from the original on 24 February 2020. Retrieved 3 January 2020.
  207. ^ Noorden, Richard Van (4 March 2019). "Peer-review experiments tracked in online repository". Nature. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-00777-8. S2CID 86845470. from the original on 12 December 2019. Retrieved 3 January 2020.
  208. ^ Penfold, Naomi C.; Polka, Jessica K. (10 September 2019). "Technical and social issues influencing the adoption of preprints in the life sciences". PLOS Genetics. 16 (4): e1008565. doi:10.7287/peerj.preprints.27954v1. PMC 7170218. PMID 32310942.
  209. ^ Nosek, Brian A.; Ebersole, Charles R.; DeHaven, Alexander C.; Mellor, David T. (12 March 2018). "The preregistration revolution". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 115 (11): 2600–2606. Bibcode:2018PNAS..115.2600N. doi:10.1073/pnas.1708274114. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 5856500. PMID 29531091.
  210. ^ a b c Ross-Hellauer, Tony (31 August 2017). "What is open peer review? A systematic review". F1000Research. 6: 588. doi:10.12688/f1000research.11369.2. ISSN 2046-1402. PMC 5437951. PMID 28580134.
  211. ^ Munafò, Marcus R.; Nosek, Brian A.; Bishop, Dorothy V. M.; Button, Katherine S.; Chambers, Christopher D.; Percie du Sert, Nathalie; Simonsohn, Uri; Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan; Ware, Jennifer J.; Ioannidis, John P. A. (10 January 2017). "A manifesto for reproducible science". Nature Human Behaviour. 1 (1): 0021. doi:10.1038/s41562-016-0021. ISSN 2397-3374. PMC 7610724. PMID 33954258.
  212. ^ Pawlik, Mateusz; Hütter, Thomas; Kocher, Daniel; Mann, Willi; Augsten, Nikolaus (1 July 2019). "A Link is not Enough – Reproducibility of Data". Datenbank-Spektrum. 19 (2): 107–115. doi:10.1007/s13222-019-00317-8. ISSN 1610-1995. PMC 6647556. PMID 31402850.
  213. ^ Munafò, Marcus R.; Nosek, Brian A.; Bishop, Dorothy V. M.; Button, Katherine S.; Chambers, Christopher D.; Percie Du Sert, Nathalie; Simonsohn, Uri; Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan; Ware, Jennifer J.; Ioannidis, John P. A. (2017). "A Manifesto for Reproducible Science". Nature Human Behaviour. 1: 0021. doi:10.1038/s41562-016-0021. PMC 7610724. PMID 33954258. from the original on 31 August 2020. Retrieved 25 September 2019.
  214. ^ Bowman, Nicholas David; Keene, Justin Robert (2018). "A Layered Framework for Considering Open Science Practices". Communication Research Reports. 35 (4): 363–372. doi:10.1080/08824096.2018.1513273.
  215. ^ McKiernan, E. C.; Bourne, P. E.; Brown, C. T.; Buck, S.; Kenall, A.; Lin, J.; McDougall, D.; Nosek, B. A.; Ram, K.; Soderberg, C. K.; Spies, J. R.; Thaney, K.; Updegrove, A.; Woo, K. H.; Yarkoni, T. (2016). "Point of View: How Open Science Helps Researchers Succeed". eLife. 5. doi:10.7554/eLife.16800. PMC 4973366. PMID 27387362.
  216. ^ Wicherts, Jelte M. (29 January 2016). "Peer Review Quality and Transparency of the Peer-Review Process in Open Access and Subscription Journals". PLOS ONE. 11 (1): e0147913. Bibcode:2016PLoSO..1147913W. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147913. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 4732690. PMID 26824759.
  217. ^ Brembs, Björn (12 February 2019). "Reliable novelty: New should not trump true". PLOS Biology. 17 (2): e3000117. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000117. ISSN 1545-7885. PMC 6372144. PMID 30753184.
  218. ^ Spezi, Valerie; Wakeling, Simon; Pinfield, Stephen; Creaser, Claire; Fry, Jenny; Willett, Peter (13 March 2017). "Open-access mega-journals". Journal of Documentation. 73 (2): 263–283. doi:10.1108/JD-06-2016-0082. ISSN 0022-0418.
  219. ^ Pourret, Olivier; Irawan, Dasapta Erwin; Tennant, Jonathan P.; Wien, Charlotte; Dorch, Bertil F. (15 June 2020). "Comments on "Factors affecting global flow of scientific knowledge in environmental sciences" by Sonne et al. (2020)". Science of the Total Environment. 721: 136454. Bibcode:2020ScTEn.721m6454P. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136454. ISSN 0048-9697. PMID 31924309. S2CID 210150077.
  220. ^ Grudniewicz, Agnes; Moher, David; Cobey, Kelly D.; Bryson, Gregory L.; Cukier, Samantha; Allen, Kristiann; Ardern, Clare; Balcom, Lesley; Barros, Tiago; Berger, Monica; Ciro, Jairo Buitrago (12 December 2019). "Predatory journals: no definition, no defence". Nature. 576 (7786): 210–212. Bibcode:2019Natur.576..210G. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-03759-y. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 31827288. S2CID 209168864.
  221. ^ Dadkhah, Mehdi; Borchardt, Glenn (1 June 2016). "Hijacked Journals: An Emerging Challenge for Scholarly Publishing". Aesthetic Surgery Journal. 36 (6): 739–741. doi:10.1093/asj/sjw026. ISSN 1090-820X. PMID 26906349. from the original on 8 June 2019. Retrieved 5 January 2020.
  222. ^ Dadkhah, Mehdi; Maliszewski, Tomasz; Teixeira da Silva, Jaime A. (24 June 2016). "Hijacked journals, hijacked web-sites, journal phishing, misleading metrics, and predatory publishing: actual and potential threats to academic integrity and publishing ethics". Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology. 12 (3): 353–362. doi:10.1007/s12024-016-9785-x. ISSN 1547-769X. PMID 27342770. S2CID 38963478.
  223. ^ Shen, Cenyu; Björk, Bo-Christer (2015). "'Predatory" Open Access: A Longitudinal Study of Article Volumes and Market Characteristics". BMC Medicine. 13: 230. doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0469-2. PMC 4589914. PMID 26423063.
  224. ^ Perlin, Marcelo S.; Imasato, Takeyoshi; Borenstein, Denis (2018). "Is Predatory Publishing a Real Threat? Evidence from a Large Database Study". Scientometrics. 116: 255–273. doi:10.1007/s11192-018-2750-6. hdl:10183/182710. S2CID 4998464.
  225. ^ Bohannon, John (2013). "Who's Afraid of Peer Review?". Science. 342 (6154): 60–65. Bibcode:2013Sci...342...60B. doi:10.1126/science.342.6154.60. PMID 24092725.
  226. ^ Olivarez, Joseph; Bales, Stephen; Sare, Laura; Vanduinkerken, Wyoma (2018). "Format Aside: Applying Beall's Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of Both OA and Non-OA Library and Information Science Journals". College & Research Libraries. 79. doi:10.5860/crl.79.1.52.
  227. ^ Shamseer, Larissa; Moher, David; Maduekwe, Onyi; Turner, Lucy; Barbour, Virginia; Burch, Rebecca; Clark, Jocalyn; Galipeau, James; Roberts, Jason; Shea, Beverley J. (2017). "Potential Predatory and Legitimate Biomedical Journals: Can You Tell the Difference? A Cross-Sectional Comparison". BMC Medicine. 15 (1): 28. doi:10.1186/s12916-017-0785-9. PMC 5353955. PMID 28298236.
  228. ^ Eisen, Michael (3 October 2013). . www.michaeleisen.org. Archived from the original on 24 September 2018. Retrieved 5 January 2020.
  229. ^ Silver, Andrew (2017). "Pay-to-View Blacklist of Predatory Journals Set to Launch". Nature. doi:10.1038/nature.2017.22090.
  230. ^ Strinzel, Michaela; Severin, Anna; Milzow, Katrin; Egger, Matthias (2019). "'Blacklists" and 'Whitelists" to Tackle Predatory Publishing : A Cross-Sectional Comparison and Thematic Analysis". mBio. 10 (3). doi:10.7287/peerj.preprints.27532v1. PMC 6550518. PMID 31164459.
  231. ^ Polka, Jessica K.; Kiley, Robert; Konforti, Boyana; Stern, Bodo; Vale, Ronald D. (2018). "Publish Peer Reviews". Nature. 560 (7720): 545–547. Bibcode:2018Natur.560..545P. doi:10.1038/d41586-018-06032-w. PMID 30158621.
  232. ^ Hull, Duncan (15 February 2012). "The Open Access Irony Awards: Naming and shaming them". O'Really?.
  233. ^ Duncan, Green (7 August 2013). "Whatever happened to the Academic Spring? (Or the irony of hiding papers on transparency and accountability behind a paywall)". From Poverty to Power.
  234. ^ a b Marwick, Ben (29 October 2020). "Open Access to Publications to Expand Participation in Archaeology". Norwegian Archaeological Review. 53 (2): 163–169. doi:10.1080/00293652.2020.1837233. S2CID 228961066.
  235. ^ Schultz, Teresa Auch (2 March 2018). "Practicing What You Preach: Evaluating Access of Open Access Research". The Journal of Electronic Publishing. 21 (1). doi:10.3998/3336451.0021.103.
  236. ^ Eve, Martin Paul (21 October 2013). "How ironic are the open access irony awards?". Martin Paul Eve.
  237. ^ "Browse by Year". roar.eprints.org. Registry of Open Access Repositories. from the original on 24 March 2019. Retrieved 10 March 2019.
  238. ^ Peiperl, Larry (16 April 2018). "Preprints in medical research: Progress and principles". PLOS Medicine. 15 (4): e1002563. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002563. ISSN 1549-1676. PMC 5901682. PMID 29659580.
  239. ^ Elmore, Susan A. (2018). "Preprints: What Role do These Have in Communicating Scientific Results?". Toxicologic Pathology. 46 (4): 364–365. doi:10.1177/0192623318767322. PMC 5999550. PMID 29628000.
  240. ^ "A List of Preprint Servers". Research Preprints. 9 March 2017. from the original on 9 March 2019. Retrieved 10 March 2019.
  241. ^ Eve, Martin (2014). Open access and the humanities . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 9–10. ISBN 9781107484016.
  242. ^ Harnad, S. 2007. "The Green Road to Open Access: A Leveraged Transition" 12 March 2010 at the Wayback Machine. In: The Culture of Periodicals from the Perspective of the Electronic Age, pp. 99–105, L'Harmattan. Retrieved 3 December 2011.
  243. ^ Harnad, S.; Brody, T.; Vallières, F. O.; Carr, L.; Hitchcock, S.; Gingras, Y.; Oppenheim, C.; Stamerjohanns, H.; Hilf, E. R. (2004). "The Access/Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access". Serials Review. 30 (4): 310–314. doi:10.1016/j.serrev.2004.09.013.
  244. ^ Fortier, Rose; James, Heather G.; Jermé, Martha G.; Berge, Patricia; Del Toro, Rosemary (14 May 2015). "Demystifying Open Access Workshop". e-Publications@Marquette. e-Publications@Marquette. from the original on 18 May 2015. Retrieved 18 May 2015.
  245. ^ " SPARC Europe – Embargo Periods 18 November 2015 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved on 18 October 2015.
  246. ^ Ann Shumelda Okerson and James J. O'Donnell (eds). 1995. "Scholarly Journals at the Crossroads: A Subversive Proposal for Electronic Publishing" 12 September 2012 at the Wayback Machine. Association of Research Libraries. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  247. ^ Poynder, Richard. 2004. "Poynder On Point: Ten Years After" 26 September 2011 at the Wayback Machine. Information Today, 21(9), October 2004. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  248. ^ Harnad, S. 2007."Re: when did the Open Access movement "officially" begin" 13 September 2016 at the Wayback Machine. American Scientist Open Access Forum, 27 June 2007. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  249. ^ SHERPA/RoMEO – Publisher copyright policies & self-archiving 11 November 2007 at the Wayback Machine. Sherpa.ac.uk. Retrieved on 3 December 2011.
  250. ^ "Evaluating Institutional Repository Deployment in American Academe Since Early 2005: Repositories by the Numbers, Part 2". www.dlib.org. from the original on 11 August 2017. Retrieved 10 March 2019.
  251. ^ Dawson, Patricia H.; Yang, Sharon Q. (1 October 2016). "Institutional Repositories, Open Access and Copyright: What Are the Practices and Implications?" (PDF). Science & Technology Libraries. 35 (4): 279–294. doi:10.1080/0194262X.2016.1224994. ISSN 0194-262X. S2CID 63819187. (PDF) from the original on 19 July 2018. Retrieved 11 July 2019.
  252. ^ Mongeon, Philippe; Paul-Hus, Adèle (2016). "The Journal Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A Comparative Analysis". Scientometrics. 106: 213–228. arXiv:1511.08096. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5. S2CID 17753803.
  253. ^ Falagas, Matthew E.; Pitsouni, Eleni I.; Malietzis, George A.; Pappas, Georgios (2008). "Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: Strengths and Weaknesses". The FASEB Journal. 22 (2): 338–342. doi:10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF. PMID 17884971. S2CID 303173.
January 10, 2023
open, access, confused, with, open, source, other, uses, disambiguation, principles, range, practices, through, which, research, outputs, distributed, online, free, access, charges, other, barriers, with, open, access, strictly, defined, according, 2001, defin. Not to be confused with Open source For other uses see Open access disambiguation Open access OA is a set of principles and a range of practices through which research outputs are distributed online free of access charges or other barriers 1 With open access strictly defined according to the 2001 definition or libre open access barriers to copying or reuse are also reduced or removed by applying an open license for copyright 1 Open access logo originally designed by Public Library of Science source source source source source source source source source source source source track A PhD Comics introduction to open access The main focus of the open access movement is peer reviewed research literature 2 Historically this has centered mainly on print based academic journals Whereas non open access journals cover publishing costs through 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 3 book chapters 1 monographs 4 research reports and images 5 Since the revenue of most open access journals is earned from publication fees charged to the authors OA publishers are motivated to increase their profits by accepting low quality papers and by not performing thorough peer review 6 7 On the other hand the prices for OA publications in the most prestigious journals have exceeded 5 000 US making such publishing model unaffordable to a large number of researchers This increase in publishing cost has been called the Open Access Sequel to the Serials Crisis 8 Contents 1 Definitions 1 1 Colour naming system 1 1 1 Gold OA 1 1 2 Green OA 1 1 3 Hybrid OA 1 1 4 Bronze OA 1 1 5 Diamond platinum OA 1 1 6 Black OA 1 2 Gratis and libre 1 3 FAIR 2 Features 2 1 Licenses 2 2 Funding 2 2 1 Article processing charges 2 2 2 Subsidized or no fee 2 3 Preprint use 2 3 1 Effect of preprints on later publication 2 4 Archiving 2 4 1 Embargo periods 3 Motivations 3 1 Stakeholders and concerned communities 3 2 Research funders and universities 3 2 1 Universities 3 3 Libraries and librarians 3 4 Public 3 5 Low income countries 4 History 4 1 Extent 5 Effects on scholarly publishing 5 1 Article impact 5 1 1 Readership 5 1 2 Citation rate 5 1 3 Alt metrics 5 2 Journal impact factor 5 3 Peer review processes 5 4 Predatory publishing 5 5 Open irony 6 Infrastructure 6 1 Databases and repositories 6 1 1 Representativeness in proprietary databases 6 2 Distribution 7 Policies and mandates 7 1 Compliance 8 Inequality and open access 8 1 Gender inequality 8 2 High income low income country inequality 9 By country 10 See also 11 Notes 12 References 12 1 Sources 13 Further reading 14 External linksDefinitions EditThere are different models of open access publishing and publishers may use one or more of these models Colour naming system Edit Different open access types are currently commonly described using a colour system The most commonly recognised names are green gold and hybrid open access however a number of other models and alternative terms are also used Gold OA Edit Number of Gold open access journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals 9 10 Number of Gold and Hybrid open access journals listed in PubMed Central 11 12 In the gold OA model the publisher makes all articles and related content available for free immediately on the journal s website In such publications articles are licensed for sharing and reuse via Creative Commons licenses or similar 1 Almost all gold OA publishers charge an article processing charge APC which is typically paid through institutional or grant funding The majority of gold open access journals charging APCs follow an author pays model 13 although this is not an intrinsic property of gold OA 14 Green OA Edit Venn diagram highlighting the key features of different types of open access in scholarly publishing 15 Self archiving by authors is permitted under green OA Independently from publication by a publisher the author also posts the work to a website controlled by the author the research institution that funded or hosted the work or to an independent central open repository where people can download the work without paying 16 Green OA is gratis for the author Some publishers less than 5 and decreasing as of 2014 may charge a fee for an additional service 16 such as a free license on the publisher authored copyrightable portions of the printed version of an article If the author posts the near final version of their work after peer review by a journal the archived version is called a postprint This can be the accepted manuscript as returned by the journal to the author after successful peer review Hybrid OA Edit Hybrid open access journals contain a mixture of open access articles and closed access articles 17 18 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 19 Hybrid OA generally costs more than gold OA and can offer a lower quality of service 20 A particularly controversial practice in hybrid open access journals is double dipping where both authors and subscribers are charged 21 Bronze OA Edit Bronze open access articles are free to read only on the publisher page but lack a clearly identifiable license 22 Such articles are typically not available for reuse Diamond platinum OA Edit See also Diamond open access Journals which publish open access without charging authors article processing charges are sometimes referred to as diamond 23 24 25 or platinum 26 27 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 institutions learned societies philanthropists or government grants 28 29 30 Diamond OA journals are available for most disciplines and are usually small lt 25 articles per year and more likely to be multilingual 38 25 Black OA Edit See also Shadow library Download rate for articles on Sci Hub black open access 31 The growth of unauthorized digital copying by large scale copyright infringement has enabled free access to paywalled literature 32 33 This has been done via existing social media sites e g the ICanHazPDF hashtag as well as dedicated sites e g Sci Hub 32 In some ways this is a large scale technical implementation of pre existing practice whereby those with access to paywalled literature would share copies with their contacts 34 35 36 37 However the increased ease and scale from 2010 onwards have changed how many people treat subscription publications 38 Gratis and libre Edit Main article Gratis versus libre Similar to the free content definition the terms gratis and libre were used in the BOAI definition to distinguish between free to read versus free to reuse 39 Gratis open access refers to online access free of charge and libre open access refers to online access free of charge plus some additional re use rights 39 Libre open access covers the kinds of open access defined in the Budapest Open Access Initiative the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing and the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities The re use rights of libre OA are often specified by various specific Creative Commons licenses 40 all of which require as a minimum attribution of authorship to the original authors 39 41 In 2012 the number of works under libre open access was considered to have been rapidly increasing for a few years though most open access mandates did not enforce any copyright license and it was difficult to publish libre gold OA in legacy journals 2 However there are no costs nor restrictions for green libre OA as preprints can be freely self deposited with a free license and most open access repositories use Creative Commons licenses to allow reuse 42 FAIR Edit Main article 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 43 44 Initially proposed in March 2016 it has subsequently been endorsed by organisations such as the European Commission and the G20 45 46 Features EditThe emergence of open science or open research has brought to light a number of controversial and hotly debated topics 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 47 has led to increasingly entrenched positions and much debate The area of open scholarly practices increasingly see a role for policy makers and research funders 48 49 50 giving focus to issues such as career incentives research evaluation and business models for publicly funded research Plan S and AmeliCA 51 Open Knowledge for Latin America caused a wave of debate in scholarly communication in 2019 and 2020 52 53 Licenses Edit Licenses used by gold and hybrid OA journals in DOAJ 54 Subscription based publishing typically requires transfer of copyright from authors to the publisher so that the latter can monetise the process via dissemination and reproduction of the work 55 56 57 58 With OA publishing typically authors retain copyright to their work and license its reproduction to the publisher 59 Retention of copyright by authors can support academic freedoms by enabling greater control of the work e g for image re use or licensing agreements e g to allow dissemination by others 60 The most common licenses used in open access publishing are Creative Commons 61 The widely used CC BY license is one of the most permissive only requiring attribution to be allowed to use the material and allowing derivations commercial use 62 A range of more restrictive creative commons licenses are also used More rarely some of the smaller academic journals use custom open access licenses 61 63 Some publishers e g Elsevier use author nominal copyright for OA articles where the author retains copyright in name only and all rights are transferred to the publisher 64 65 66 Funding Edit Since open access publication does not charge readers there are many financial models used to cover costs by other means 67 Open access can be provided by commercial publishers who may publish open access as well as subscription based journals or dedicated open access publishers such as Public Library of Science PLOS and BioMed Central Another source of funding for open access can be institutional subscribers One example of this is the Subscribe to Open publishing model introduced by Annual Reviews if the subscription revenue goal is met the given journal s volume is published open access 68 Advantages and disadvantages of open access have generated considerable discussion amongst researchers academics librarians university administrators funding agencies government officials commercial publishers editorial staff and society publishers 69 Reactions of existing publishers to open access journal publishing have ranged from moving with enthusiasm to a new open access business model to experiments with providing as much free or open access as possible to active lobbying against open access proposals There are many publishers that started up as open access only publishers such as PLOS Hindawi Publishing Corporation Frontiers in journals MDPI and BioMed Central Article processing charges Edit Article processing charges by gold OA journals in DOAJ 54 See also Article processing charge Some open access journals under the gold and hybrid models generate revenue by charging publication fees in order to make the work openly available at the time of publication 70 23 24 The money might come from the author but more often comes from the author s research grant or employer 71 While the payments are typically incurred per article published e g BMC or PLOS journals some journals apply them per manuscript submitted e g Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics until recently or per author e g PeerJ Charges typically range from 1 000 3 000 5 380 for Nature Communications 72 54 73 but can be under 10 74 or over 5 000 75 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 76 APCs can also depend on a journal s impact factor 77 78 79 80 Some publishers e g eLife and Ubiquity Press have released estimates of their direct and indirect costs that set their APCs 81 82 Hybrid OA generally costs more than gold OA and can offer a lower quality of service 83 A particularly controversial practice in hybrid open access journals is double dipping where both authors and subscribers are charged 21 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 84 failed verification This has led to the assessment that there is enough money within the system to enable full transition to OA 84 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 85 Concern has been noted that increasing subscription journal prices will be mirrored by rising APCs creating a barrier to less financially privileged authors 86 87 88 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 89 Some gold OA publishers will waive all or part of the fee for authors from less developed economies Steps are normally taken to ensure that peer reviewers 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 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 Subsidized or no fee Edit No fee open access journals also known as platinum or diamond 23 24 do not charge either readers or authors 90 These journals use a variety of business models including subsidies advertising membership dues endowments or volunteer labour 91 85 Subsidising sources range from universities libraries and museums to foundations societies or government agencies 91 Some publishers may cross subsidise from other publications or auxiliary services and products 91 For example most APC free journals in Latin America are funded by higher education institutions and are not conditional on institutional affiliation for publication 85 Conversely Knowledge Unlatched crowdsources funding in order to make monographs available open access 92 Estimates of prevalence vary but approximately 10 000 journals without APC are listed in DOAJ 93 and the Free Journal Network 94 95 APC free journals tend to be smaller and more local regional in scope 96 97 Some also require submitting authors to have a particular institutional affiliation 96 Preprint use Edit Typical publishing workflow for an academic journal article preprint postprint and 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 98 99 100 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 101 Effect of preprints on later publication Edit A persistent concern surrounding preprints is that work may be at risk of being plagiarised or scooped meaning that the same or similar research will be published by others without proper attribution to the original source if publicly available but not yet associated with a stamp of approval from peer reviewers and traditional journals 102 These concerns are often amplified as competition increases for academic jobs and funding and perceived to be particularly problematic for early career researchers and other higher risk demographics within academia However preprints in fact protect against scooping 103 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 104 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 Preprints provide a time stamp at the time of publication which helps to establish the priority of discovery for scientific claims Vale and Hyman 2016 This means that a preprint can act as proof of provenance for research ideas data code models and results 105 The fact that the majority of preprints come with a form of permanent identifier usually a digital object identifier DOI also makes them easy to cite and track Thus if one were to be scooped without adequate acknowledgement this would be a case of academic misconduct and plagiarism and could be pursued as such 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 note 1 Indeed the benefits of preprints especially for early career researchers seem to outweigh any perceived risk rapid sharing of academic research open access without author facing charges establishing priority of discoveries receiving wider feedback in parallel with or before peer review and facilitating wider collaborations 103 Archiving Edit 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 and or subject repository This route is often dependent on journal or publisher policies note 2 which can be more restrictive and complicated than respective gold policies regarding deposit location license and embargo requirements Some publishers require an embargo period before deposition in public repositories 106 arguing that immediate self archiving risks loss of subscription income Embargo periods Edit Length of embargo times for bronze Elsevier journals 107 Embargoes are imposed by between 20 and 40 of journals 108 109 during which time an article is paywalled before permitting self archiving green OA or releasing a free to read version bronze OA 110 111 Embargo periods typically vary from 6 12 months in STEM and gt 12 months in humanities arts and social sciences 85 Embargo free self archiving has not been shown to affect subscription revenue 112 and tends to increase readership and citations 113 114 Embargoes have been lifted on particular topics for either limited times or ongoing e g Zika outbreaks 115 or indigenous health 116 Plan S includes zero length embargoes on self archiving as a key principle 85 Motivations EditMain article Academic journal publishing reform Open access mostly green and gratis began to be sought and provided worldwide by researchers when the possibility itself was opened by the advent of Internet and the World Wide Web The momentum was further increased by a growing movement for academic journal publishing reform and with it gold and libre OA The premises behind open access publishing are that there are viable funding models to maintain traditional peer review standards of quality while also making the following changes Rather than making journal articles accessible through a subscription business model all academic publications could be made free to read and published with some other cost recovery model such as publication charges subsidies or charging subscriptions only for the print edition with the online edition gratis or free to read 117 Rather than applying traditional notions of copyright to academic publications they could be libre or free to build upon 117 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 118 although others have argued that OA may raise the total cost of publication 119 and further increase economic incentives for exploitation in academic publishing 120 The open access movement is motivated by the problems of social inequality caused by restricting access to academic research which favor large and wealthy institutions with the financial means to purchase access to many journals as well as the economic challenges and perceived unsustainability of academic publishing 117 121 Stakeholders and concerned communities Edit source source source source source source source source source source source source source source A fictional thank you note from the future to contemporary researchers for sharing their research openly The intended audience of research articles is usually other researchers Open access helps researchers as readers by opening up access to articles that their libraries do not subscribe to One of the great beneficiaries of open access may be users in developing countries where currently some universities find it difficult to pay for subscriptions required to access the most recent journals 122 Some schemes exist for providing subscription scientific publications to those affiliated to institutions in developing countries at little or no cost 123 All researchers benefit from open access as no library can afford to subscribe to every scientific journal and most can only afford a small fraction of them this is known as the serials crisis 124 Open access extends the reach of research beyond its immediate academic circle An open access article can be read by anyone a professional in the field a researcher in another field a journalist a politician or civil servant or an interested layperson Indeed a 2008 study revealed that mental health professionals are roughly twice as likely to read a relevant article if it is freely available 125 Research funders and universities Edit See also Policies and mandates Further information Open access mandate Instances Research funding agencies and universities want to ensure that the research they fund and support in various ways has the greatest possible research impact 126 As a means of achieving this research funders are beginning to expect open access to the research they support Many of them including all UK Research Councils have already adopted open access mandates and others are on the way to do so see ROARMAP In the US the 2008 NIH Public Access Policy an open access mandate was put into law and required that research 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 Universities Edit A growing number of universities are providing institutional repositories in which their researchers can deposit their published articles Some open access advocates believe that institutional repositories will play a very important role in responding to open access mandates from funders 127 In May 2005 16 major Dutch universities cooperatively launched DAREnet the Digital Academic Repositories making over 47 000 research papers available 128 From 2 June 2008 DAREnet has been incorporated into the scholarly portal NARCIS 129 By 2019 NARCIS provided access to 360 000 open access publications from all Dutch universities KNAW NWO and a number of scientific institutes 130 In 2011 a group of universities in North America formed the Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions COAPI 131 Starting with 21 institutions where the faculty had either established an open access policy or were in the process of implementing one COAPI now has nearly 50 members These institutions administrators faculty and librarians and staff support the international work of the Coalition s awareness raising and advocacy for open access In 2012 the Harvard Open Access Project released its guide to good practices for university open access policies 132 focusing on rights retention policies that allow universities to distribute faculty research without seeking permission from publishers Rights retention is currently being explored in the UK by UKSCL 133 In 2013 a group of nine Australian universities formed the Australian Open Access Strategy Group AOASG to advocate collaborate raise awareness and lead and build capacity in the open access space in Australia 134 In 2015 the group expanded to include all eight New Zealand universities and was renamed the Australasian Open Access Support Group 135 It was then renamed the Australasian Open Access Strategy Group Archived 10 February 2018 at the Wayback Machine highlighting its emphasis on strategy The awareness raising activities of the AOASG include presentations workshops blogs and a webinar series Archived 5 February 2018 at the Wayback Machine on open access issues 136 Libraries and librarians Edit As information professionals librarians are often vocal and active advocates of open access These librarians believe that open access promises to remove both the price barriers and the permission barriers that undermine library efforts to provide access to the scholarly record 137 as well as helping to address the serials crisis Many library associations have either signed major open access declarations or created their own For example IFLA have produced a Statement on Open Access 138 Librarians also lead education and outreach initiatives to faculty administrators and others about the benefits of open access For example the Association of College and Research Libraries of the American Library Association has developed a Scholarly Communications Toolkit 139 The Association of Research Libraries has documented the need for increased access to scholarly information and was a leading founder of the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition SPARC 140 141 At most universities the library manages the institutional repository which provides free access to scholarly work by the university s faculty The Canadian Association of Research Libraries has a program 142 to develop institutional repositories at all Canadian university libraries An increasing number of libraries provide publishing or hosting services for open access journals with the Library Publishing Coalition as a membership organisation 143 In 2013 open access activist Aaron Swartz was posthumously awarded the American Library Association s James Madison Award for being an outspoken advocate for public participation in government and unrestricted access to peer reviewed scholarly articles 144 145 In March 2013 the entire editorial board and the editor in chief of the Journal of Library Administration resigned en masse citing a dispute with the journal s publisher 146 One board member wrote of a crisis of conscience about publishing in a journal that was not open access after the death of Aaron Swartz 147 148 The pioneer of the open access movement in France and one of the first librarians to advocate the self archiving approach to open access worldwide is Helene Bosc 149 Her work is described in her 15 year retrospective 150 Public Edit Open access to scholarly research is argued to be important to the public for a number of reasons One of the arguments for public access to the scholarly literature is that most of the research is paid for by taxpayers through government grants who therefore have a right to access the results of what they have funded This is one of the primary reasons for the creation of advocacy groups such as The Alliance for Taxpayer Access in the US 151 Examples of people who might wish to read scholarly literature include individuals with medical conditions or family members of such individuals and serious hobbyists or amateur scholars who may be interested in specialized scientific literature e g amateur astronomers Additionally professionals in many fields such as those doing research in private companies start ups and most hospitals usually do not have access to publications behind paywalls and OA publications is the only type that they can access in practice Even those who do not read scholarly articles benefit indirectly from open access 152 For example patients benefit when their doctor and other health care professionals have access to the latest research As argued by open access advocates open access speeds research progress productivity and knowledge translation 153 Every researcher in the world can read an article not just those whose library can afford to subscribe to the particular journal in which it appears Faster discoveries benefit everyone High school and junior college students can gain the information literacy skills critical for the knowledge age Critics of the various open access initiatives claim that there is little evidence that a significant amount of scientific literature is currently unavailable to those who would benefit from it 154 While no library has subscriptions to every journal that might be of benefit virtually all published research can be acquired via interlibrary loan 155 Note that interlibrary loan may take a day or weeks depending on the loaning library and whether they will scan and email or mail the article Open access online by contrast is faster often immediate making it more suitable than interlibrary loan for fast paced research Low income countries Edit In developing nations open access archiving and publishing acquires a unique importance Scientists health care professionals and institutions in developing nations often do not have the capital necessary to access scholarly literature although schemes exist to give them access for little or no cost Among the most important is HINARI 156 the Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative sponsored by the World Health Organization and part of Research4Life HINARI however also has restrictions For example individual researchers may not register as users unless their institution has access 157 and several countries that one might expect to have access do not have access at all not even low cost access e g South Africa 157 Many open access projects involve international collaboration For example the SciELO Scientific Electronic Library Online 158 is a comprehensive approach to full open access journal publishing involving a number of Latin American countries Bioline International a non profit organization dedicated to helping publishers in developing countries is a collaboration of people in the UK Canada and Brazil the Bioline International Software is used around the world Research Papers in Economics RePEc is a collaborative effort of over 100 volunteers in 45 countries The Public Knowledge Project in Canada developed the open source publishing software Open Journal Systems OJS which is now in use around the world for example by the African Journals Online group and one of the most active development groups is Portuguese This international perspective has resulted in advocacy for the development of open source appropriate technology and the necessary open access to relevant information for sustainable development 159 160 History EditThis section should include a summary of or be summarized in History of open access See Wikipedia Summary style for information on how to incorporate it into this article s main text or the main text of another article May 2018 Main article History of open access The number and proportion of open access articles split between Gold Green Hybrid Bronze and closed access 1950 2016 161 Ratios of article access types for different subjects averaged 2009 2015 161 Share of hybrid open access OA articles in the subscription journals of the top three publishers JCR Journal Citation Reports Reproduced Extent Edit Various studies have investigated the extent of open access A study published in 2010 showed that roughly 20 of the total number of peer reviewed articles published in 2008 could be found openly accessible 162 Another study found that by 2010 7 9 of all academic journals with impact factors were gold open access journals and showed a broad distribution of Gold Open Access journals throughout academic disciplines 163 A study of random journals from the citations indexes AHSCI SCI and SSCI in 2013 came to the result that 88 of the journals were closed access and 12 were open access 23 In August 2013 a study done for the European Commission reported that 50 of a random sample of all articles published in 2011 as indexed by Scopus were freely accessible online by the end of 2012 164 165 166 A 2017 study by the Max Planck Society put the share of gold access articles in pure open access journals at around 13 percent of total research papers 167 In 2009 there were approximately 4 800 active open access journals publishing around 190 000 articles 168 As of February 2019 over 12 500 open access journals are listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals 169 Percentange of Open Access journal articles available from ACS green Elsevier orange and MDPI blue vs the original publication year accrording to Web Of Science on on 2022 10 28 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 170 171 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 72 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 72 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 172 Crawford s study also found that although a minority of open access journals impose charges on authors a growing majority of open access articles are published under this arrangement particularly in the science disciplines thanks to the enormous output of open access mega journals each of which may publish tens of thousands of articles in a year and are invariably funded by author side charges see Figure 10 1 in GOA4 The Registry of Open Access Repositories ROAR indexes the creation location and growth of open access open access repositories and their contents 173 As of February 2019 over 4 500 institutional and cross institutional repositories have been registered in ROAR 174 Effects on scholarly publishing EditArticle impact Edit Comparison of OA publications to non OA publications for academic citations n 44 175 HTML views n 4 176 177 154 178 PDF downloads n 3 177 154 178 Twitter n 2 179 176 Wikipedia n 1 179 Since published articles report on research that is typically funded by government or university grants the more the article is used cited applied and built upon the better for research as well as for the researcher s career 180 181 Some professional organizations have encouraged use of open access in 2001 the International Mathematical Union communicated to its members that Open access to the mathematical literature is an important goal and encouraged them to make available electronically as much of our own work as feasible to enlarge the reservoir of freely available primary mathematical material particularly helping scientists working without adequate library access 182 Readership Edit OA articles are generally viewed online and downloaded more often than paywalled articles and that readership continues for longer 176 183 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 184 OA articles are more read on publication management programs such as Mendeley 179 Open access practices can reduce publication delays an obstacle which led some research fields such as high energy physics to adopt widespread preprint access 185 Citation rate Edit See also FUTON bias Authors may use form language like this to request an open access license when submitting their work to a publisher source source source source source source source source source source source source source source track A 2013 interview on paywalls and open access with NIH Director Francis Collins and inventor Jack Andraka A main reason authors make their articles openly accessible is to maximize their citation impact 186 Open access articles are typically cited more often than equivalent articles requiring subscriptions 2 187 188 189 190 This citation advantage was first reported in 2001 191 Two major studies dispute this claim 192 183 however the consensus of multiple studies support the effect 175 193 with measured OA citation advantage varying in magnitude between 1 3 fold to 6 fold depending on discipline 189 194 Citation advantage is most pronounced in OA articles in hybrid journals compared to the non OA articles in those same journals 195 and with articles deposited in green OA repositories 162 Notably green OA articles show similar benefits to citation counts as gold OA articles 190 Articles in gold OA journals are typically cited at a similar frequency to paywalled articles 196 Citation advantage increases the longer an article has been published 176 Alt metrics Edit In addition to format academic citation other forms of research impact altmetrics may be affected by OA publishing 184 190 constituting a significant amplifier effect for science published on such platforms 197 Initial studies suggest that OA articles are more referenced in blogs 198 on Twitter 179 and on English Wikipedia 197 The OA advantage in altmetrics may be smaller than the advantage in academic citations although findings are mixed 199 190 Journal impact factor Edit See also Impact factor Journal impact factor JIF measures the average number of citations of articles in a journal over a two year window It is commonly used as a proxy for journal quality expected research impact for articles submitted to that journal and of researcher success 200 201 In subscription journals impact factor correlates with overall citation count however this correlation is not observed in gold OA journals 202 Open access initiatives like Plan S typically call on a broader adoption and implementation of the Leiden Manifesto note 3 and the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment DORA alongside fundamental changes in the scholarly communication system note 4 Peer review processes Edit See also Scholarly peer review Peer review of research articles prior to publishing has been common since the 18th century 203 204 Commonly reviewer comments are only revealed to the authors and reviewer identities kept anonymous 205 206 The rise of OA publishing has also given rise to experimentation in technologies and processes for peer review 207 Increasing transparency of peer review and quality control includes posting results to preprint servers 208 preregistration of studies 209 open publishing of peer reviews 210 open publishing of full datasets and analysis code 211 212 and other open science practices 213 214 215 It is proposed that increased transparency of academic quality control processes makes audit of the academic record easier 210 216 Additionally the rise of OA megajournals has made it viable for their peer review to focus solely on methodology and results interpretation whilst ignoring novelty 217 218 Major criticisms of the influence of OA on peer review have included that if OA journals have incentives to publish as many articles as possible then peer review standards may fall as aspect of predatory publishing increased use of preprints may populate the academic corpus with un reviewed junk and propaganda and that reviewers may self censor if their identity of open Some advocates propose that readers will have increased skepticism of preprint studies a traditional hallmark of scientific inquiry 85 Predatory publishing Edit 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 219 In this sense Grudniewicz et al 220 proposed a consensus definition that needs to be shared Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information deviation from best editorial and publication practices a lack of transparency and or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices 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 221 222 The rise of such journals since 2010 223 224 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 225 Although commonly associated with OA publishing models subscription journals are also at risk of similar lax quality control standards and poor editorial policies 226 227 228 OA publishers therefore aim to ensure quality via auditing by registries such as DOAJ 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 229 230 Increased transparency of the peer review and publication process has been proposed as a way to combat predatory journal practices 85 210 231 Open irony Edit 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 232 233 234 This has been noted in many fields with more than 20 examples appearing since around 2010 including in widely read journals such as The Lancet Science and Nature A Flickr group collected screenshots of examples In 2012 Duncan Hull proposed the Open Access Irony award to publicly humiliate journals that publish these kinds of papers 235 Examples of these have been shared and discussed on social media using the hashtag openirony e g on Twitter Typically these discussions are humorous exposures of articles editorials that are pro open access but locked behind paywalls The main concern that motivates these discussions is that restricted access to public scientific knowledge is slowing scientific progress 234 The practice has been justified as important for raising awareness of open access 236 Infrastructure Edit Number of open access repositories listed in the Registry of Open Access Repositories 237 Databases and repositories Edit Multiple databases exist for open access articles journals and datasets These databases overlap however each has different inclusion criteria which typically include extensive vetting for journal publication practices editorial boards and ethics statements The main databases of open access articles and journals are DOAJ and PMC In the case of DOAJ only fully gold open access journals are included whereas PMC also hosts articles from hybrid journals There are also a number of preprint servers which host articles that have not yet been reviewed as open access copies 238 239 These articles are subsequently submitted for peer review by both open access or subscription journals however the preprint always remains openly accessible A list of preprint servers is maintained at ResearchPreprints 240 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 241 242 243 173 244 Most subscription journals place restrictions on which version of the work may be shared and or require an embargo period following the original date of publication What is deposited can therefore vary either a preprint or the peer reviewed postprint either the author s refereed and revised final draft or the publisher s version of record either immediately deposited or after several years 245 Repositories may be specific to an institution a discipline e g arXiv a scholarly society e g MLA s CORE Repository or a funder e g PMC Although the practice was first formally proposed in 1994 246 247 self archiving was already being practiced by some computer scientists in local FTP archives in the 1980s later harvested by CiteSeer 248 The SHERPA RoMEO site maintains a list of the different publisher copyright and self archiving policies 249 and the ROAR database hosts an index of the repositories themselves 250 251 Representativeness in proprietary databases Edit Uneven coverage of journals in the major commercial citation index databases such as Web of Science Scopus and PubMed 252 253 254 255 has strong effects on evaluating both researchers and institutions e g the UK Research Excellence Framework or Times Higher Education ranking note 5 256 257 While these databases primarily select based on process and content quality there has been concern that their commercial nature may skew their assessment criteria and representation of journals outside of Europe and North America 85 65 However there are not currently equal comprehensive multi lingual open source or non commercial digital infrastructures 258 Distribution Edit See also Scientific journal Electronic publishing Like the self archived green open access articles most gold open access journal articles are distributed via the World Wide Web 1 due to low distribution costs increasing reach speed and increasing importance for scholarly communication Open source software is sometimes used for open access repositories 259 open access journal websites 260 and other aspects of open access provision and open access publishing 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 ROAD the Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources 261 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 262 169 Open access articles can be found with a web search using any general search engine or those specialized for the scholarly and scientific literature such as Google Scholar OAIster base search net 263 and CORE 264 Many open access repositories offer a programmable interface to query their content Some of them use a generic protocol such as OAI PMH e g base search net 263 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 In 1998 several universities founded the Public Knowledge Project to foster open access and developed the open source journal publishing system Open Journal Systems among other scholarly software projects As of 2010 it was being used by approximately 5 000 journals worldwide 265 Several initiatives provide an alternative to the English language dominance of existing publication indexing systems including Index Copernicus Polish SciELO Portuguese Spanish and Redalyc Spanish Policies and mandates EditMain article Open access mandate See also Research funders and universitiesMany universities research institutions and research funders have adopted mandates requiring their researchers to make their research publications open access 266 For example Research Councils UK spent nearly 60m on supporting their open access mandate between 2013 and 2016 267 New mandates are often announced during the Open Access Week that takes place each year during the last full week of October The idea of mandating self archiving was raised at least as early as 1998 268 Since 2003 269 efforts have been focused on open access mandating by the funders of research governments 270 research funding agencies 271 and universities 272 Some publishers and publisher associations have lobbied against introducing mandates 273 274 275 In 2002 the University of Southampton s School of Electronics amp 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 2 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 2 Compliance Edit As of March 2021 open access mandates have been registered by over 100 research funders and 800 universities worldwide compiled in the Registry of Open Access Repository Mandates and Policies 276 As these sorts of mandates increase in prevalence collaborating researchers may be affected by several at once Tools such as SWORD can help authors manage sharing between repositories 2 Compliance rates with voluntary open access policies remain low as low as 5 2 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 2 277 Compliance with compulsory open access mandates varies between funders from 27 to 91 averaging 67 2 278 From March 2021 Google Scholar started tracking and indicating compliance with funders open access mandates although it only checks whether items are free to read rather than openly licensed 279 Inequality and open access EditGender inequality Edit Gender inequality still exists in the modern system of scientific publishing In terms of citation and authorship position gender differences favoring men can be found in many disciplinaries such as political science economics and neurology and critical care research For instance in critical care research 30 8 of 18 483 research led by female authors is more likely to be published in lower impact journals than male authors Such disparity can adversely affect the scientific career of women and underrate their scientific impacts for promotion and funding Hence for a healthy and fair scientific community it is important to mitigate such gender inequality It is suggested to help women in science by reducing systematic bias inappropriate institutional practices or unequal domestic work Increasing the number of female scientists and policies promoting gender equality may help close the gender gap in science Besides improving the visibility and representation of women in academic publishing is also essential because underrepresentation of women in scholarly literature can enlarge the gendered citation gap even in the discipline that has more women than men Open access OA publishing has many advantages in the present publishing system and can help female researchers increase their publications visibility and measure impact 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 Additionally because of this high visibility authors can receive more recognition for their works OA publishing is also suggested to be advantageous in terms of citation number compared to non OA publishing but this aspect is still controversial within the scientific community The association between OA and a higher number of citations may be because higher quality articles are self selected for publication as OA Considering the gender based issues in academia and the efforts to improve gender equality OA can be an important factor when female researchers choose a place to publish their articles With a proper supporting system and funding OA publishing is shown to have increased female researchers productivity 280 High income low income country inequality Edit A 2022 study has found most OA articles were written by authors in high income countries and there were no articles in Mirror journals by authors in low income countries 281 One of the great ironies of open access is that you grant authors around the world the ability to finally read the scientific literature that was completely closed off to them but it ends up excluding them from publishing in the same journals says Emilio Bruna a scholar at the University of Florida in Gainesville 282 By country EditAustralia Austria Belgium Canada Denmark France Germany Greece Hungary India Republic of Ireland Italy Netherlands New Zealand Norway Poland Portugal Russia South Africa Spain Sweden UkraineSee also EditAccess to knowledge movement Altmetrics Copyright policies of academic publishers Freedom of information Guerilla Open Access List of open access journals Open Access Button Open access monograph Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association Open Access Week Open data Open educational resources Open government Predatory open access publishing Right to Internet access Category Open access journals Category Open access by country Category Publication management softwareNotes Edit ASAPbio FAQ Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 28 August 2019 SHERPA RoMEO Archived from the original on 30 August 2019 Retrieved 28 August 2019 database The Leiden Manifesto for Research Metrics Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 28 August 2019 2015 Plan S implementation guidelines Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 28 August 2019 February 2019 Publications in journals listed in the WoS has a large effect on the UK Research Excellence Framework Bibliographic data from Scopus represents more than 36 of assessment criteria in THE rankings References Edit a b c d e Suber Peter Open Access Overview Archived from the original on 19 May 2007 Retrieved 29 November 2014 a b c d e f g h i Swan Alma 2012 Policy guidelines for the development and promotion of open access UNESCO Archived from the original on 14 April 2019 Retrieved 14 April 2019 Schopfel Joachim Prost Helene 2013 Degrees of secrecy in an open environment The case of electronic theses and dissertations ESSACHESS Journal for Communication Studies 6 2 12 65 86 Archived from the original on 1 January 2014 Schwartz Meredith 2012 Directory of Open Access Books Goes Live Library Journal Archived from the original on 4 October 2013 Terms and conditions for the use and redistribution of Sentinel data PDF No version 1 0 European Space Agency July 2014 Archived PDF from the original on 8 February 2020 Retrieved 28 June 2020 Beall Jeffrey What the Open Access Movement Doesn t Want You to Know AAUP Retrieved 22 October 2021 Knox Richard 3 October 2013 Some Online Journals Will Publish Fake Science For A Fee NPR Retrieved 22 October 2021 Khoo Shaun Yon Seng 2019 Article Processing Charge Hyperinflation and Price Insensitivity An Open Access Sequel to the Serials Crisis Liber Quarterly The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries 29 1 18 doi 10 18352 lq 10280 S2CID 164265611 Retrieved 30 August 2022 DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals doaj org 1 May 2013 Archived from the original on 1 May 2013 Morrison Heather 31 December 2018 Dramatic Growth of Open Access Scholars Portal Dataverse hdl 10864 10660 PMC full journal list download www ncbi nlm nih gov Archived from the original on 7 March 2019 Retrieved 10 March 2019 NLM Catalog www ncbi nlm nih gov Archived from the original on 14 January 2019 Retrieved 10 March 2019 Schroter Sara Tite Leanne 2006 Open access publishing and author pays business models a survey of authors knowledge and perceptions Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 99 3 141 148 doi 10 1177 014107680609900316 PMC 1383760 PMID 16508053 Eve Martin Paul Introduction or why open access Chapter 1 Open Access and the Humanities Cambridge Core pp 1 42 doi 10 1017 CBO9781316161012 003 ISBN 9781107097896 Retrieved 30 December 2020 Farquharson Jamie Ian Wadsworth Fabian B 31 July 2018 Introducing Volcanica The first diamond open access journal for volcanology Volcanica 1 1 i ix doi 10 30909 vol 01 01 i ix ISSN 2610 3540 S2CID 159022081 a b Gadd Elizabeth Troll Covey Denise 1 March 2019 What does green open access mean Tracking twelve years of changes to journal publisher self archiving policies Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 51 1 106 122 doi 10 1177 0961000616657406 ISSN 0961 0006 S2CID 34955879 Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 28 August 2019 Laakso Mikael Bjork Bo Christer 2016 Hybrid open access A longitudinal study Journal of Informetrics 10 4 919 932 doi 10 1016 j joi 2016 08 002 Suber 2012 pp 140 141 Suber 2012 p 140 Trust Wellcome 23 March 2016 Wellcome Trust and COAF Open Access Spend 2014 15 Wellcome Trust Blog Archived from the original on 27 October 2019 Retrieved 27 October 2019 a b Open access double dipping policy Cambridge Core Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 12 March 2018 Piwowar Heather Priem Jason Lariviere Vincent Alperin Juan Pablo Matthias Lisa Norlander Bree Farley Ashley West Jevin Haustein Stefanie 13 February 2018 The state of OA a large scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles PeerJ 6 e4375 doi 10 7717 peerj 4375 PMC 5815332 PMID 29456894 a b c d Fuchs Christian Sandoval Marisol 2013 The diamond model of open access publishing Why policy makers scholars universities libraries labour unions and the publishing world need to take non commercial non profit open access serious TripleC 13 2 428 443 doi 10 31269 triplec v11i2 502 a b c Gajovic S 31 August 2017 Diamond Open Access in the quest for interdisciplinarity and excellence Croatian Medical Journal 58 4 261 262 doi 10 3325 cmj 2017 58 261 PMC 5577648 PMID 28857518 a b Bosman Jeroen Frantsvag Jan Erik Kramer Bianca Langlais Pierre Carl Proudman Vanessa 9 March 2021 OA Diamond Journals Study Part 1 Findings Report doi 10 5281 zenodo 4558704 Machovec George 2013 An Interview with Jeffrey Beall on Open Access Publishing The Charleston Advisor 15 50 doi 10 5260 chara 15 1 50 Ochsner A 2013 Publishing Companies Publishing Fees and Open Access Journals Introduction to Scientific Publishing SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology pp 23 29 doi 10 1007 978 3 642 38646 6 4 ISBN 978 3 642 38645 9 Normand Stephanie 4 April 2018 Is Diamond Open Access the Future of Open Access The IJournal Graduate Student Journal of the Faculty of Information 3 2 ISSN 2561 7397 Archived from the original on 29 May 2020 Retrieved 25 June 2019 Rosenblum Brian Greenberg Marc Bolick Josh Emmett Ada Peterson A Townsend 17 June 2016 Subsidizing truly open access Science 352 6292 1405 Bibcode 2016Sci 352 1405P doi 10 1126 science aag0946 hdl 1808 20978 ISSN 0036 8075 PMID 27313033 S2CID 206650745 By 1 June 2017 Diamond Open Access Societies and Mission The Scholarly Kitchen Archived from the original on 24 June 2019 Retrieved 25 June 2019 Himmelstein Daniel S Romero Ariel Rodriguez Levernier Jacob G Munro Thomas Anthony McLaughlin Stephen Reid Greshake Tzovaras Bastian Greene Casey S 1 March 2018 Sci Hub provides access to nearly all scholarly literature eLife 7 doi 10 7554 eLife 32822 ISSN 2050 084X PMC 5832410 PMID 29424689 Archived from the original on 21 May 2019 Retrieved 21 May 2019 a b Bjork Bo Christer 2017 Gold green and black open access Learned Publishing 30 2 173 175 doi 10 1002 leap 1096 ISSN 1741 4857 Green Toby 2017 We ve failed Pirate black open access is trumping green and gold and we must change our approach Learned Publishing 30 4 325 329 doi 10 1002 leap 1116 ISSN 1741 4857 Bohannon John 28 April 2016 Who s downloading pirated papers Everyone Science 352 6285 508 12 doi 10 1126 science 352 6285 508 ISSN 0036 8075 PMID 27126020 Archived from the original on 13 May 2019 Retrieved 17 May 2019 Greshake Bastian 21 April 2017 Looking into Pandora s Box The Content of Sci Hub and its Usage F1000Research 6 541 doi 10 12688 f1000research 11366 1 ISSN 2046 1402 PMC 5428489 PMID 28529712 Jamali Hamid R 1 July 2017 Copyright compliance and infringement in ResearchGate full text journal articles Scientometrics 112 1 241 254 doi 10 1007 s11192 017 2291 4 ISSN 1588 2861 S2CID 189875585 Swab Michelle Romme Kristen 1 April 2016 Scholarly Sharing via Twitter icanhazpdf Requests for Health Sciences Literature Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association 37 1 doi 10 5596 c16 009 ISSN 1708 6892 McKenzie Lindsay 27 July 2017 Sci Hub s cache of pirated papers is so big subscription journals are doomed data analyst suggests Science doi 10 1126 science aan7164 ISSN 0036 8075 Archived from the original on 17 May 2019 Retrieved 17 May 2019 a b c Suber Peter 2008 Gratis and Libre Open Access Archived from the original on 10 March 2017 Retrieved 3 December 2011 Suber 2012 pp 68 69 Suber 2012 pp 7 8 Balaji B Dhanamjaya M 2019 Preprints in Scholarly Communication Re Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures Publications 7 6 doi 10 3390 publications7010006 gt Wilkinson Mark D Dumontier Michel Aalbersberg IJsbrand Jan Appleton Gabrielle et al 15 March 2016 The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship Scientific Data 3 160018 Bibcode 2016NatSD 360018W doi 10 1038 sdata 2016 18 OCLC 961158301 PMC 4792175 PMID 26978244 Wilkinson Mark D da Silva Santos Luiz Olavo Bonino Dumontier Michel Velterop Jan Neylon Cameron Mons Barend 1 January 2017 Cloudy increasingly FAIR revisiting the FAIR Data guiding principles for the European Open Science Cloud Information Services amp Use 37 1 49 56 doi 10 3233 ISU 170824 hdl 20 500 11937 53669 ISSN 0167 5265 European Commission embraces the FAIR principles Dutch Techcentre for Life Sciences 20 April 2016 Archived from the original on 20 July 2018 Retrieved 31 July 2019 G20 Leaders Communique Hangzhou Summit europa eu Archived from the original on 31 July 2019 Retrieved 31 July 2019 Hecho En Latinoamerica Acceso Abierto Revistas Academicas e Innovaciones Regionales Archived from the original on 6 August 2020 Retrieved 31 August 2020 Ross Hellauer Tony Schmidt Birgit Kramer Bianca Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea doi 10 7287 peerj preprints 26954v1 S2CID 49319171 a href Template Cite journal html title Template Cite journal cite journal a Cite journal requires journal help Vincent Lamarre Philippe Boivin Jade Gargouri Yassine Lariviere Vincent Harnad Stevan 2016 Estimating Open Access Mandate Effectiveness The MELIBEA Score PDF Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67 11 2815 2828 arXiv 1410 2926 doi 10 1002 asi 23601 S2CID 8144721 Archived PDF from the original on 23 September 2016 Retrieved 28 August 2019 Future of Scholarly Publishing and Scholarly Communication Report of the Expert Group to the European Commission 30 January 2019 ISBN 9789279972386 Archived from the original on 3 June 2019 Retrieved 28 August 2019 Aguado Lopez Eduardo Becerril Garcia Arianna 8 August 2019 AmeliCA before Plan S The Latin American Initiative to develop a cooperative non commercial academic led system of scholarly communication Impact of Social Sciences Archived from the original on 1 November 2019 Retrieved 26 November 2022 Johnson Rob 2019 From Coalition to Commons Plan S and the Future of Scholarly Communication Insights The UKSG Journal 32 doi 10 1629 uksg 453 Pourret Olivier Irawan Dasapta Erwin Tennant Jonathan P Hursthouse Andrew Van Hullebusch Eric D 1 September 2020 The growth of open access publishing in geochemistry Results in Geochemistry 1 100001 doi 10 1016 j ringeo 2020 100001 ISSN 2666 2779 S2CID 219903509 a b c DOAJ Journal metadata doaj org Archived from the original on 27 August 2016 Retrieved 18 May 2019 Matushek Kurt J 2017 Take Another Look at the Instructions for Authors Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 250 3 258 259 doi 10 2460 javma 250 3 258 PMID 28117640 Bachrach S Berry R S Blume M von Foerster T Fowler A Ginsparg P Heller S Kestner N Odlyzko A Okerson A Wigington R Moffat A 1998 Who Should Own Scientific Papers Science 281 5382 1459 60 Bibcode 1998Sci 281 1459B doi 10 1126 science 281 5382 1459 PMID 9750115 S2CID 36290551 Gadd Elizabeth Oppenheim Charles Probets Steve 2003 RoMEO Studies 4 An Analysis of Journal Publishers Copyright Agreements PDF Learned Publishing 16 4 293 308 doi 10 1087 095315103322422053 hdl 10150 105141 S2CID 40861778 Archived PDF from the original on 28 July 2020 Retrieved 9 September 2019 Willinsky John 2002 Copyright Contradictions in Scholarly Publishing First Monday 7 11 doi 10 5210 fm v7i11 1006 S2CID 39334346 Carroll Michael W 2011 Why Full Open Access Matters PLOS Biology 9 11 e1001210 doi 10 1371 journal pbio 1001210 PMC 3226455 PMID 22140361 Davies Mark 2015 Academic Freedom A Lawyer s Perspective PDF Higher Education 70 6 987 1002 doi 10 1007 s10734 015 9884 8 S2CID 144222460 Archived PDF from the original on 23 December 2019 Retrieved 28 August 2019 a b Frosio Giancarlo F 2014 Open Access Publishing A Literature Review SSRN 2697412 Peters Diane Margoni Thomas 10 March 2016 Creative Commons Licenses Empowering Open Access SSRN 2746044 Dodds Francis 2018 The Changing Copyright Landscape in Academic Publishing Learned Publishing 31 3 270 275 doi 10 1002 leap 1157 Archived from the original on 4 February 2020 Retrieved 4 February 2020 Morrison Heather 2017 From the Field Elsevier as an Open Access Publisher The Charleston Advisor 18 3 53 59 doi 10 5260 chara 18 3 53 hdl 10393 35779 a b Pablo Alperin Juan Rozemblum Cecilia 2017 The Reinterpretation of the Visibility and Quality of New Policies to Assess Scientific Publications Revista Interamericana de Bibliotecologia 40 231 241 doi 10 17533 udea rib v40n3a04 W Frass J Cross V Gardner 2013 Open Access Survey Exploring the Views of Taylor amp Francis and Routledge Authors PDF Taylor amp Francis Routledge OA journal business models Open Access Directory 2009 2012 Archived from the original on 18 October 2015 Retrieved 20 October 2015 Jisc supports Subscribe to Open model Jisc 11 March 2020 Retrieved 6 October 2020 Markin Pablo 25 April 2017 The Sustainability of Open Access Publishing Models Past a Tipping Point OpenScience Retrieved 26 April 2017 Socha Beata 20 April 2017 How Much Do Top Publishers Charge for Open Access openscience com Archived from the original on 19 February 2019 Retrieved 26 April 2017 Peter Suber 2012 Open access Cambridge Massachusetts MIT Press ISBN 9780262301732 OCLC 795846161 a b c Walt Crawford 2019 Gold Open Access 2013 2018 Articles in Journals GOA4 PDF Cites amp Insights Books ISBN 978 1 329 54713 1 Archived PDF from the original on 6 May 2019 Retrieved 30 August 2019 Kim Sang Jun Park Kay Sook 2021 Influence of open access journals on the research community in Journal Citation Reports Science Editing 8 32 38 doi 10 6087 kcse 227 S2CID 233380569 An efficient journal The Occasional Pamphlet 6 March 2012 Archived from the original on 18 November 2019 Retrieved 27 October 2019 Article processing charges nature com Nature Communications Archived from the original on 27 October 2019 Retrieved 27 October 2019 Kozak Marcin Hartley James December 2013 Publication fees for open access journals Different disciplines different methods Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 12 2591 2594 doi 10 1002 asi 22972 Bjork Bo Christer Solomon David 2015 Article Processing Charges in OA Journals Relationship between Price and Quality Scientometrics 103 2 373 385 doi 10 1007 s11192 015 1556 z S2CID 15966412 Lawson Stuart 2014 APC Pricing Figshare doi 10 6084 m9 figshare 1056280 v3 a href Template Cite journal html title Template Cite journal cite journal a Cite journal requires journal help Developing an Effective Market for Open Access Article Processing Charges PDF Archived PDF from the original on 3 October 2018 Retrieved 28 August 2019 Schonfelder Nina 2018 APCs Mirroring the Impact Factor or Legacy of the Subscription Based Model Archived from the original on 22 December 2019 Retrieved 28 August 2019 a href Template Cite journal html title Template Cite journal cite journal a Cite journal requires journal help Setting a fee for publication eLife 29 September 2016 Archived from the original on 7 November 2017 Retrieved 27 October 2019 Ubiquity Press www ubiquitypress com Archived from the original on 21 October 2019 Retrieved 27 October 2019 Trust Wellcome 23 March 2016 Wellcome Trust and COAF Open Access Spend 2014 15 Wellcome Trust Blog Archived from the original on 27 October 2019 Retrieved 27 October 2019 a b Schimmer Ralf Geschuhn Kai Karin Vogler Andreas 2015 Disrupting the Subscription Journals Business Model for the Necessary Large Scale Transformation to Open Access doi 10 17617 1 3 a href Template Cite journal html title Template Cite journal cite journal a Cite journal requires journal help a b c d e f g h Vanholsbeeck Marc Thacker Paul Sattler Susanne Ross Hellauer Tony Rivera Lopez Barbara S Rice Curt Nobes Andy Masuzzo Paola Martin Ryan Kramer Bianca Havemann Johanna Enkhbayar Asura Davila Jacinto Crick Tom Crane Harry Tennant Jonathan P 11 March 2019 Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing Publications 7 2 34 doi 10 3390 publications7020034 Bjork B C 2017 Growth of Hybrid Open Access PeerJ 5 e3878 doi 10 7717 peerj 3878 PMC 5624290 PMID 28975059 Pinfield Stephen Salter Jennifer Bath Peter A 2016 The Total Cost of Publication in a Hybrid Open Access Environment Institutional Approaches to Funding Journal Article Processing Charges in Combination with Subscriptions PDF Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67 7 1751 1766 doi 10 1002 asi 23446 S2CID 17356533 Archived PDF from the original on 5 June 2019 Retrieved 9 September 2019 Green Toby 2019 Is Open Access Affordable Why Current Models Do Not Work and Why We Need Internet Era Transformation of Scholarly Communications Learned Publishing 32 13 25 doi 10 1002 leap 1219 S2CID 67869151 Pourret Olivier Hedding David William Ibarra Daniel Enrique Irawan Dasapta Erwin Liu Haiyan Tennant Jonathan Peter 10 June 2021 International disparities in open access practices in the Earth Sciences European Science Editing 47 e63663 doi 10 3897 ese 2021 e63663 ISSN 2518 3354 S2CID 236300530 Koroso Nesru H 18 November 2015 Diamond Open Access UA Magazine UA Magazine Archived from the original on 18 November 2018 Retrieved 11 May 2018 a b c Suber Peter 2 November 2006 No fee open access journals SPARC open access Newsletter Archived from the original on 8 December 2008 Retrieved 14 December 2008 Montgomery Lucy 2014 Knowledge Unlatched A Global Library Consortium Model for Funding Open Access Scholarly Books Cultural Science 7 2 hdl 20 500 11937 12680 DOAJ search Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 30 June 2019 Wilson Mark 20 June 2018 Introducing the Free Journal Network community controlled open access publishing Impact of Social Sciences Archived from the original on 24 April 2019 Retrieved 17 May 2019 Is the EU s open access plan a tremor or an earthquake Science Business Archived from the original on 17 May 2019 Retrieved 17 May 2019 a b Bastian Hilda 2 April 2018 A Reality Check on Author Access to Open Access Publishing Absolutely Maybe Archived from the original on 22 December 2019 Retrieved 27 October 2019 Crotty David 26 August 2015 Is it True that Most Open Access Journals Do Not Charge an APC Sort of It Depends The Scholarly Kitchen Archived from the original on 12 December 2019 Retrieved 27 October 2019 Ginsparg P 2016 Preprint Deja Vu The EMBO Journal 35 24 2620 2625 doi 10 15252 embj 201695531 PMC 5167339 PMID 27760783 Tennant Jonathan Bauin Serge James Sarah Kant Juliane 2018 The Evolving Preprint Landscape Introductory Report for the Knowledge Exchange Working Group on Preprints doi 10 17605 OSF IO 796TU a href Template Cite journal html title Template Cite journal cite journal a Cite journal requires journal help Neylon Cameron Pattinson Damian Bilder Geoffrey Lin Jennifer 2017 On the Origin of Nonequivalent States How We Can Talk about Preprints F1000Research 6 608 doi 10 12688 f1000research 11408 1 PMC 5461893 PMID 28620459 Balaji B Dhanamjaya M 2019 Preprints in Scholarly Communication Re Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures Publications 7 6 doi 10 3390 publications7010006 Bourne Philip E Polka Jessica K Vale Ronald D Kiley Robert 2017 Ten simple rules to consider regarding preprint submission PLOS Computational Biology 13 5 e1005473 Bibcode 2017PLSCB 13E5473B doi 10 1371 journal pcbi 1005473 PMC 5417409 PMID 28472041 a b Sarabipour Sarvenaz Debat Humberto J Emmott Edward Burgess Steven J Schwessinger Benjamin Hensel Zach 2019 On the Value of Preprints An Early Career Researcher Perspective PLOS Biology 17 2 e3000151 doi 10 1371 journal pbio 3000151 PMC 6400415 PMID 30789895 Powell Kendall 2016 Does It Take Too Long to Publish Research Nature 530 7589 148 151 Bibcode 2016Natur 530 148P doi 10 1038 530148a PMID 26863966 S2CID 1013588 Crick Tom Hall Benjamin A Ishtiaq Samin 2017 Reproducibility in Research Systems Infrastructure Culture Journal of Open Research Software 5 32 doi 10 5334 jors 73 Gadd Elizabeth Troll Covey Denise 2019 What Does Green Open Access Mean Tracking Twelve Years of Changes to Journal Publisher Self Archiving Policies Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 51 106 122 doi 10 1177 0961000616657406 S2CID 34955879 Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 28 August 2019 Journal embargo finder www elsevier com Archived from the original on 18 May 2019 Retrieved 17 May 2019 Laakso Mikael 1 May 2014 Green open access policies of scholarly journal publishers a study of what when and where self archiving is allowed Scientometrics 99 2 475 494 doi 10 1007 s11192 013 1205 3 hdl 10138 157660 ISSN 1588 2861 S2CID 8225450 Harnad Stevan 2015 Holbrook J Britt Mitcham Carl eds Stevan Harnad J Britt Holbrook Carl Mitcham Open access what where when how and why Ethics Science Technology and Engineering An International Resource Macmillan Reference archived from the original on 5 August 2020 retrieved 6 January 2020 Laakso Mikael Bjork Bo Christer 2013 Delayed open access An overlooked high impact category of openly available scientific literature Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 7 1323 1329 doi 10 1002 asi 22856 hdl 10138 157658 Bjork Bo Christer Roos Annikki Lauri Mari 2009 Scientific Journal Publishing Yearly Volume and Open Access Availability Information Research An International Electronic Journal 14 1 ISSN 1368 1613 Archived from the original on 5 August 2020 Retrieved 6 January 2020 Swan Alma Brown Sheridan May 2005 Open Access Self Archiving An Author Study Departmental Technical Report UK FE and HE Funding Councils Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 28 August 2019 Ottaviani Jim 22 August 2016 Bornmann Lutz ed The Post Embargo Open Access Citation Advantage It Exists Probably It s Modest Usually and the Rich Get Richer of Course PLOS ONE 11 8 e0159614 Bibcode 2016PLoSO 1159614O doi 10 1371 journal pone 0159614 ISSN 1932 6203 PMC 4993511 PMID 27548723 Suber Peter 2014 The evidence fails to justify publishers demand for longer embargo periods on publicly funded research LSA impact blog Archived from the original on 4 March 2020 Retrieved 6 January 2020 Global scientific community commits to sharing data on Zika wellcome ac uk Wellcome Archived from the original on 21 December 2019 Retrieved 6 January 2020 About Medical Journal of Australia Australasian Medical Publishing Company Archived from the original on 5 April 2019 Retrieved 12 June 2019 a b c Suber 2012 pp 29 43 The Life and Death of an Open Access Journal Q amp A with Librarian Marcus Banks 31 March 2015 Archived from the original on 24 May 2018 Retrieved 23 May 2018 As the BOAI text expressed it the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination Gold open access in practice How will universities respond to the rising total cost of publication 25 March 2015 Archived from the original on 1 January 2016 Retrieved 23 May 2018 Reasoning and Interest Clustering Open Access LePublikateur LePublikateur 4 June 2018 Archived from the original on 18 October 2018 Retrieved 5 June 2018 Tennant Jonathan P Waldner Francois Jacques Damien C Masuzzo Paola Collister Lauren B Hartgerink Chris H J 21 September 2016 The academic economic and societal impacts of Open Access an evidence based review F1000Research 5 632 doi 10 12688 f1000research 8460 3 PMC 4837983 PMID 27158456 Sivaraj S et al 2008 Resource Sharing among Engineering College Libraries in Tamil Nadu in a Networking System Archived 24 December 2012 at the Wayback Machine Library Philosophy and Practice Developing World Access to Leading Research Archived 1 December 2013 at the Wayback Machine research4life org Retrieved on 19 November 2012 Van Orsdel Lee C amp Born Kathleen 2005 Periodicals Price Survey 2005 Choosing Sides Library Journal 15 April 2005 Archived from the original on 30 June 2017 Retrieved 18 October 2017 Hardisty David J Haaga David A F 2008 Diffusion of Treatment Research Does Open Access Matter PDF Journal of Clinical Psychology 64 7 821 839 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 487 5198 doi 10 1002 jclp 20492 PMID 18425790 Archived from the original PDF on 28 May 2008 Retrieved 22 April 2008 DFID Research DFID s Policy Opens up a World of Global Research dfid gov uk Archived from the original on 3 January 2013 How To Integrate University and Funder Open Access Mandates Archived 16 March 2008 at the Wayback Machine Openaccess eprints org 2 March 2008 Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Libbenga Jan 11 May 2005 Dutch academics declare research free for all Archived 15 July 2017 at the Wayback Machine Theregister co uk Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Portal NARCIS Archived 5 November 2010 at the Wayback Machine Narcis info Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Open and closed access scholarly publications in NARCIS per year of publication NARCIS Archived from the original on 26 April 2019 Retrieved 26 February 2019 Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions COAPI SPARC arl org Archived from the original on 18 October 2015 Retrieved 20 October 2015 Good practices for university open access policies Harvard Archived from the original on 5 October 2016 Retrieved 4 October 2016 Baldwin Julie Pinfield Stephen 13 July 2018 The UK Scholarly Communication Licence Attempting to Cut through the Gordian Knot of the Complexities of Funder Mandates Publisher Embargoes and Researcher Caution in Achieving Open Access Publications 6 3 31 doi 10 3390 publications6030031 About the AOASG Australian Open Access Support Group 5 February 2013 Archived from the original on 20 December 2014 Australian Open Access Support Group expands to become Australasian Open Access Support Group 17 August 2015 Archived from the original on 17 November 2015 Creative Commons Australia partners with Australasian Open Access Strategy Group Creative Commons Australia 31 August 2016 Suber Peter 2003 Removing the Barriers to Research An Introduction to Open Access for Librarians College amp Research Libraries News 62 2 92 94 113 doi 10 5860 crln 64 2 92 Archived from the original on 20 June 2018 Retrieved 20 June 2018 IFLA Statement on Open Access 2011 IFLA 6 March 2019 Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 ALA Scholarly Communication Toolkit Archived 8 September 2005 at the Wayback Machine Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition Archived 15 August 2013 at the Wayback Machine Arl org Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Open Access for Scholarly Publishing Archived 19 May 2014 at the Wayback Machine Southern Cross University Library Retrieved on 14 March 2014 CARL Institutional Repositories Program Archived 7 June 2013 at the Wayback Machine Carl abrc ca Retrieved on 12 June 2013 Lippincott Sarah 5 July 2016 The Library Publishing Coalition organizing libraries to enhance scholarly publishing Insights 29 2 186 191 doi 10 1629 uksg 296 ISSN 2048 7754 Archived from the original on 21 July 2018 Retrieved 2 September 2019 Kopfstein Janus 13 March 2013 Aaron Swartz to receive posthumous Freedom of Information award for open access advocacy The Verge Archived from the original on 15 March 2013 Retrieved 24 March 2013 James Madison Award Ala org 17 January 2013 Archived from the original on 22 March 2013 Retrieved 24 March 2013 Brandom Russell 26 March 2013 Entire library journal editorial board resigns citing crisis of conscience after death of Aaron Swartz The Verge Archived from the original on 31 December 2013 Retrieved 1 January 2014 New Jake 27 March 2013 Journal s Editorial Board Resigns in Protest of Publisher s Policy Toward Authors The Chronicle of Higher Education Archived from the original on 8 January 2014 Bourg Chris 23 March 2013 My short stint on the JLA Editorial Board Feral Librarian Archived from the original on 24 August 2014 It was just days after Aaron Swartz death and I was having a crisis of conscience about publishing in a journal that was not open access Poynder Richard 2009 The Open Access Interviews Helene Bosc PDF Archived PDF from the original on 23 October 2013 Open Access to scientific communication Open access infodocs eu Retrieved on 3 December 2011 ATA The Alliance for Taxpayer Access Archived 27 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine Taxpayeraccess org 29 October 2011 Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Open Access Basics and Benefits Eprints rclis org Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Eysenbach Gunther 2006 The Open Access Advantage J Med Internet Res 8 2 e8 doi 10 2196 jmir 8 2 e8 PMC 1550699 PMID 16867971 a b c Davis Philip M 2010 Does open access lead to increased readership and citations A randomized controlled trial of articles published in APS journals The Physiologist 53 6 197 200 201 ISSN 0031 9376 PMID 21473414 Goodman D 2004 The Criteria for Open Access Serials Review 30 4 258 270 doi 10 1016 j serrev 2004 09 009 hdl 10760 6167 World Health Organization Archived 27 January 2012 at the Wayback Machine Health InterNetwork Access to Research Initiative a b World Health Organization Archived 22 April 2009 at the Wayback Machine Eligibility Scientific Electronic Library Online Archived 31 August 2005 at the Wayback Machine SciELO Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Pearce J M 2012 The case for open source appropriate technology Environment Development and Sustainability 14 3 425 431 doi 10 1007 s10668 012 9337 9 A J Buitenhuis et al Open Design Based Strategies to Enhance Appropriate Technology Development Proceedings of the 14th Annual National Collegiate Inventors and Innovators Alliance Conference Open 25 27 March 2010 pp 1 12 a b Piwowar Heather Priem Jason Lariviere Vincent Alperin Juan Pablo Matthias Lisa Norlander Bree Farley Ashley West Jevin Haustein Stefanie 13 February 2018 The state of OA a large scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles PeerJ 6 e4375 doi 10 7717 peerj 4375 ISSN 2167 8359 PMC 5815332 PMID 29456894 a b Bjork B C Welling P Laakso M Majlender P Hedlund T Gudnason G N 2010 Scalas Enrico ed Open Access to the Scientific Journal Literature Situation 2009 PLOS ONE 5 6 e11273 Bibcode 2010PLoSO 511273B doi 10 1371 journal pone 0011273 PMC 2890572 PMID 20585653 Cummings J 2013 Open access journal content found in commercial full text aggregation databases and journal citation reports New Library World 114 3 4 166 178 doi 10 1108 03074801311304078 hdl 2376 4903 Open access to research publications reaching tipping point Press Releases europa eu Archived from the original on 24 August 2013 Retrieved 25 August 2013 Proportion of Open Access Peer Reviewed Papers at the European and World Levels 2004 2011 PDF Science Metrix August 2013 Archived PDF from the original on 3 September 2013 Retrieved 25 August 2013 Van Noorden Richard 2013 Half of 2011 papers now free to read Nature 500 7463 386 7 Bibcode 2013Natur 500 386V doi 10 1038 500386a PMID 23969438 Area wide transition to open access is possible A new study calculates a redeployment of funds in Open Access www mpg de en Max Planck Gesellschaft 27 April 2015 Archived from the original on 16 June 2017 Retrieved 12 May 2017 Bjork Bo Christer 2011 A Study of Innovative Features in Scholarly Open Access Journals Journal of Medical Internet Research 13 4 e115 doi 10 2196 jmir 1802 PMC 3278101 PMID 22173122 a b Directory of Open Access Journals Directory of Open Access Journals Archived from the original on 27 August 2016 Retrieved 26 February 2019 Chun Kai Karl Huang Cameron Neylon Richard Hosking Lucy Montgomery Katie S Wilson Alkim Ozaygen Chloe Brookes Kenworthy 14 September 2020 Meta Research Evaluating the impact of open access policies on research institutions eLife 9 doi 10 7554 ELIFE 57067 ISSN 2050 084X PMC 7536542 PMID 32924933 Wikidata Q99410785 Institutions open access over time Evolution of green and gold OA storage googleapis com Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative Retrieved 13 October 2021 Piwowar H Priem J Lariviere V Alperin J P Matthias L Norlander B Farley A West J Haustein S 2018 The state of OA A large scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles PeerJ 6 e4375 doi 10 7717 peerj 4375 PMC 5815332 PMID 29456894 a b Registry of Open Access Repositories ROAR Archived 30 October 2012 at the Wayback Machine Roar eprints org Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Browse by Repository Type Registry of Open Access Repositories Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 26 February 2019 a b McKiernan Erin C Bourne Philip E Brown C Titus Buck Stuart Kenall Amye Lin Jennifer McDougall Damon Nosek Brian A Ram Karthik Soderberg Courtney K Spies Jeffrey R 7 July 2016 Rodgers Peter ed How open science helps researchers succeed eLife 5 e16800 doi 10 7554 eLife 16800 ISSN 2050 084X PMC 4973366 PMID 27387362 a b c d Wang Xianwen Liu Chen Mao Wenli Fang Zhichao 1 May 2015 The open access advantage considering citation article usage and social media attention Scientometrics 103 2 555 564 arXiv 1503 05702 Bibcode 2015arXiv150305702W doi 10 1007 s11192 015 1547 0 ISSN 1588 2861 S2CID 14827780 a b Davis Philip M 30 March 2011 Open access readership citations a randomized controlled trial of scientific journal publishing The FASEB Journal 25 7 2129 2134 doi 10 1096 fj 11 183988 ISSN 0892 6638 PMID 21450907 S2CID 205367842 a b Davis Philip M Lewenstein Bruce V Simon Daniel H Booth James G Connolly Mathew J L 31 July 2008 Open access publishing article downloads and citations randomised controlled trial BMJ 337 a568 doi 10 1136 bmj a568 ISSN 0959 8138 PMC 2492576 PMID 18669565 a b c d Adie Euan 24 October 2014 Attention A study of open access vs non open access articles Figshare doi 10 6084 m9 figshare 1213690 v1 S2CID 155854134 Archived from the original on 3 January 2020 Retrieved 3 January 2020 Maximising the Return on the UK s Public Investment in Research Open Access Archivangelism Archived 2 July 2017 at the Wayback Machine Openaccess eprints org 14 September 2005 Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Garfield E 1988 Can Researchers Bank on Citation Analysis Archived 25 October 2005 at the Wayback Machine Current Comments No 44 31 October 1988 Committee on Electronic Information and Communication CEIC of the International Mathematical Union 15 May 2001 Call to All Mathematicians Archived from the original on 7 June 2011 a b Davis P M 2011 Open access readership citations a randomized controlled trial of scientific journal publishing The FASEB Journal 25 7 2129 34 doi 10 1096 fj 11 183988 PMID 21450907 S2CID 205367842 a b ElSabry ElHassan 1 August 2017 Who needs access to research Exploring the societal impact of open access Revue francaise des sciences de l information et de la communication 11 doi 10 4000 rfsic 3271 ISSN 2263 0856 Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 3 January 2020 Gentil Beccot Anne Mele Salvatore Brooks Travis 2009 Citing and Reading Behaviours in High Energy Physics How a Community Stopped Worrying about Journals and Learned to Love Repositories arXiv 0906 5418 cs DL Swan Alma 2006 The culture of Open Access researchers views and responses Archived 22 May 2012 at the Wayback Machine In Neil Jacobs Ed Open access key strategic technical and economic aspects Chandos Piwowar Heather Priem Jason Lariviere Vincent Alperin Juan Pablo Matthias Lisa Norlander Bree Farley Ashley West Jevin Haustein Stefanie 13 February 2018 The state of OA a large scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles PeerJ 6 e4375 doi 10 7717 peerj 4375 ISSN 2167 8359 PMC 5815332 PMID 29456894 Swan Alma 2010 The Open Access citation advantage Studies and results to date eprints soton ac uk Alma Swan Archived from the original on 3 January 2020 Retrieved 3 January 2020 a b Tennant Jonathan P Waldner Francois Jacques Damien C Masuzzo Paola Collister Lauren B Hartgerink Chris H J 21 September 2016 The academic economic and societal impacts of Open Access an evidence based review F1000Research 5 632 doi 10 12688 f1000research 8460 3 ISSN 2046 1402 PMC 4837983 PMID 27158456 a b c d Clayson Peter E Baldwin Scott A Larson Michael J 1 June 2021 The open access advantage for studies of human electrophysiology Impact on citations and Altmetrics International Journal of Psychophysiology 164 103 111 doi 10 1016 j ijpsycho 2021 03 006 ISSN 0167 8760 PMID 33774077 S2CID 232409668 Online or Invisible Steve Lawrence NEC Research Institute Archived 16 March 2007 at the Wayback Machine Citeseer ist psu edu Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Davis P M Lewenstein B V Simon D H Booth J G Connolly M J L 2008 Open access publishing article downloads and citations randomised controlled trial BMJ 337 a568 doi 10 1136 bmj a568 PMC 2492576 PMID 18669565 Effect of OA on citation impact a bibliography of studies Archived 2 November 2017 at the Wayback Machine Opcit eprints org Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Swan Alma 2010 The Open Access citation advantage Studies and results to date eprints soton ac uk Alma Swan Archived from the original on 3 January 2020 Eysenbach Gunther 16 May 2006 Tenopir Carol ed Citation Advantage of Open Access Articles PLOS Biology 4 5 e157 doi 10 1371 journal pbio 0040157 ISSN 1545 7885 PMC 1459247 PMID 16683865 Bjork Bo Christer Solomon David 17 July 2012 Open access versus subscription journals a comparison of scientific impact BMC Medicine 10 1 73 doi 10 1186 1741 7015 10 73 ISSN 1741 7015 PMC 3398850 PMID 22805105 a b Teplitskiy M Lu G Duede E 2016 Amplifying the impact of open access Wikipedia and the diffusion of science Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 68 9 2116 arXiv 1506 07608 doi 10 1002 asi 23687 S2CID 10220883 Shema Hadas Bar Ilan Judit Thelwall Mike 15 January 2014 Do blog citations correlate with a higher number of future citations Research blogs as a potential source for alternative metrics Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 65 5 1018 1027 doi 10 1002 asi 23037 ISSN 2330 1635 S2CID 31571840 Alhoori Hamed Ray Choudhury Sagnik Kanan Tarek Fox Edward Furuta Richard Giles C Lee 15 March 2015 On the Relationship between Open Access and Altmetrics IConference 2015 Proceedings Archived from the original on 3 January 2020 Retrieved 3 January 2020 Gargouri Yassine Hajjem Chawki Lariviere Vincent Gingras Yves Carr Les Brody Tim Harnad Stevan 2018 The Journal Impact Factor A Brief History Critique and Discussion of Adverse Effects arXiv 1801 08992 Bibcode 2018arXiv180108992L a href Template Cite journal html title Template Cite journal cite journal a Cite journal requires journal help Curry Stephen 2018 Let s Move beyond the Rhetoric It s Time to Change How We Judge Research Nature 554 7691 147 Bibcode 2018Natur 554 147C doi 10 1038 d41586 018 01642 w PMID 29420505 Chua SK Qureshi Ahmad M Krishnan Vijay Pai Dinker R Kamal Laila B Gunasegaran Sharmilla Afzal MZ Ambawatta Lahiru Gan JY Kew PY Winn Than 2 March 2017 The impact factor of an open access journal does not contribute to an article s citations F1000Research 6 208 doi 10 12688 f1000research 10892 1 ISSN 2046 1402 PMC 5464220 PMID 28649365 Csiszar Alex 2016 Peer Review Troubled from the Start Nature 532 7599 306 308 Bibcode 2016Natur 532 306C doi 10 1038 532306a PMID 27111616 Moxham Noah Fyfe Aileen 2018 The Royal Society and the Prehistory of Peer Review 1665 1965 PDF The Historical Journal 61 4 863 889 doi 10 1017 S0018246X17000334 S2CID 164984479 Archived PDF from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 28 August 2019 Tennant Jonathan P Dugan Jonathan M Graziotin Daniel Jacques Damien C Waldner Francois Mietchen Daniel Elkhatib Yehia B Collister Lauren Pikas Christina K Crick Tom Masuzzo Paola 29 November 2017 A multi disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review F1000Research 6 1151 doi 10 12688 f1000research 12037 3 ISSN 2046 1402 PMC 5686505 PMID 29188015 Tennant Jonathan P 1 October 2018 The state of the art in peer review FEMS Microbiology Letters 365 19 doi 10 1093 femsle fny204 ISSN 0378 1097 PMC 6140953 PMID 30137294 Archived from the original on 24 February 2020 Retrieved 3 January 2020 Noorden Richard Van 4 March 2019 Peer review experiments tracked in online repository Nature doi 10 1038 d41586 019 00777 8 S2CID 86845470 Archived from the original on 12 December 2019 Retrieved 3 January 2020 Penfold Naomi C Polka Jessica K 10 September 2019 Technical and social issues influencing the adoption of preprints in the life sciences PLOS Genetics 16 4 e1008565 doi 10 7287 peerj preprints 27954v1 PMC 7170218 PMID 32310942 Nosek Brian A Ebersole Charles R DeHaven Alexander C Mellor David T 12 March 2018 The preregistration revolution Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115 11 2600 2606 Bibcode 2018PNAS 115 2600N doi 10 1073 pnas 1708274114 ISSN 0027 8424 PMC 5856500 PMID 29531091 a b c Ross Hellauer Tony 31 August 2017 What is open peer review A systematic review F1000Research 6 588 doi 10 12688 f1000research 11369 2 ISSN 2046 1402 PMC 5437951 PMID 28580134 Munafo Marcus R Nosek Brian A Bishop Dorothy V M Button Katherine S Chambers Christopher D Percie du Sert Nathalie Simonsohn Uri Wagenmakers Eric Jan Ware Jennifer J Ioannidis John P A 10 January 2017 A manifesto for reproducible science Nature Human Behaviour 1 1 0021 doi 10 1038 s41562 016 0021 ISSN 2397 3374 PMC 7610724 PMID 33954258 Pawlik Mateusz Hutter Thomas Kocher Daniel Mann Willi Augsten Nikolaus 1 July 2019 A Link is not Enough Reproducibility of Data Datenbank Spektrum 19 2 107 115 doi 10 1007 s13222 019 00317 8 ISSN 1610 1995 PMC 6647556 PMID 31402850 Munafo Marcus R Nosek Brian A Bishop Dorothy V M Button Katherine S Chambers Christopher D Percie Du Sert Nathalie Simonsohn Uri Wagenmakers Eric Jan Ware Jennifer J Ioannidis John P A 2017 A Manifesto for Reproducible Science Nature Human Behaviour 1 0021 doi 10 1038 s41562 016 0021 PMC 7610724 PMID 33954258 Archived from the original on 31 August 2020 Retrieved 25 September 2019 Bowman Nicholas David Keene Justin Robert 2018 A Layered Framework for Considering Open Science Practices Communication Research Reports 35 4 363 372 doi 10 1080 08824096 2018 1513273 McKiernan E C Bourne P E Brown C T Buck S Kenall A Lin J McDougall D Nosek B A Ram K Soderberg C K Spies J R Thaney K Updegrove A Woo K H Yarkoni T 2016 Point of View How Open Science Helps Researchers Succeed eLife 5 doi 10 7554 eLife 16800 PMC 4973366 PMID 27387362 Wicherts Jelte M 29 January 2016 Peer Review Quality and Transparency of the Peer Review Process in Open Access and Subscription Journals PLOS ONE 11 1 e0147913 Bibcode 2016PLoSO 1147913W doi 10 1371 journal pone 0147913 ISSN 1932 6203 PMC 4732690 PMID 26824759 Brembs Bjorn 12 February 2019 Reliable novelty New should not trump true PLOS Biology 17 2 e3000117 doi 10 1371 journal pbio 3000117 ISSN 1545 7885 PMC 6372144 PMID 30753184 Spezi Valerie Wakeling Simon Pinfield Stephen Creaser Claire Fry Jenny Willett Peter 13 March 2017 Open access mega journals Journal of Documentation 73 2 263 283 doi 10 1108 JD 06 2016 0082 ISSN 0022 0418 Pourret Olivier Irawan Dasapta Erwin Tennant Jonathan P Wien Charlotte Dorch Bertil F 15 June 2020 Comments on Factors affecting global flow of scientific knowledge in environmental sciences by Sonne et al 2020 Science of the Total Environment 721 136454 Bibcode 2020ScTEn 721m6454P doi 10 1016 j scitotenv 2019 136454 ISSN 0048 9697 PMID 31924309 S2CID 210150077 Grudniewicz Agnes Moher David Cobey Kelly D Bryson Gregory L Cukier Samantha Allen Kristiann Ardern Clare Balcom Lesley Barros Tiago Berger Monica Ciro Jairo Buitrago 12 December 2019 Predatory journals no definition no defence Nature 576 7786 210 212 Bibcode 2019Natur 576 210G doi 10 1038 d41586 019 03759 y ISSN 0028 0836 PMID 31827288 S2CID 209168864 Dadkhah Mehdi Borchardt Glenn 1 June 2016 Hijacked Journals An Emerging Challenge for Scholarly Publishing Aesthetic Surgery Journal 36 6 739 741 doi 10 1093 asj sjw026 ISSN 1090 820X PMID 26906349 Archived from the original on 8 June 2019 Retrieved 5 January 2020 Dadkhah Mehdi Maliszewski Tomasz Teixeira da Silva Jaime A 24 June 2016 Hijacked journals hijacked web sites journal phishing misleading metrics and predatory publishing actual and potential threats to academic integrity and publishing ethics Forensic Science Medicine and Pathology 12 3 353 362 doi 10 1007 s12024 016 9785 x ISSN 1547 769X PMID 27342770 S2CID 38963478 Shen Cenyu Bjork Bo Christer 2015 Predatory Open Access A Longitudinal Study of Article Volumes and Market Characteristics BMC Medicine 13 230 doi 10 1186 s12916 015 0469 2 PMC 4589914 PMID 26423063 Perlin Marcelo S Imasato Takeyoshi Borenstein Denis 2018 Is Predatory Publishing a Real Threat Evidence from a Large Database Study Scientometrics 116 255 273 doi 10 1007 s11192 018 2750 6 hdl 10183 182710 S2CID 4998464 Bohannon John 2013 Who s Afraid of Peer Review Science 342 6154 60 65 Bibcode 2013Sci 342 60B doi 10 1126 science 342 6154 60 PMID 24092725 Olivarez Joseph Bales Stephen Sare Laura Vanduinkerken Wyoma 2018 Format Aside Applying Beall s Criteria to Assess the Predatory Nature of Both OA and Non OA Library and Information Science Journals College amp Research Libraries 79 doi 10 5860 crl 79 1 52 Shamseer Larissa Moher David Maduekwe Onyi Turner Lucy Barbour Virginia Burch Rebecca Clark Jocalyn Galipeau James Roberts Jason Shea Beverley J 2017 Potential Predatory and Legitimate Biomedical Journals Can You Tell the Difference A Cross Sectional Comparison BMC Medicine 15 1 28 doi 10 1186 s12916 017 0785 9 PMC 5353955 PMID 28298236 Eisen Michael 3 October 2013 I confess I wrote the Arsenic DNA paper to expose flaws in peer review at subscription based journals www michaeleisen org Archived from the original on 24 September 2018 Retrieved 5 January 2020 Silver Andrew 2017 Pay to View Blacklist of Predatory Journals Set to Launch Nature doi 10 1038 nature 2017 22090 Strinzel Michaela Severin Anna Milzow Katrin Egger Matthias 2019 Blacklists and Whitelists to Tackle Predatory Publishing A Cross Sectional Comparison and Thematic Analysis mBio 10 3 doi 10 7287 peerj preprints 27532v1 PMC 6550518 PMID 31164459 Polka Jessica K Kiley Robert Konforti Boyana Stern Bodo Vale Ronald D 2018 Publish Peer Reviews Nature 560 7720 545 547 Bibcode 2018Natur 560 545P doi 10 1038 d41586 018 06032 w PMID 30158621 Hull Duncan 15 February 2012 The Open Access Irony Awards Naming and shaming them O Really Duncan Green 7 August 2013 Whatever happened to the Academic Spring Or the irony of hiding papers on transparency and accountability behind a paywall From Poverty to Power a b Marwick Ben 29 October 2020 Open Access to Publications to Expand Participation in Archaeology Norwegian Archaeological Review 53 2 163 169 doi 10 1080 00293652 2020 1837233 S2CID 228961066 Schultz Teresa Auch 2 March 2018 Practicing What You Preach Evaluating Access of Open Access Research The Journal of Electronic Publishing 21 1 doi 10 3998 3336451 0021 103 Eve Martin Paul 21 October 2013 How ironic are the open access irony awards Martin Paul Eve Browse by Year roar eprints org Registry of Open Access Repositories Archived from the original on 24 March 2019 Retrieved 10 March 2019 Peiperl Larry 16 April 2018 Preprints in medical research Progress and principles PLOS Medicine 15 4 e1002563 doi 10 1371 journal pmed 1002563 ISSN 1549 1676 PMC 5901682 PMID 29659580 Elmore Susan A 2018 Preprints What Role do These Have in Communicating Scientific Results Toxicologic Pathology 46 4 364 365 doi 10 1177 0192623318767322 PMC 5999550 PMID 29628000 A List of Preprint Servers Research Preprints 9 March 2017 Archived from the original on 9 March 2019 Retrieved 10 March 2019 Eve Martin 2014 Open access and the humanities Cambridge Cambridge University Press pp 9 10 ISBN 9781107484016 Harnad S 2007 The Green Road to Open Access A Leveraged Transition Archived 12 March 2010 at the Wayback Machine In The Culture of Periodicals from the Perspective of the Electronic Age pp 99 105 L Harmattan Retrieved 3 December 2011 Harnad S Brody T Vallieres F O Carr L Hitchcock S Gingras Y Oppenheim C Stamerjohanns H Hilf E R 2004 The Access Impact Problem and the Green and Gold Roads to Open Access Serials Review 30 4 310 314 doi 10 1016 j serrev 2004 09 013 Fortier Rose James Heather G Jerme Martha G Berge Patricia Del Toro Rosemary 14 May 2015 Demystifying Open Access Workshop e Publications Marquette e Publications Marquette Archived from the original on 18 May 2015 Retrieved 18 May 2015 SPARC Europe Embargo Periods Archived 18 November 2015 at the Wayback Machine Retrieved on 18 October 2015 Ann Shumelda Okerson and James J O Donnell eds 1995 Scholarly Journals at the Crossroads A Subversive Proposal for Electronic Publishing Archived 12 September 2012 at the Wayback Machine Association of Research Libraries Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Poynder Richard 2004 Poynder On Point Ten Years After Archived 26 September 2011 at the Wayback Machine Information Today 21 9 October 2004 Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Harnad S 2007 Re when did the Open Access movement officially begin Archived 13 September 2016 at the Wayback Machine American Scientist Open Access Forum 27 June 2007 Retrieved on 3 December 2011 SHERPA RoMEO Publisher copyright policies amp self archiving Archived 11 November 2007 at the Wayback Machine Sherpa ac uk Retrieved on 3 December 2011 Evaluating Institutional Repository Deployment in American Academe Since Early 2005 Repositories by the Numbers Part 2 www dlib org Archived from the original on 11 August 2017 Retrieved 10 March 2019 Dawson Patricia H Yang Sharon Q 1 October 2016 Institutional Repositories Open Access and Copyright What Are the Practices and Implications PDF Science amp Technology Libraries 35 4 279 294 doi 10 1080 0194262X 2016 1224994 ISSN 0194 262X S2CID 63819187 Archived PDF from the original on 19 July 2018 Retrieved 11 July 2019 Mongeon Philippe Paul Hus Adele 2016 The Journal Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus A Comparative Analysis Scientometrics 106 213 228 arXiv 1511 08096 doi 10 1007 s11192 015 1765 5 S2CID 17753803 Falagas Matthew E Pitsouni Eleni I Malietzis George A Pappas Georgios 2008 Comparison of PubMed Scopus Web of Science and Google Scholar Strengths and Weaknesses The FASEB Journal 22 2 338 342 doi 10 1096 fj 07 9492LSF PMID 17884971 S2CID 303173 span, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.