citation advantage
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

53
(FIVE YEARS 19)

H-INDEX

10
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tehmina Amjad ◽  
Mehwish Sabir ◽  
Azra Shamim ◽  
Masooma Amjad ◽  
Ali Daud

PurposeCitation is an important measure of quality, and it plays a vital role in evaluating scientific research. However, citation advantage varies from discipline to discipline, subject to subject and topic to topic. This study aims to compare the citation advantage of open access and toll access articles from four subfields of computer science.Design/methodology/approachThis research studies the articles published by two prestigious publishers: Springer and Elsevier in the author-pays charges model from 2011 to 2015. For experimentation, four sub-domains of computer science are selected including (a) artificial intelligence, (b) human–computer interaction, (c) computer vision and graphics, and (d) software engineering. The open-access and toll-based citation advantage is studied and analyzed at the micro level within the computer science domain by performing independent sample t-tests.FindingsThe results of the study highlight that open access articles have a higher citation advantage as compared to toll access articles across years and sub-domains. Further, an increase in open access articles has been observed from 2011 to 2015. The findings of the study show that the citation advantage of open access articles varies among different sub-domains of a subject. The study contributed to the body of knowledge by validating the positive movement toward open access articles in the field of computer science and its sub-domains. Further, this work added the success of the author-pays charges model in terms of citation advantage to the literature of open access.Originality/valueTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to examine the citation advantage of the author-pays charges model at a subject level (computer science) along with four sub-domains of computer science.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Kudlow ◽  
Tashauna Brown

BACKGROUND There are limited evidence-based strategies that have been shown to increase the rate at which peer-reviewed articles are cited. In a previously reported randomized controlled trial we demonstrated that promotion of article links in an online cross-publisher distribution platform (TrendMD) persistently augments citation rates after 12 months, leading to a statistically significant, 50% increase in citations relative to control. OBJECTIVE To investigate if the citation advantage of promoted articles upholds after 36-months. METHODS Three thousand two hundred articles published in 64 peer-reviewed journals across eight subject areas were block randomized at the subject level to either the TrendMD group (n=1600) or the control group (n=1600) of the study. Articles were promoted in the TrendMD Network for 6 months. We compared the citation rates in both groups after 36 months. RESULTS At 36 months, we found the citation advantage endured; articles randomized to TrendMD showed a 28% increase in mean citations relative to control. The difference in mean citations at 36 months for articles randomized to TrendMD versus control was 10.52, 95% CI [3.79, 17.25] and was statistically significant (p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial to demonstrate how a post-publication article promotion intervention can be used to persistently augment citations of peer-reviewed articles. TrendMD is an efficient digital tool for knowledge translation and dissemination to targeted audiences to facilitate uptake of research.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. e0253129
Author(s):  
Allison Langham-Putrow ◽  
Caitlin Bakker ◽  
Amy Riegelman

Aims Over the last two decades, the existence of an open access citation advantage (OACA)—increased citation of articles made available open access (OA)—has been the topic of much discussion. While there has been substantial research to address this question, findings have been contradictory and inconclusive. We conducted a systematic review to compare studies of citations to OA and non-OA articles. Methods A systematic search of 17 databases attempted to capture all relevant studies authored since 2001. The protocol was registered in Open Science Framework. We included studies with a direct comparison between OA and non-OA items and reported article-level citation as an outcome. Both randomized and non-randomized studies were included. No limitations were placed on study design, language, or publication type. Results A total of 5,744 items were retrieved. Ultimately, 134 items were identified for inclusion. 64 studies (47.8%) confirmed the existence of OACA, while 37 (27.6%) found that it did not exist, 32 (23.9%) found OACA only in subsets of their sample, and 1 study (0.8%) was inconclusive. Studies with a focus on multiple disciplines were significantly positively associated with finding that OACA exists in subsets, and are less associated with finding that OACA did not exist. In the critical appraisal of the included studies, 3 were found to have an overall low risk of bias. Of these, one found that an OACA existed, one found that it did not, and one found that an OACA occurred in subsets. Conclusions As seen through the large number of studies identified for this review, OACA is a topic of continuing interest. Quality and heterogeneity of the component studies pose challenges for generalization. The results suggest the need for reporting guidelines for bibliometrics studies.


Author(s):  
Zohreh Estakhr ◽  
Hajar Sotudeh ◽  
Javad Abbaspour ◽  
◽  

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.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumit Kumar Banshal ◽  
Vivek Kumar Singh ◽  
Pranab Kumar Muhuri

PurposeThe main purpose of this study is to explore and validate the question “whether altmetric mentions can predict citations to scholarly articles”. The paper attempts to explore the nature and degree of correlation between altmetrics (from ResearchGate and three social media platforms) and citations.Design/methodology/approachA large size data sample of scholarly articles published from India for the year 2016 is obtained from the Web of Science database and the corresponding altmetric data are obtained from ResearchGate and three social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook and blog through Altmetric.com aggregator). Correlations are computed between early altmetric mentions and later citation counts, for data grouped in different disciplinary groups.FindingsResults show that the correlation between altmetric mentions and citation counts are positive, but weak. Correlations are relatively higher in the case of data from ResearchGate as compared to the data from the three social media platforms. Further, significant disciplinary differences are observed in the degree of correlations between altmetrics and citations.Research limitations/implicationsThe results support the idea that altmetrics do not necessarily reflect the same kind of impact as citations. However, articles that get higher altmetric attention early may actually have a slight citation advantage. Further, altmetrics from academic social networks like ResearchGate are more correlated with citations, as compared to social media platforms.Originality/valueThe paper has novelty in two respects. First, it takes altmetric data for a window of about 1–1.5 years after the article publication and citation counts for a longer citation window of about 3–4 years after the publication of article. Second, it is one of the first studies to analyze data from the ResearchGate platform, a popular academic social network, to understand the type and degree of correlations.Peer reviewThe peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-11-2019-0364


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Basson ◽  
Jaco P. Blanckenberg ◽  
Heidi Prozesky

Abstract This study is one of the first that uses the recently introduced open access (OA) labels in the Web of Science (WoS) metadata to investigate whether OA articles published in Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) listed journals experience a citation advantage in comparison to subscription journal articles, specifically those of which no self-archived versions are available. Bibliometric data on all articles and reviews indexed in WoS, and published from 2013 to 2015, were analysed. In addition to normalised citation score (NCS), we used two additional measures of citation advantage: whether an article was cited at all; and whether an article is among the most frequently cited percentile of articles within its respective subject area (pptopX %). For each WoS subject area, the strength of the relationship between access status (whether an article was published in an OA journal) and each of these three measures was calculated. We found that OA journal articles experience a citation advantage in very few subject areas and, in most of these subject areas, the citation advantage was found on only a single measure of citation advantage, namely whether the article was cited at all. Our results lead us to conclude that access status accounts for little of the variability in the number of citations an article accumulates. The methodology and the calculations that were used in this study are described in detail and we believe that the lessons we learnt, and the recommendations we make, will be of much use to future researchers interested in using the WoS OA labels, and to the field of citation advantage in general.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Euan Adie

There's a clear - if not completely understood - download and citation advantage for open access articles. We investigate whether or not this holds true for citations outside of the scholarly literature, specifically for references to scholarly work in government white papers, guidelines and other policy documents. Does making an article more available mean that it's more likely to have a policy impact? We follow up with a list of strategies different journals and publishers have adopted to make sure that the research they publish reach the right policymakers at the right time, as well as a brief discussion on the role of preprints and review articles.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Kenneth Alistair White ◽  
Anton Angelo ◽  
Deborah Jane Fitchett ◽  
Moira Fraser ◽  
Luqman Hayes ◽  
...  

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.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. e0230416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Colavizza ◽  
Iain Hrynaszkiewicz ◽  
Isla Staden ◽  
Kirstie Whitaker ◽  
Barbara McGillivray

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document