The dark side of open access in google and google scholar: The case of latin-american repositories

Scientometrics

Volumn 102, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 829-846

  Orduña Malea, Enrique ^a   Delgado López Cózar, Emilio ^b  

^a UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE VALÈNCIA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Google; Google scholar; Indexing; Latin America; Open access; Repositories; Web indicators; Web visibility; Webometrics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937788619     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: 15882861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-014-1369-5     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Aguillo, I. F. (2009). Measuring the institutions’ footprint in the web. Library Hi Tech, 27(4), 540–556.
2. Aguillo, I. F. (2011). Building web indicators for the EU OA repository. Workshop on new research lines in informetrics (España).
3. Aguillo, I. F., & Granadino, B. (2006). Indicadores web para medir la presencia de las universidades en la Red. RUSC: Revista de universidad y sociedad del conocimiento, 3(1), 68–75.
4. Aguillo, I. F., Ortega, J. L., Fernandez, M., & Utrilla, A. M. (2010). Indicators for a webometric ranking of open Access repositories. Scientometrics,82(3), 477–486.
5. Archambault, E., Amyot, D., Deschamps, P., Nicol, A., Rebout, L. & Roberge, G. (2013). Proportion of open access peer-reviewed papers at the european and world. Science-Metrix [Technical report]. http://www.science-metrix.com/pdf/SM_EC_OA_Availability_2004-2011.pdf Accessed 15 March 2014.
6. Arlitsch, K., & O’Brian, P. S. (2012). Invisible institutional repositories: Addressing the low indexing ratios of IRs in Google. Library Hi Tech, 30(1), 60–81.
7. Arlitsch, K., O’Brian, P. S., & Rossmann, B. (2013). Managing search engine optimization: An introduction for library administrators. Journal of Library Administrators, 53(2–3), 177–188.
8. Armbruster, C., & Romary, L. (2010). Comparing repository types-challenges and barriers for subject-based repositories, research repositories, national repository systems and institutional repositories in serving scholarly communication. International Journal of Digital Library Systems, 1(4), 61–73.
9. Björk, B.-C. (2014). Open access subject repositories: An overview. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(4), 698–706.
10. Björk, B. C., Welling, P., Laakso, M., Majlender, P., Hedlund, T., & Gudnason, G. (2010). Open access to the scientific journal literature: Situation 2009. PLoS One, 5(6). http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0011273 Accessed 15 March 2014.
11. Burns, C. S. (2013). Free or open access to scholarly documentation: Google Scholar or academic libraries. University of Missouri.
12. Calderón-Martínez, A., & Ruiz-Conde, E. (2013). The participation and web visibility of university digital repositories in the European context.Comunicar, 20(40), 193–201.
13. Chan, L. (2004). Supporting and enhancing scholarship in the digital age: The role of open access institutional repository. Canadian Journal of Communication, 29(3), 277–300.
14. Cook, C., Heath, F., Thomson, B., Davis, M., Kyrillidou, M. & Roebuck, G. (2009). LibQual + 2009 Survey. Association of Research Libraries [technical report]. http://www.libqual.org/documents/admin/ARL_Notebook_2009.pdf Accessed 15 March 2014.
15. Cox, J., & Cox, L. (2003). Scholarly publishing practice: The ALPSPS report on academic journal publishers’ policies and practices in online publishing. London (England): Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers.
16. Crow, R. (2002). The Case for Institutional Repositories: A SPARC Position Paper. Association of Research Libraries [technical report, n. 223].http://www.sparc.arl.org/sites/default/files/media_files/instrepo.pdf Accessed 30 April 2014.
17. De Rosa, C., & OCLC. (2005). Perceptions of libraries and information resources; a report to the OCLC membership. Dublin, OH: OCLC Online Computer Library Center.
18. Delgado López-Cózar, E. & Robinson-García, N. (2012). Repositories in Google Scholar Metrics: what is this document type doing in a place as such. Cybermetrics, v. 16. http://cybermetrics.cindoc.csic.es/articles/v16i1p4.pdf Accessed 15 March 2014.
19. Galina, I. (2011). La visibilidad de los recursos académicos: una revisión crítica del papel de los repositorios institucionales y el acceso abierto. Investigación Bibliotecológica, 25(53), 159–183.
20. Griffiths, J. R., & Brophy, P. (2005). Student searching behavior and the Web: Use of academic resources and Google. Library Trends, 53(4), 545.
21. Haglund, L., & Olsson, P. (2008). The impact on university libraries of changes in information behavior among academic researchers: a multiple case study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(1), 52.
22. Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallières, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y., et al. (2004). The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access. Serial Review, 30(4), 310–314.
23. Herrera, G. (2011). Google Scholar users and user behaviours: an exploratory study. College and Research Libraries, 72(4), 316–330.
24. Hixson, C.G. (2005). First we build them, then what?: The future of institutional repositories. BiD, Textos Universitaris de Biblioteconomia i Documentació, (15). http://bid.ub.edu/15hixso2.htm Accessed 30 April 2014.
25. Holmberg, K. (2010). Web impact factors- a significant contribution to webometric research. In B. Larssen, J. W. Schneider, & F. Åstrom (Eds.), The Janus facet scholar: a festschrift in honour of Peter Ingwersen (pp. 127–134). Copenhaghe: Royal School of Library and Information Science.
26. Kling, R., & McKim, G. (2000). Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 51(14), 1306–1320.
27. Lynch, C. (2003). Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. ARL Bimonthy Report 226, 1–16. Available at http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/arl-br-226.pdf. Accessed 02 July 2014.
28. Mas-Bleda, A., Thelwall, M., Kousha, K., & Aguillo, I. F. (2014). Successful researchers publicizing research online: an outlink analysis of European highly cited scientists’ personal websites. Journal of Documentation, 70(1), 148–172.
29. rduña-Malea, E. (2012). Propuesta de un modelo de análisis redinformétrico multinivel para el estudio sistémico de las universidades (2010). Valencia: Universidad Politécnica de Valencia [unpublished doctoral dissertation].
30. Orduña-Malea, (2013). Aggregation of the web performance of internal university units as a method of quantitative analysis of a university system: the case of Spain. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(10), 2100–2114.
31. Orduña-Malea, E., & Regazzi, J. J. (2014). US academic libraries: understanding their web presence and their relationship with economic indicators. Scientometrics, 98(1), 315–336.
32. Ortega, J. L., Orduña-Malea, E., & Aguillo, I. F. (2014). Influence of language and file type on the web visibility of top European universities. Aslib Proceedings, 66(1), 96–116.
33. Pinfield, S., Salter, J., Bath, P.A., Hubbard, B., Millington, P., Anders, J.H.S. & Hussain, A. (2014). Open-access repositories worldwide, 2005–2012: Past growth, current characteristics and future possibilities. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. doi:10.1002/asi.23131
34. Ruiz-Conde, E., & Calderón-Martinez, A. (2014). University institutional repositories: competitive environment and their role as communication media of scientific knowledge. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1283–1299.
35. Sato, S., & Itsumura, H. (2011). How do people use open access papers in non-academic activities? A link analysis of papers deposited in institutional repositories. Library, Information and Media Studies, 9(1), 51–64.
36. Scholze, F. (2007). Measuring research impact in an open access environment. Liber Quarterly: The Journal of European Research Libraries, 17(1–4), 220–232.
37. Schonfeld, Roger C. & Housewright, R. (2010). Faculty Survey 2009: Key Strategic insights for libraries, publishers, and societies (Ithaka S + R, Apr. 7, 2010): 7. http://www.sr.ithaka.org/research-publications/us-faculty-survey-2009 Accessed 15 March 2014.
38. Smith, A. G. (2011). Wikipedia and institutional repositories: An academic symbiosis? Proceedings of the ISSI 2011 Conference. Durban (South Africa), 794-800.
39. Smith, A. G. (2012). Webometric evaluation of institutional repositories. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Webometrics Informetrics and Scientometrics & 13th Collnet Meeting. Seoul (Korea), pp. 722-729.
40. Smith, A.G. (2013). Web Based Impact Measures for Institutional Repositories. Proceedings of the ISSI 2013 conference. Viena (Austria), 1806–1816.
41. Thelwall, M. (2004). Link analysis: An information science approach. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
42. Thelwall, M., & Sud, P. (2011). A comparison of methods for collecting web citation data for academic organisations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(8), 1488–1497.
43. Zuccala, A., Oppenheim, C. & Dhiensa, R. (2008). Managing and evaluating digital repositories. Information research, 13(1). http://informationr.net/ir/13-1/paper333.html Accessed 15 March 2014.
44. Zuccala, A., Thelwall, M., Oppenheim, C., & Dhiensa, R. (2007). Web intelligence analyses of digital libraries: A case study of the national electronic library for health (NeLH). Journal of Documentation, 63(4), 558–589.