The citation advantage of open-access articles

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 59, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 1963-1972

  Norris, Michael ^a   Oppenheim, Charles ^a   Rowland, Fytton ^a  

^a LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SOCIAL SCIENCES;

APPLIED MATHEMATICS; GOOGLE SCHOLAR; JOURNAL ARTICLES; OPEN-ACCESS;

INTERNET;

EID: 53849119903     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20898     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Antelman, K. (2004). Do open-access articles have a greater research impact? College and Research Libraries, 65, 372-382.
2. Carr, L. (2006). Access to self-archive via Google Scholar. Message posted October 22, 2006, to http://listserver.sigmaxi.org/sc/wa.exe?A2= ind06& L=american-scientist-open-access-forum&D=1&O=D&F=1&S= &P= 81868
3. Craig, I., Plume, A., McVeigh, M., Pringle, J., & Amin, M. (2007). Do open access articles have greater citation impact? A critical review of the literature. Retrieved July 21, 2007, from http://www.publishingresearch. net/Citations-Summary Paper3_000.pdf.pdf
4. Davis, P., & Fromerth, M. (2006). Does the arXiv lead to higher citations and reduced publisher downloads for mathematics articles? Retrieved March 22, 2007, from http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.DL/0603056
5. Eysenbach G. (2006). Citation advantage of open access articles. PLoS Biology, 4, 692-698.
6. Garfield, E. (1979). Citation indexing - Its theory and application in science, technology, and humanities. New York: Wiley.
7. Garfield, E. (2005). The agony and the ecstasy - The history and meaning of the Journal Impact Factor. Retrieved January 8, 2007, from http://garfield.library.upenn.edu/papers/jifchicago2005.pdf
8. Hajjem, C., Harnad, S., & Gringras, Y. (2005). Ten-year cross disciplinary comparison of the growth of OA and how it increases citation impact. Retrieved January 8, 2007, from http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/11688/01/ hajjem.pdf
9. Hamad, S. (2006). Opening access by overcoming Zeno's paralysis. In N. Jacobs (Ed.), Open access: Key strategic, technical and economic aspects (pp. 73-85). Oxford, United Kingdom: Chandos.
10. Hamad, S. (2007a). The open access citation advantage: Quality advantage or quality bias? Retrieved April 3, 2007, from http://openaccess.eprints.org/ index.php?/archives/191-The-Open-Access-Citation-Advantage-Quality-Advantage-Or- Quality-Bias.html
11. Hamad, S. (2007b). Citation advantage for OA self-archiving is independent of journal impact factor, article age, and number of co-authors. Retrieved April 5, 2007, from http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/ 2007/01/17.html
12. Hamad, S., & Brody, T. (2004). Comparing the impact of open access (OA) vs. non-OA articles in the same journals. D-Lib Magazine, 10. Retrieved March 23, 2007, from http://mirrored.ukoln.ac.uk/lis-journals/dlib/dlib/dlib/ june04/harnad/06harnad.html
13. Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y., Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H., & Hilfet, E. (2004). The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access. Serials Review, 30, 310-314.
14. Hicks, D. (2004). The four literatures of the social science. In H.K. Moed, W. Glanzel, & U. Schmoch (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative science and technology research (pp. 473-495). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
15. Hinton, P. (2004). Statistics explained (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
16. Hirsch, J. (2005). An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 46, 16569-16572.
17. Jacso, P. (2005a). Google Scholar: The pros and the cons. Online Information Review, 29, 208-214.
18. Jacso, P. (2005b). As we may search - Comparison of major features of Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced databases. Current Science, 89, 1537-1547.
19. Journal Citation Reports. (2007). Retrieved January 8, 2007, from http://portal.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi?DestApp=JCR&Func=Frame Kurtz, M., Eichhorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C., Demleitner, M., Henneken, E., & Murray, S. (2005). The effect of use and access on citations. Information Processing and Management, 41, 1395-1402.
20. Lawrence, S. (2001). Online or invisible. Nature, 411, 521.
21. Meho, L., & Yang, K. (2007). Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: Web of Science vs. Scopus and Google Scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2105-2125.
22. Metcalfe, T. (2006). The citation impact of digital preprint archives for solar physics papers. Solar Physics, 239, 549-553.
23. Moed, H. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
24. Moed, H. (2006). The effect of "Open Access" upon citation impact: An analysis of ArXiv's Condensed Matter section. Retrieved March 20, 2007, from http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.DL/0611060
25. Myhill, M. (2005). Google Scholar. The Charleston Adviser, 6(4), 49.
26. Nederhof, A. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A review. Scientometrics, 66, 81-100.
27. Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2007). Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for coverage of the social sciences' literature. Journal of Informetrics, 1, 161-169.
28. Notess, G. (2005). Scholarly web searching: Google Scholar and Scirus. Retrieved February 15, 2007, from http://www.infotoday.com/Online/ jul05/OnTheNet.shtml
29. OAIster. (2007). Retrieved January 29, 2007, from http://OAIster.org/ about.html
30. OpenDOAR. (2007). Retrieved January 29, 2007, from http://www.opendoar. org/about.html
31. Opthof, T. (1997). Sense and nonsense about the impact factor. Cardio-vascular Research, 33, 1-7.
32. The RePEc Project. (2007). Retrieved July 22, 2007, from http://repec.org/ docs/RePEcIntro.html
33. Sale, A. (2005). Comparison of IR content policies in Australia. Retrieved February 12, 2007, from http://eprints.comp.utas.edu.au/ 264/1/Comparison_of_content_policies_in_Australia.pdf
34. Schwarz, G., & Kennicutt, R. (2004). Demographic and citation trends in astrophysical papers and preprints. Retrieved March 19, 2007, from http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0411275
35. Swan, A., & Brown, S. (2005). OA self archiving: An author study. Retrieved March 26, 2007, from http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/10999/01/jisc2.pdf
36. van Leeuwen, T.N., Visser, M.S., Moed, H.F., Nederhof, T.J., & Van Raan, A.F.J. (2003). The holy grail of science policy: Exploring and combining bibliometrics tools in search of scientific excellence. Scientometrics, 57, 257-280.
37. Vaughan, L., & Shaw, D. (2005). Web citation data for impact assessment: A comparison of four disciplines. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56, 1075-1087.
38. Web of Science. (2007). Retrieved March 23, 2007, from http://portal.isiknowledge.com/portal.cgi?DestApp=WOS&Func=Frame
39. Wren, J.D. (2005). Open access and openly accessible. BMJ, 330. Retrieved March 23, 2007, from http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/reprint/ 330/7500/1128