| Autor: |
Amanda D. Clark, Tanner C. Myers, Todd D. Steury, Ali Krzton, Julio Yanes, Angela Barber, Jacqueline Barry, Subarna Barua, Katherine Eaton, Devadatta Gosavi, Rebecca Nance, Zahida Pervaiz, Chidozie Ugochukwu, Patricia Hartman, Laurie S. Stevison |
| Jazyk: |
angličtina |
| Rok vydání: |
2024 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
PeerJ, Vol 12, p e16824 (2024) |
| Druh dokumentu: |
article |
| ISSN: |
2167-8359 |
| DOI: |
10.7717/peerj.16824 |
| Popis: |
Authors are often faced with the decision of whether to maximize traditional impact metrics or minimize costs when choosing where to publish the results of their research. Many subscription-based journals now offer the option of paying an article processing charge (APC) to make their work open. Though such “hybrid” journals make research more accessible to readers, their APCs often come with high price tags and can exclude authors who lack the capacity to pay to make their research accessible. Here, we tested if paying to publish open access in a subscription-based journal benefited authors by conferring more citations relative to closed access articles. We identified 146,415 articles published in 152 hybrid journals in the field of biology from 2013–2018 to compare the number of citations between various types of open access and closed access articles. In a simple generalized linear model analysis of our full dataset, we found that publishing open access in hybrid journals that offer the option confers an average citation advantage to authors of 17.8 citations compared to closed access articles in similar journals. After taking into account the number of authors, Journal Citation Reports 2020 Quartile, year of publication, and Web of Science category, we still found that open access generated significantly more citations than closed access (p |
| Databáze: |
Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
