Open Access Has Influence On Scholarly Publishing
The classical subscription-based scientific publication has limitations: often, papers are unavailable to the number of scholars in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where memberships to journals or one-time access fees are too expensive. Open access (OA) publication, where journals make their papers freely available online, eliminates this barrier and provides scholars worldwide unlimited access to scientific and academic knowledge.
At the same time, one significant constraint of open access is the high publication cost imposed on writers. For research publications, open access has many benefits and drawbacks. Here are a few of them.
The Article Influence Score determines the average influence of a journal's articles throughout the first five years following publication. It's derived by dividing the Eigenfactor Score by the number of articles in the journal, normalized as a proportion of all articles in all publications, and multiplying by 0.01.
Because published publications often report on research financed by state or university funds, the more the publication is utilized, quoted, used, and expanded upon, the better for research and the scientist's career. In 2001, the International Mathematical Union told its members that "open access to the mathematical literary works is an important objective". It urged them to "[make] available electronically as much of our work as possible" to "[enlarge] the reservoir of freely available primary mathematical material, particularly helping scientists working without adequate library access."
Compared to paywalled papers, open access articles are often seen online and downloaded more frequently, and their readership lasts for a more extended period. Readership is solid among demographics that do not generally have access to subscription-based journals (in addition to the general population, including many medical practitioners, patient groups, policymakers, non-profit sector workers, industry researchers, and independent researchers). Open access publications are more widely read than closed access articles on publication management systems such as Mendeley. Open access methods can shorten publishing delays, which has prompted several academic disciplines, such as high-energy physics, to adopt extensive preprint access to solve this problem.
One of the primary reasons authors make their works freely available is to increase the number of citations. Ones freely available online are often mentioned more frequently than articles that need a membership. The term "citation advantage" was initially used in 2001 to describe this phenomenon. However, while two large pieces of research challenge this assertion, the consensus of other studies supports the impact, with the estimated open access citation benefit ranging in magnitude from 1.3-fold to 6-fold depending on the discipline studied in each case. The citation benefit is the most evident in open access publications published in hybrid journals (as opposed to non-OA pieces published in the same journals) and works stored in green open access repositories. Notably, the benefits of green open access publications are comparable to those of gold open access articles in terms of citation counts. Publications in gold open access journals are often referenced at an equal relative rate similar to paywalled papers. The benefit of citations grows with the length of time an article has been published.
The journal impact factor (JIF) is a statistic that reflects the average number of citations received by articles published in a journal over a two-year period. It is often used as a proxy for journal quality, the predicted research impact of publications submitted to that journal, and the success of individual researchers in their endeavors. In subscription journals, the impact factor is shown to be correlated with the total number of citations; however, this association is not seen in gold open access journals.
A wide adoption and usage of the Leiden Declaration and the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), as well as fundamental changes in the intellectual communication system, are typically required as part of open access initiatives such as Plan S, which are currently in the planning stages.
Peer evaluation of research publications has been used since the 18th century. Reviewer comments are usually only revealed to writers, and reviewers are anonymous. OA publishing has led to new peer review technology and methods. Pre-registration of projects, open publication of peer reviews, open publication of entire datasets and analytic code are examples of available scientific approaches that increase peer review transparency. Increased openness of academic quality control methods may facilitate academic record auditing. With the development of OA mega journals, peer review may now focus entirely on technique and outcomes interpretation, neglecting novelty. Aspects of predatory publishing include using preprints to fill the academic corpus with un-reviewed rubbish and propaganda, and reviewers may self-censor if their name is revealed. Some argue that readers will be more sceptical of preprint research, a hallmark of scientific inquiry.
Articles that have been published under open access tend to have a more significant amount of citations. The effect of open access publishing on HTML views and PDF downloads is strong and significant, indicating that open access articles will have more exposure as a result of their release.