Schlagwort: oaca

Werden Open-Access-Publikationen in Patenten zitiert?

Werden Open-Access-Publikationen in Patenten zitiert? Ja. Aber ich würde gerne herausfinden, wie hoch der Open-Access-Anteil der in Patenten zitierten Literatur tatsächlich ist. Und ob und wie stark er steigt. Ich habe keine Veröffentlichungen gefunden, die sich dieser Thematik annehmen. Und auch keine geeigneten Daten oder Suchinstrumente. Eventuell könnte PatBase dafür in Frage kommen? Zumindest wird dies hier angedeutet.

Die OECD-Daten sind zu alt, das NBER Patent Citation Data File sowieso. Kann mir jemand weiterhelfen?

Kritik an Altmetrics

Teil der Operation Frühjahrsputz 2016, in deren Verlauf angefangene und nie beendete Postings einfach so veröffentlicht werden.

Erste Meldung:

Scholar urges delegates at conference in the Netherlands to use measures like Twitter to measure public engagement, rather than turning them into new metrics

Ähnliches Thema:

Open access papers ‘more likely to be cited on Twitter’

Articles that are free to view are also more frequently shared on Facebook, new research finds

Wikipedia erhöht den Impact einer Publikation

Misha Teplitskiy, Grace Lu, Eamon Duede: Amplifying the Impact of Open Access: Wikipedia and the Diffusion of Science

Abstract:

With the rise of Wikipedia as a first-stop source for scientific knowledge, it is important to compare its representation of that knowledge to that of the academic literature. This article approaches such a comparison through academic references made within the worlds 50 largest Wikipedias. Previous studies have raised concerns that Wikipedia editors may simply use the most easily accessible academic sources rather than sources of the highest academic status. We test this claim by identifying the 250 most heavily used journals in each of 26 research fields (4,721 journals, 19.4M articles in total) indexed by the Scopus database, and modeling whether topic, academic status, and accessibility make articles from these journals more or less likely to be referenced on Wikipedia. We find that, controlling for field and impact factor, the odds that an open access journal is referenced on the English Wikipedia are 47% higher compared to closed access journals. Moreover, in most of the worlds Wikipedias a journals high status (impact factor) and accessibility (open access policy) both greatly increase the probability of referencing. Among the implications of this study is that the chief effect of open access policies may be to significantly amplify the diffusion of science, through an intermediary like Wikipedia, to a broad public audience.

Ich vermute übrigens, dass die in großen MOOCs verwendete Literatur ebenfalls einen, wenn auch eventuell verzögerten, Zitationsanstieg erfährt. Viele Wissenschaftler werden MOOCs zur interdisziplinären Fortbildung verwenden und darüber ihre jeweiligen Grundlagen und somit auch die Grundlagenliteratur aufnehmen.

Schwedische OA-Artikel werden häufiger zitiert als Nicht-OA-Artikel

Teil der Operation Frühjahrsputz 2015, in deren Verlauf angefangene und nie beendete Postings einfach so veröffentlicht werden.

Across all fields, Open Access articles in Swedish repository have a higher citation rate than non-OA articles.

Due to differences in citation practices amongst scientific disciplines, existing research on a possible open access citation advantage remains limited. A new study seeks to overcome these limitations by investigating whether there is a possible OA citation advantage across all fields. Lars Kullman presents his findings on cross-field citation comparisons between OA and non-OA articles from the Chalmers University of Technology self-archive repository. The results indicate an advantage. The OA articles studied in this paper have a 22% higher field normalized citation rate than the non-OA articles.

Nature Communications bald nur noch Open Access

Aus einer Pressemitteilung der NPG zu Nature Communications:

Nature Communications is to become the first Nature-branded open access only journal.

Standardlizenz wird CC BY 4.0, aber auch andere CC-Lizenzen werden verfügbar sein. In der Mitteilung wird auch auf einen “kleinen, aber signifikanten” Vorteil hinsichtlich der Zitationshäufigkeit von OA-Publikationen hingewiesen:

A report by the Research Information Network recently found that there is a significant benefit for article views and downloads, as well as a small but significant citation benefit to publishing open access in Nature Communications.

Nachtrag zum Open Data Citation Advantage

Wer einem Artikel über den Open Data Citation Advantage beim Entstehen zusehen möchte, sollte (eigentlich immer, aber jetzt besonders) Research Remix, Heather Piwowars Blog, verfolgen. Sie postet dort Abschnitte ihres gerade entstehenden Artikels, die teils auch schon kommentiert wurden.

Wo ich schon dabei bin: Man kann und sollte ihr auch auf Twitter folgen.

Mögliche Ursachen für einen Open Data Citation Advantage

Heather Piwowar schlägt fünf mögliche Ursachen für einen Open Data Citation Advantage vor:

  1. Data Reuse. Papers with available datasets can be used in more ways than papers without data, and therefore may receive additional attributions upon published data reuse.
  2. Credibility Signalling. The credibility of research findings may be higher for research papers with available data. Such papers may be preferentially chosen background citations and/or the foundation of additional research.
  3. Increased Visibility. Citing authors may be more likely to encounter a research project with available data. More artifacts associated with a research project gives the project a larger footprint, increasing the likelihood that someone finds an aspect of the research. Links from data to the research paper may also increase the search ranking of the research paper.
  4. Early View. When data is made available before a paper is published, some citations may accrue earlier than otherwise because research methods and findings are encountered prior to paper publication.
  5. Selection Bias. Authors may be more likely to publish data for papers they judge to be their best quality work, because they are most proud or confident in the results. ALTERNATIVELY, it is possible that author self-selection bias may have a negative correlation with research quality in the case of Open Data: authors may be less willing to share details for their most important and visible research in order to maintain a competitive edge and avoid the upheaval of error detection.

Sie bittet um Kritik oder weitere Vorschläge.