scholarly journals Only two out of five articles by New Zealand researchers are free-to-access: a multiple API study of access, its impact on open citation advantage, cost of Article Processing Charges (APC), and the potential to increase the proportion of open access

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Kenneth Alistair White ◽  
Anton Angelo ◽  
Deborah Jane Fitchett ◽  
Moira Fraser ◽  
Luqman Hayes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
Average Citation ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Harvest Data ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Citation Advantage ◽  
Sample Set

AbstractWe studied journal articles published by researchers at all eight of New Zealand universities in 2017 to determine how many were freely accessible on the web. We wrote software code to harvest data from multiple sources, code that we now share to enable others to reproduce our work on their own sample set. In May 2019, we ran our code to determine which of the 2017 articles were open at that time and by what method; where those articles would have incurred an Article Processing Charge (APC) we calculated the cost if those charges had been paid. Where articles were not freely available we determined whether the policies of publishers in each case would have allowed deposit in a non-commercial repository (Green open access). We also examined average citation rates for different types of access. We found that, of our 2017 sample set, about two out of every five articles were freely accessible without payment or subscription (41%). Where research was explicitly said to be funded by New Zealand’s major research funding agencies, the proportion was slightly higher at 49%. Where open articles would have incurred an APC we estimated an average cost per article of USD1,682 (for publications where all articles require an APC, that is, Gold open access) and USD2,558 (where APC payment is optional, Hybrid open access) at a total estimated cost of USD1.45m. Of the paid options, Gold is by far more common for New Zealand researchers (82% Gold, 18% Hybrid). Where articles were not freely accessible we found that a very large majority of them (88%) could have been legally deposited in an institutional repository. In terms of average citation rates, we found Green and Hybrid open access to achieve the highest rates, higher than other forms of open access and higher still than research that is only available via payment. Given that most New Zealand researchers support research being open, there is clearly a large gap between belief and practice in New Zealand’s research ecosystem, despite a clear citation advantage for open access over research that is not freely accessible.

scholarly journals Only two out of five articles by New Zealand researchers are free-to-access: a multiple API study of access, citations, cost of Article Processing Charges (APC), and the potential to increase the proportion of open access

PeerJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. e11417
Author(s):  
Richard K.A. White ◽  
Anton Angelo ◽  
Deborah Fitchett ◽  
Moira Fraser ◽  
Luqman Hayes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
Harvest Data ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Sample Set

We studied journal articles published by researchers at all eight New Zealand universities in 2017 to determine how many were freely accessible on the web. We wrote software code to harvest data from multiple sources, code that we now share to enable others to reproduce our work on their own sample set. In May 2019, we ran our code to determine which of the 2017 articles were open at that time and by what method; where those articles would have incurred an Article Processing Charge (APC) we calculated the cost if those charges had been paid. Where articles were not freely available we determined whether the policies of publishers in each case would have allowed deposit in a non-commercial repository (Green open access). We also examined citation rates for different types of access. We found that, of our 2017 sample set, about two out of every five articles were freely accessible without payment or subscription (41%). Where research was explicitly said to be funded by New Zealand’s major research funding agencies, the proportion was slightly higher at 45%. Where open articles would have incurred an APC we estimated an average cost per article of USD1,682 (for publications where all articles require an APC, that is, Gold open access) and USD2,558 (where APC payment is optional, Hybrid open access) at a total estimated cost of USD1.45m. Of the paid options, Gold is by far more common for New Zealand researchers (82% Gold, 18% Hybrid). In terms of citations, our analysis aligned with previous studies that suggest a correlation between publications being freely accessible and, on balance, slightly higher rates of citation. This is not seen across all types of open access, however, with Diamond OA achieving the lowest rates. Where articles were not freely accessible we found that a very large majority of them (88% or 3089 publications) could have been legally deposited in an institutional repository. Similarly, only in a very small number of cases had a version deposited in the repository of a New Zealand university made the difference between the publication being freely accessible or not (125 publications). Given that most New Zealand researchers support research being open, there is clearly a large gap between belief and practice in New Zealand’s research ecosystem.

scholarly journals The cost-effectiveness of the article-processing-charge-funded model across countries in different scientific blocks: the case of Elsevier's hybrid open access journals

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zohreh Estakhr ◽  
Hajar Sotudeh ◽  
Javad Abbaspour ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Scientific Development ◽  
Article Processing Charge ◽  
Publishing Article ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Citation Advantage

Introduction. The present study investigated the cost-effectiveness of article-processing-charge-funded model across the world countries in terms of its citation value proportional to the article processing charges. Method. Using a comparative citation analysis method at the macro level, it explored a sample of articles in forty-seven Elsevier hybrid open access journals that had been following the model since 2007. Analysis. The contributing countries' open access citation advantages were calculated based on the percentage of their open access citation surplus proportional to that of their non-open access articles. Their relative open access citation cost-effectiveness was obtained based on their open access citation counts proportional to the article processing charges, normalised by those of non-open access papers. The countries were categorised into four scientific blocks using Rand's categorization of countries' scientific development. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyse the data in SPSS. Results. The results supported the citation advantage of the article-processing-charge-funded papers, encompassing the majority of the contributing countries in the four scientific development blocks. The articles showed relative cost-effectiveness over the years and for most countries in all the scientific development blocks. Conclusions. Publishing article-processing-charge-funded papers is relatively cost-effective, implying higher visibility and influence in exchange for the money paid.

scholarly journals Article processing charges for open access publication—the situation for research intensive universities in the USA and Canada

PeerJ ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. e2264 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Solomon ◽  
Bo-Christer Björk
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
European Universities ◽  
Lack Of Information ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Western European ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Cost

Background.Open access (OA) publishing via article processing charges (APCs) is growing as an alternative to subscription publishing. The Pay It Forward (PIF) Project is exploring the feasibility of transitioning from paying subscriptions to funding APCs for faculty at research intensive universities. Estimating of the cost of APCs for the journals authors at research intensive universities tend to publish is essential for the PIF project and similar initiatives. This paper presents our research into this question.Methods.We identified APC prices for publications by authors at the 4 research intensive United States (US) and Canadian universities involved in the study. We also obtained APC payment records from several Western European universities and funding agencies. Both data sets were merged with Web of Science (WoS) metadata. We calculated the average APCs for articles and proceedings in 13 discipline categories published by researchers at research intensive universities. We also identified 41 journals published by traditionally subscription publishers which have recently converted to APC funded OA and recorded the APCs they charge.Results.We identified 7,629 payment records from the 4 European APC payment databases and 14,356 OA articles authored by PIF partner university faculty for which we had listed APC prices. APCs for full OA journals published by PIF authors averaged 1,775 USD; full OA journal APCs paid by Western European funders averaged 1,865 USD; hybrid APCs paid by Western European funders averaged 2,887 USD. The APC for converted journals published by major subscription publishers averaged 1,825 USD. APC funded OA is concentrated in the life and basic sciences. APCs funded articles in the social sciences and humanities are often multidisciplinary and published in journals such as PLOS ONE that largely publish in the life sciences.Conclusions.Full OA journal APCs average a little under 2,000 USD while hybrid articles average about 3,000 USD for publications by researchers at research intensive universities. There is a lack of information on discipline differences in APCs due to the concentration of APC funded publications in a few fields and the multidisciplinary nature of research.

The Cost of Publishing

2019 ◽  
pp. 164-171
Author(s):  
Michael Hochberg
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Academic Society ◽  
Major Shift ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Cost

The cost of publishing is hotly debated. Until the 1990s, publication was either free of charge, paid per page or per article, or covered partially or completely if subscribing to a journal or if a member of the academic society overseeing a journal. A major shift occurred in the early 2000s when new “Open Access” publishers made articles freely available for all to read and reuse, with article processing charges being covered by the author. This chapter discusses the paradigm shift and how it has changed the landscape of who pays for scientific publication.

Does open access citation advantage depend on paper topics?

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. 696-709
Author(s):  
Hajar Sotudeh
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Research Topics ◽  
Abstract Level ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
Processing Techniques ◽  
Citation Advantage ◽  
Selection Of

Research topics vary in their citation potential. In a metric-wise scientific milieu, it would be probable that authors tend to select citation-attractive topics especially when choosing open access (OA) outlets that are more likely to attract citations. Applying a matched-pairs study design, this research aims to examine the role of research topics in the citation advantage of OA papers. Using a comparative citation analysis method, it investigates a sample of papers published in 47 Elsevier article processing charges (APC)-funded journals in different access models including non-open access (NOA), APC, Green and mixed Green-APC. The contents of the papers are analysed using natural language processing techniques at the title and abstract level and served as a basis to match the NOA papers to their peers in the OA models. The publication years and journals are controlled for in order to avoid their impacts on the citation numbers. According to the results, the OA citation advantage that is observed in the whole sample still holds even for the highly similar OA and NOA papers. This implies that the OA citation surplus is not an artefact of the OA and NOA papers’ differences in their topics and, therefore, in their citation potential. This leads to the conclusion that OA authors’ self-selectivity, if it exists at all, is not responsible for the OA citation advantage, at least as far as selection of topics with probably higher citation potentials is concerned.

The citation advantage for open access science journals with and without article processing charges

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-130
Author(s):  
Mohammad Reza Ghane ◽  
Mohammad Reza Niazmand ◽  
Ameneh Sabet Sarvestani
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Human Anatomy ◽  
Science Class ◽  
H Index ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Thomson Reuters ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
Citation Metrics ◽  
Citation Advantage

In this study of access models, we compared citation performance in journals that do and do not levy article processing charges (APCs) as part of their business model. We used a sample of journals from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) science class and its 13 subclasses and recorded four citation metrics: JIF, H-index, citations per publication (CPP) and quartile rank. We examined 1881 science journals indexed in DOAJ. Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports and Web of Science were used to extract JIF, H-index, CPP and quartile category. Overall, the JIF, H-index and CPP indicated that APC and non-APC open access (OA) journals had equal impact. Quartile category ranking indicated a difference in favour of APC journals. In each science subclass, we found significant differences between APC and non-APC journals in all citation metrics except for quartile rank. Discipline-related variations were observed in non-APC journals. Differences in the rank positions of scores in different groups identified citation advantages for non-APC journals in physiology, zoology, microbiology and geology, followed by botany, astronomy and general biology. Impact ranged from moderate to low in physics, chemistry, human anatomy, mathematics, general science and natural history. The results suggest that authors should consider field- and discipline-related differences in the OA citation advantage, especially when they are considering non-APC OA journals categorised in two or more subjects. This may encourage OA publishing at least in the science class.

scholarly journals The Potential of a Cost-Per-Use Analysis to Assess the Value of Library Open-Access Funds

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 99-101
Author(s):  
Jessica Koos
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Biomed Central ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Level Data ◽  
Article Usage ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Design Cost ◽  
The Impact

A Review of: Hampson, C., & Stregger, E. (2017). Measuring cost per use of library-funded open access article processing charges: Examination and implications of one method. Journal of Librarianship & Scholarly Communication, 5(1), eP2182. https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2182 Abstract Objective – To determine the feasibility and potential effects of a cost-per-use analysis of library funds dedicated to open access. Design – Cost-per-use analysis, case study. Setting – PLOS and BioMed Central. Subjects – 591 articles published in PLOS ONE, 165 articles published in PLOS Biology, and 17 articles published in BioMed Central. Methods – Three specific examples are provided of how academic libraries can employ a cost-per-use analysis in order to determine the impact of library-based open access (OA) funds. This method is modeled after the traditional cost-per-use method of analyzing a library collection, and facilitates comparison to other non-OA items. The first example consisted of using a formula dividing the total library-funded article processing charges (APCs) by the total global use of the specific PLOS journal articles that were funded. The second and third examples demonstrated what a library-funded OA membership to BioMed Central would cost alone, and then with APCs that cost could be divided by the total usage of the funded articles to determine cost-per-use. Main Results – The authors found both of the examples described in the article to be potential ways of determining cost-per-use of OA articles, with some limitations. For instance, counting article usage through the publisher’s website may not capture the true usage of an article, as it does not take altmetrics into consideration. In addition, article-level data is not always readily available. In addition, the cost-per-use of OA articles was found to be very low, ranging from $0.01 to $1.51 after the first three years of publication based on the cost of library-funded APCs. The second and third methods revealed a cost-per-use of $0.10 using membership-only payments, while using the cost of membership plus APCs resulted in a cost-per-use of $0.41. Conclusion – Libraries may wish to consider using these methods for demonstrating the value of OA funds in terms of return on investment, as these techniques allow for direct comparison to the usage of traditional journals. However, several barriers need to be overcome in how article-level usage is obtained in order for these methods to be more accurate and efficient. In addition, while the authors report that "The specific examples in this study suggest that OA APCs may compare favorably to traditional publishing when considering value for money based on cost per use," they also caution that the study was not designed to answer the question if the ROI is greater for OA publications than for traditional articles, stating that "...the data in this study should not be interpreted as a verification of such an argument, as this study was not designed to answer that question, nor can it do so given the limitations on the data. This paper was designed to present and illustrate a method. Further study would be necessary to verify or refute this possibility" (p. 15).

scholarly journals Three new suggested guidelines for increased transparency regarding open access article processing charges (APCs)

2020 ◽  
pp. 4
Author(s):  
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Business Model ◽  
Article Processing Charge ◽  
Wide Debate ◽  
Financial Transparency ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Gold Open Access ◽  
Open Access Article

The article processing charge (APC) lies at the heart of the gold open access (GOA) business model. Small and larger society-based, as well as commercial publishers, rely – to different extents – on the APC and the GOA model to thrive. There is wide debate regarding what amount of APC is considered to be exploitative, and the issue of low APCs is often erroneously associated with “predatory” OA publishing. Independent of this debate, there is still, surprisingly, considerable opacity related to the APC used to cover the cost of  GOA. In a bid to increase transparency, a simple 3-point plan at increasing academic and financial transparency of authors and journals/publishers regarding APCs is proposed: 1) indicate which author paid the APC in multi-author papers; 2) indicate the value of the APC paid; 3) provide online proof or certification of APC payment, including the indication of any discounts or waivers.

scholarly journals The Library Solution: How Academic Libraries Could End the APC Scourge

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jefferson Pooley
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Academic Libraries ◽  
Current System ◽  
University Libraries ◽  
Economic Framework ◽  
Alternative System ◽  
History Of ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Cost

Media researcher and publisher Jeff Pooley responds to the European open access initiative, Plan S, outlining the history of the current system of author-paid article processing charges (APCs) and the ways this system perpetuates inequality across the publishing landscape. He proposes an alternative system wherein university libraries shoulder the cost to publish for affiliated faculty, and describes an economic framework that could make such a solution sustainable for authors, libraries, publishers, and scholarly societies.

scholarly journals The burden of article processing charges on Canadian universities

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc-André Simard ◽  
Toluwase Asubiaro ◽  
Philippe Mongeon
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Scholarly Literature ◽  
Canadian Universities ◽  
Research Institution ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Cost ◽  
The Web

The question about the cost of access to scholarly resources is usually answered by focusing on subscription cost. This study highlights the article processing charges (APCs) paid by Canada’s research institution as an additional scholarly resource. Unpaywall database was queried with the DOIs of CARL member universities’ publication indexed in the Web of Science. We find that while Open Access should in principle reduce the cost of access to scholarly literature, we are rather in a situation where both the cost of access and the cost of publishing are increasing simultaneously.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document