Download e-book Stanford Law Review: Volume 63, Issue 4 - April 2011

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Stanford Law Review: Volume 63, Issue 4 - April 2011 file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Stanford Law Review: Volume 63, Issue 4 - April 2011 book. Happy reading Stanford Law Review: Volume 63, Issue 4 - April 2011 Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Stanford Law Review: Volume 63, Issue 4 - April 2011 at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Stanford Law Review: Volume 63, Issue 4 - April 2011 Pocket Guide.

Explore Now. Buy As Gift. Overview A leading law journal has added a digital edition to its worldwide distribution, using quality ebook formatting, active links, and nested and detailed Tables of Contents for each article. This current issue of the Stanford Law Review contains studies of law, history, and social policy by recognized scholars on such diverse topics as fixing unfair contracts by Omri Ben-Shahar , using DNA forensics to identify family members in criminal cases and other legal matters by Natalie Ram , and the ethics of lawyers holding onto real evidence such as guns,tapes, and drugs by Stephen Gillers.

In addition, extensive student work explores the history of religious freedom and the First Amendment, as well as the use of amicus curiae briefs in the Supreme Court after an opinion below is abandoned by a party. The Stanford Law Review was organized in Each year the Law Review publishes one volume, which appears in six separate issues between December and July. Each issue contains material written by student members of the Law Review, other Stanford law students, and outside contributors, such as law professors, judges, and practicing lawyers.

The current volume is 63, for the academic year , and the present compilation, in ebook form, represents Issue 4 for April In the ebook editions, all footnotes, graphs, and Tables of Contents including those for individual articles are fully linked, properly scaled, and functional; the original note numbering is retained; and the issue is properly formatted for ereaders.

Product Details About the Author. About the Author Students of Stanford Law School who edit and contribute to this journal of legal and social issues, with principal contributions by recognized scholars in their fields. Average Review. In this research, indexes such as the relation between self-citation of journal and impact factor and the effect of self-citation rate of the journal in open access performance are investigated. Research method is an analytical method conducted by using citation analysis technique. SPSS statistical software was used to examine and analyze the data and its inferential analysis methods such as Pierson Factor were used as well.

Statistical society includes journals. The findings indicate that there is a significant relation between self-citation and impact factor. Added 28 May Mark J. McCabe, Christopher M. Using panel data on science journals, we are able to circumvent some problems plaguing previous studies of the impact of open access on citations.

Open access increases cites to the best content top-ranked journals or articles in upper quintiles of citations within a volume but reduces cites to lower-quality content. We can find structural parameters allowing the model to fit the quintile results quite closely. The Journal Impact Factor is frequently used as the primary parameter with which to compare the scientific output of individuals and institutions. The Journal Impact Factor, as calculated by Thomson Reuters, was originally created as a tool to help librarians identify journals to purchase, not as a measure of the scientific quality of research in an article.

With that in mind, it is critical to understand that the Journal Impact Factor has a number of well-documented deficiencies as a tool for research assessment. These limitations include: A citation distributions within journals are highly skewed; B the properties of the Journal Impact Factor are field-specific: it is a composite of multiple, highly diverse article types, including primary research papers and reviews; C Journal Impact Factors can be manipulated or "gamed" by editorial policy; and D data used to calculate the Journal Impact Factors are neither transparent nor openly available to the public.

A number of themes run through these recommendations: the need to eliminate the use of journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, in funding, appointment, and promotion considerations; the need to assess research on its own merits rather than on the basis of the journal in which the research is published; and the need to capitalize on the opportunities provided by online publication such as relaxing unnecessary limits on the number of words, figures, and references in articles, and exploring new indicators of significance and impact.

Mendeley is signing DORA on its own. To make the case for, or against, a claim such as 'open access increases impact' requires a lot of the reader, who may not be a specialist but who wants to try and understand the point at issue and decide if it has any relevance to him or her. The following simple example is included for this reason, not as proof but as evidence of the effect within a particular domain.

Draw your own conclusions, and then read the more detailed evidence of the bibliography if you are still interested. This link returns the number of articles published in the Astrophysical Journal in and their number of citations. There is a systematic error in the calculations for Nuclear Physics A Elsevier does not give us the references so the results will be higher than the true value. DL], 20 Dec Mertens, S. A critical review of the literature , Publishing Research Consortium, undated announced 17 May , Journal of Informetrics , 1 3 : , July and some practical advice on how to respond to the OA citation advantage Bowering Mullen, L.

Harnad and Brody, D-Lib , , and by Kurtz et al. It's the first major study since the famous Lawrence paper documenting the proposition that OA increases impact. It's also the first to go beyond Lawrence in scope and method in order to answer doubts raised about his thesis. By confirming that OA increases impact, it gives authors the best of reasons to provide OA to their own work 21 June Broader collaborations have emerged to extend these findings e. Brody et al. Open access has become feasible because of the move towards online publication and dissemination.

A new measure that becomes possible with online publication is the number of downloads or 'hits', opening a new line of investigation. Brody and Harnad The effect can be verified with the Correlation Generator below. The latest listings might include preprints, or even pre-preprints. This area of study is effectively a work in progress, and as such the list is intended to raise awareness of the most recent results, even where these may not be definitive or final versions.

Check back for definitive versions. Added 13 May Cassidy R. Although hundreds of scientists have presented at TED, little information is available regarding the presenters, their academic credentials, and the impact of TED Talks on the general population.

This article uses bibliometric and webometric techniques to gather data on the characteristics of TED presenters and videos and analyze the relationship between these characteristics and the subsequent impact of the videos. The results show that the presenters were predominately male and non-academics. Male-authored videos were more popular and more liked when viewed on YouTube. Videos by academic presenters were more commented on than videos by others and were more liked on YouTube, although there was little difference in how frequently they were viewed. The majority of academic presenters were senior faculty, males, from United States-based institutions, were visible online, and were cited more frequently than average for their field.

However, giving a TED presentation appeared to have no impact on the number of citations subsequently received by an academic, suggesting that although TED popularizes research, it may not promote the work of scientists within the academic community. Using the page views data of papers published on Nature, we calculate from two perspectives. Papers are viewed most frequently within a short time period after publication.

Respectively, In addition, we find that readers' attention on Open Access publications are more enduring. Using the usage data of a newly published paper, we conduct regression analysis to predict the future expected total usage count of the paper. The articles were classified into two groups - the OA publications and the non-OA publications. We analyzed all the articles published in the same year and the number of their citations until the end of February , seeking to find out if these two groups differ from each other.

These two journals are ranked in the second quarter among 88 journals in the same subject category, civil engineering. The present results indicate that more research is needed to give a final answer to the principle question of the paper: does open access have a significant impact on citations in the field of civil engineering. Some other potentially influential factors will be tested as well.

Lozano, Yves Gingras Are elite journals declining? In this paper we examine whether this diversification has also affected the handful of elite journals that are traditionally considered to be the best. We examine citation patterns over the past 40 years of 7 long-standing traditionally elite journals and 6 journals that have been increasing in importance over the past 20 years. Since the late s and early s elite journals have been publishing a decreasing proportion of these top cited papers.

This also applies to the two journals that are typically considered as the top venues and often used as bibliometric indicators of "excellence", Science and Nature. On the other hand, several new and established journals are publishing an increasing proportion of most cited papers. These changes bring new challenges and opportunities for all parties. Journals can enact policies to increase or maintain their relative position in the journal hierarchy. Researchers now have the option to publish in more diverse venues knowing that their work can still reach the same audiences.

Finally, evaluators and administrators need to know that although there will always be a certain prestige associated with publishing in "elite" journals, journal hierarchies are in constant flux so inclusion of journals into this group is not permanent. See also Hadas Shema, Elite journals: to hell in a handbasket? Objective: to establish the volume and evolution of scientific production published in open access journals and in subscription journals that allow self-archiving in repositories.

Methods: The scientific production for both institutions was determined by taking a sample from Scopus and covers the period Additionally, the study explores the citation levels of articles from both institutions according to access models of journals, comparing impact indicators from average citation per article.

Results: The two institutions generally show similar patterns to those found at national level, although UNR, following international trends in Medicine, has a higher percentage of articles published in open access journals. In both cases, about half of the production could be deposited in repositories, being pre-print versions and the author's post print mostly allowed by editors. Conclusions: From the perspective of the impact levels achieved, the results indicate a higher level of citation in subscription journals with self-archiving permissions, and this is encouraging for the promotion and development of institutional repositories in both universities.

Many Wikipedia pages pertain to academic papers, scholars and topics providing a rich ecology for scholarly uses. Although many recognize the scholarly potential of Wikipedia, as a crowdsourced encyclopedia its authority and quality is questioned due to the lack of rigorous peer-review and supervision. In this paper we compare the impact of papers, scholars, and topics according to two different measures, namely scholarly citations and Wikipedia mentions. Our results show that academic and Wikipedia impact are positively correlated. Papers, authors, and topics that are mentioned on Wikipedia have higher academic impact than those are not mentioned.

Our findings validate the hypothesis that Wikipedia can help assess the impact of scholarly publications and underpin relevance indicators for scholarly retrieval or recommendation systems. Furthermore, little is known about patterns in data reuse over time and across datasets. Date of publication, journal impact factor, open access status, number of authors, first and last author publication history, corresponding author country, institution citation history, and study topic were included as covariates. We conclude there is a direct effect of third-party data reuse that persists for years beyond the time when researchers have published most of the papers reusing their own data.

Added 9 April Philip M. A longitudinal, retrospective cohort analysis of 13, articles treatment, control published in 14 society-run biomedical research journals in nutrition, experimental biology, physiology, and radiology between February and January reveals a National Institutes of Health-sponsored articles treatment become freely available from the PubMed Central repository.

In addition, the effect of PubMed Central on reducing PDF article downloads is increasing over time, growing at a rate of 1. There was no longitudinal effect for full-text HTML downloads. While PubMed Central may be providing complementary access to readers traditionally underserved by scientific journals, the loss of article readership from the journal website may weaken the ability of the journal to build communities of interest around research papers, impede the communication of news and events to scientific society members and journal readers, and reduce the perceived value of the journal to institutional subscribers.

In Journal of Informetrics , accepted for publication Abstract: The study documents the growth in the number of journals and articles along with the increase in normalized citation rates of open access OA journals listed in the Scopus bibliographic database between and Two-year citation averages for journals funded by article processing charges APCs have reached the same level as subscription journals.

Citation averages of OA journals funded by other means continue to lag well behind OA journals funded by APCs and subscription journals. We hypothesize this is less an issue of quality than due to the fact that such journals are commonly published in languages other than English and tend to be located outside the four major publishing countries. Authors seeking to be well cited should aim to write comprehensive and substantial review articles, and submit them to journals with a high impact factor which has previously carried articles on the topic.

Nonetheless, strategic placement of articles is complementary to, and no substitute for careful crafting of good quality research. I also downloaded a spreadsheet of impact data from Journal Metrics, an offshoot of Scopus that assesses journal impact. In terms of impact, open access still lags behind non-OA journals. Added 19 March , updated 13 May Mark J. Submitted to Review of Economics and Statistics. Revised preprint. Abstract: Does online availability boost citations? The answer has implications for issues ranging from the value of a citation to the sustainability of open-access journals.

Using panel data on citations to economics and business journals, we show that the enormous effects found in previous studies were an artifact of their failure to control for article quality, disappearing once we add fixed effects as controls.

  • The Monument.
  • The 12222 Ig Nobel Prize Winners.
  • See a Problem??
  • Stanford Law Review: Volume 63, Issue 4 - April 2011!
  • Klänge aus der Heimat from the Operetta Die Fledermaus - Score.
  • No section.
  • Read More From Stanford Law Review.

Our theoretical analysis informs the econometric specification and allows us to translate our results for citation increases into welfare terms. Added 4 March Richard C. Implicit in many OACE studies is the belief that authors are heavily invested in the number of citations their articles receive. This study seeks to determine what influence the OACE has on the decision-making process of tenure-track science faculty when they consider where to submit a manuscript for publication. Due to dramatically different expectations with respect to the size of the OACE, however, only one of them is likely to seriously consider the OACE when deciding where to submit their next manuscript for publication.

Once a subset of journals has satisfied these criteria, financial and access issues compete with the OACE in making a final decision. The association of scientific and nonscientific factors on their citation rate was quantified. Results: Randomized controlled trials, as well as multicenter studies with large sample sizes, were significantly more frequent in the high citation rate group.

The unadjusted odds of a highly cited article to be supported by industry were 2. But there is still no consensus which model should be supported in particular. The aim of this simulation study is to discover mechanisms and predict developments that may lead to specific outcomes of possible market transformation scenarios. It contributes to theories related to OA by substantiating the argument of a citation advantage of OA articles and by visualizing the mechanisms of a journal system collapsing in the long-term due to the continuation of the serials crisis.

Our results indicate that for scholarly communication in general, a transition to Green OA combined with a certain level of subscription-based publishing and a migration of few top journals is the most beneficial development. However, self-archiving policies that are promoted by publishers provide a method by which this restriction can be relaxed. In this paper I outline the motivation behind self-archiving publications in terms of increased impact citations and downloads of articles , increased access for the developing world, and decreased library costs.

I then describe the current state of self-archiving policies in ecology and evolution journals. Journals with higher impacts tend to have more restrictive policies on self-archiving, and publishers vary in the extent to which they impose these restrictions. Finally, I provide a guide to academics on how to take advantage of opportunities for self-archiving using either institutional repositories or freely-available online tools. More specifically, it is believed that the social media can influence article citations.

Here we tested the hypothesis that inclusion of scholarly references in Wikipedia affects the citation trends. To perform this analysis, we introduced a citation "propensity" measure, which is inspired by the concept of amino acid propensity for protein secondary structures. We show that although citation counts generally increase during time, the citation "propensity" does not increase after inclusion of a reference in Wikipedia.

However, true Gold Open Access journals are still outnumbered by traditional journals.


Law school in the United States - Wikipedia

Moreover availability of Gold OA journals differs from discipline to discipline and often leaves scientists concerned about the impact of these existent titles. The identified top Gold Open Access journals proved to be well-established and their impact is generally increasing for all the analyzed indicators. The success-rate for JCR inclusion differs from country to country and is often inversely proportional to the number of national OA journal titles.

Because of online accessibility, academic researchers tend to read more, and reading has become more superficial, such that information overload has become an important issue. Given this circumstance, how the Internet affects knowledge transfer, or, more specifically, the citation behavior of researchers, has become a recent focus of interest.

This study assesses the effects of the Internet on citation patterns in terms of 4 characteristics of cited documents: topic relevance, author status, journal prestige, and age of references. This work hypothesizes that academic scholars cite more topically relevant articles, more articles written by lower status authors, articles published in less prestigious journals, and older articles with online accessibility. The current study also hypothesizes that researcher knowledge level moderates such Internet effects.

The references of these documents were analyzed to test the proposed hypotheses, which are significantly supported by the empirical results. Added 4 December V. Calcagno, E. Demoinet, K. Gollner, L. Guidi, D. Ruths, C. Here, we report results from a large-scale survey of the submission process, covering scientific journals from the biological sciences in years Manuscript flows among journals revealed a modular submission network, with high-impact journals preferentially attracting submissions.

Submission history affected postpublication impact: Resubmissions from other journals received significantly more citations than first-intent submissions, and resubmissions between different journal communities received significantly fewer citations. An excavation of scientific papers' usually hidden prepublication trajectories from journal to journal has found that papers published after having first been rejected elsewhere receive significantly more citations on average than ones accepted on first submission.

Though a substantial number of journals have practiced delayed OA since they started publishing e-versions, empirical studies concerning open access have often overlooked this body of literature. This study provides comprehensive quantitative measurements by identifying delayed OA journals, collecting data concerning their publication volumes, embargo lengths, and citation rates.

  • Never to Sleep (Soul Screamers).
  • Volume 63, Issue 4.
  • Little Pete and the Great Big Giant Tree;
  • The Ig Nobel Prize Winners;

Altogether journals were identified, publishing a combined total of articles in A journal impact factor analysis revealed that delayed OA journals have on average twice as high average citation rates compared to closed subscription journals, and three times as high as immediate OA journals. Overall the results demonstrate that delayed OA journals constitute an important segment of the openly available scholarly journal literature, both by their sheer article volume as well as by including a substantial proportion of high impact journals.

The loss of article readership from the journal website may weaken the ability of the publisher to build communities of interest around the research article, impede the communication of news and events with society members and reduce the perceived value of the journal to institutional subscribers. It appears that the increased IFs are a result of the journals having gone open access from to onwards. Added 4 December Filippo Radicchi In science "there is no bad publicity": Papers criticized in technical comments have high scientific impact arXiv.

Often, comments are negatively perceived by the authors of the criticized articles because believed to make the commented papers less worthy or trusty to the eyes of the scientific community. Thus, there is a tendency to think that criticized papers are predestined to have low scientific impact. We show here that such belief is not supported by empirical evidence.

We consider thirteen major publication outlets in science and perform a large-scale analysis of the citation patterns of criticized publications. We find that commented papers have not only average citation rates much higher than those of non commented articles, but also unexpectedly over-populate the set of the most cited publications within a journal.

Since comments are published soon after criticized papers, comments can be viewed as early indicators of the future impact of criticized papers. This paper deals with actions needed for extracting web indicators from bibliographic records in open access repositories, provides guidelines to support a further webometric study and presents the results of a preliminary web impact evaluation carried out over a sample of EU FP7 output papers available from the OpenAIRE database.

Using URL citations, title mentions and copies of titles as main web impact indicators, this study suggests that a priori the implementation of the mandatory clause SC39 to encourage open access to European research may be resulted indeed in a greater and more immediate web visibility of these papers. By monitoring the downloads of scientific articles in the journal of Scientometrics for hours, namely one month, we investigate the download statistics.

Then we aggregate the keywords in these downloaded research papers, and analyze the trends of article downloading and keyword downloading. We surveyed their Facebook and Twitter presences and scanned their Web sites for any Facebook and or Twitter features as of November Those journals in our sample making best use of the open sharing nature of social media are closed-access; with the leading open access journals on the list lagging behind by comparison. Our aim was to inform this debate by comparing the scientific impact of OA journals with subscription journals, controlling for journal age, the country of the publisher, discipline and for OA publishers their business model.

A total of OA journals were compared with 7, subscription journals using Web of Science citation data while an overlapping set of 1, OA journals were compared with 11, subscription journals using Scopus data. However, after controlling for discipline medicine and health versus other , age of the journal three time periods and the location of the publisher four largest publishing countries versus other countries the differences largely disappeared in most subcategories except for journals that had been launched prior to OA journals that fund publishing with article processing charges APCs are on average cited more than other OA journals.

In medicine and health, OA journals founded in the last 10 years are receiving about as many citations as subscription journals launched during the same period. Hence, a Data Sharing Citation Advantage seems inevitable. Quoted extracts: " F assessors are highly influenced by the impact factor of the journal and less by the actual intrinsic quality of the paper" "Without the information of what journal that paper is published in you have very little power to tell the ultimate impact of that paper" "People tend to over-rate the quality of science in high-impact factor journals and that is a very important influence" "The difference between the really high impact journals and the medium quality journals is nothing like as dramatic as we might think" There is a brief mention of open access impact only in questions following the presentation - assumes open access journals.

Added 27 June Sharon Mathelus, Ginny Pittman, and Jill Yablonski-Crepeau Promotion of research articles to the lay press: a summary of a three-year project Learned Publishing , Vol 25, No 3, July , Abstract: The promotion of scholarly journal articles to journalists and bloggers via the dissemination of press releases generates a positive impact on the number of citations that publicized journal articles receive. We evaluated scholarly journal articles published in nearly Wiley journals, which were also covered in press releases.

What is Kobo Super Points?

The results in this case study suggest a need for greater investment in media support for scholarly journals publishing research that sparks interest to a broad news audience, as it could increase citations. Added 27 June M. Riera and E. Aibar Does open access publishing increase the impact of scientific articles?

Citation data were compared between the two groups up until April 30, Potentially confounding variables for citation counts were adjusted for in a linear multiple regression model. The mean follow-up was The open access advantage is greater for the more highly cited articles, and appears in the months after publication. However, increasingly scholars are also visible on the Web, establishing presences in a growing variety of social ecosystems.

But how wide and established is this presence, and how do measures of social Web impact relate to their more traditional counterparts? To answer this, we sampled 57 presenters from the Leiden STI Conference, gathering publication and citations counts as well as data from the presenters' Web "footprints. Throughout most of the 20th century, papers' citation rates were increasingly linked to their respective journals' Impact Factors.

However, since , the advent of the digital age, the strength of the relation between Impact Factors and paper citations has been decreasing. This decrease began sooner in physics, a field that was quicker to make the transition into the electronic domain.


Furthermore, since , the proportion of highly cited papers coming from highly cited journals has been decreasing, and accordingly, the proportion of highly cited papers not coming from highly cited journals has also been increasing. Should this pattern continue, it might bring an end to the use of the Impact Factor as a way to evaluate the quality of journals, papers and researchers. See also George Lozano, The demise of the Impact Factor: The strength of the relationship between citation rates and IF is down to levels last seen 40 years ago, Impact of Social Sciences , 08 June Lozano discusses the recent paper that he co-authored.

Scholarly Kitchen, Nov 13, "The paper continues a controversy between those who believe that digital publishing is narrowing the attention of scientists and those who believe it is expanding it. There are theories to support each viewpoint. Unfortunately, the authors seemed too eager to make strong conclusions from inappropriate and rudimentary analyses, and the authors' unwillingness to share their data for validation purposes does not give me confidence in their results. Research Trends , No. During the past 10 years numerous empirical studies have been published that examine this issue using various methodologies and viewpoints.

The aim of this article is not to replicate nor update these thorough reviews. Rather, it aims to presents the two main methodologies that were applied in these OA-related studies and discusses their potentialities and limitations. The first method is based on citation analyses; the second on usage analyses. In OR 7th International Conference on Open Repositories, July , Edinburgh From the Abstract: we are witnessing the increasing take-up of a range of third-party services such as LinkedIn and Academia which are being used by researchers to publish information related to their professional activities, including details of their research publications.

Harvard Law Review Subcite Training Session, April 18, 2019

The paper provides evidence which suggests that personal use of such services can increase the number of downloads by increasing SEO Search Engine Optimisation rankings through inbound links from highly ranked web sites. A survey of use of such services across Russell Group universities shows the popularity of a number of social media services.

In the light of existing usage of these services this paper proposes that institutional encouragement of their use by researchers may generate increased accesses to institutional research publications at little cost to the institution. This paper concludes by describing further work which is planned in order to investigate the SEO characteristics of institutional repositories. Titles containing a question mark, containing a reference to a specific geographical region, and that used a colon or a hyphen were associated with a lower number of citations.

Articles with results-describing titles were cited more often than those with methods-describing titles. After multivariate analysis, only a low number of characters and title typology remained as predictors of the number of citations. However, the relationship between the 2 is not constant or well understood. We investigated the relationship between article accesses and citations in 3 general medicine journals with different journal rankings. For open-access journals with a low impact factor, overall article reach may be higher than expected on the basis of citations. In many cases, supplementary material such as source code and measurement data are required, or can at least be very helpful.

One of the arguments for not making code available is the extra time required to prepare the material. In this paper, we claim that this additional time may be well spent, as the availability of code for a publication is associated with an increase in the expected number of citations. We show this with exploratory analyses of the relationship between code availability and the number of citations for image processing papers. Note on open access citation impact on results p4 : As can be seen in the open access citation studies such as the one by Lawrence , papers for which an online version is freely available have an increased number of citations.

I did not take this into account in my analyses by adding the open access availability as another variable. Articles that have code available generally also have an online version of the article. The citation effect seen above is therefore the combined effect of the open access availability of the paper and the availability of code. From a methodological point of view, the debate focuses on biases, control groups, sampling, and the degree to which conclusions from case studies can be generalized.

This note does not give a complete overview of studies that were published during the past decade but highlights key events. But how many studies showing that OA articles are downloaded and cited more have to be published before the ad hoc critiques many funded and promoted by an industry not altogether disinterested in the outcome! The online, public nature of these tools exposes and reifies scholarly processes once hidden and ephemeral. Metrics based on this activities could inform broader, faster measures of impact, complementing traditional citation metrics.

This study explores the properties of these social media-based metrics or "altmetrics", sampling 24, articles published by the Public Library of Science. We employ a cohort of 4, scientific articles submitted to the preprint database arXiv. We study three forms of reactions to these preprints: how they are downloaded on the arXiv. We perform two analyses. First, we analyze the delay and time span of article downloads and Twitter mentions following submission, to understand the temporal configuration of these reactions and whether significant differences exist between them.

Second, we run correlation tests to investigate the relationship between Twitter mentions and both article downloads and article citations. We find that Twitter mentions follow rapidly after article submission and that they are correlated with later article downloads and later article citations, indicating that social media may be an important factor in determining the scientific impact of an article. The natural experiment in this study is that a select group of published articles is posted on SSRN at a time chosen by their authors' affiliated organizations or SSRN, not by their authors.

Using a difference-in-difference method and comparing the citation profiles of the articles before and after the posting time on SSRN against a group of control articles with similar characteristics, I estimated the effect of the SSRN posting on citation counts. This gain is likely to be caused by the free access that SSRN provides. Abstract: This paper uses Genome Expression Omnibus GEO , a data repository in biomedical sciences, to examine the usage patterns of open data repositories.

It attempts to identify the degree of recognition of data reuse value and understand how e-science has impacted a large-scale scholarship. By analyzing a list of 1, publications that cite GEO data to support their independent studies, it discovers that free data can support a wealth of high quality investigations, that the rate of open data use keeps growing over the years, and that scholars in different countries show different rates of complying with data sharing policies.

From the Abstract: This research examines the relationship between the open access availability of journal papers in anthropology and their citation conditions. The results reveal that open access papers in general receive more citations. Moreover this research finds that 1 papers in high-ranked journals do not have a higher open access rate, and 2 papers in lower-ranked journals have a greater rate of citations if they are freely accessible.

The findings are contrary to the existing theory that the higher citation rate of open access papers is caused by authors posting their best papers online. From the Abstract: We study the impact of content factors and search engine optimization factors on download rates of capstone papers.

We examined all MPA capstone papers at Texas State University which have been made available through an online digital repository for public consumption. Results show strong support for the impact of search engine factors on download rates. The implications of high download rates of MPA capstone papers on public administration research, practice, and education are discussed in this paper. A total of tweets cited distinct JMIR articles.

Conclusions: Tweets can predict highly cited articles within the first 3 days of article publication. Social media activity either increases citations or reflects the underlying qualities of the article that also predict citations, but the true use of these metrics is to measure the distinct concept of social impact. Social impact measures based on tweets are proposed to complement traditional citation metrics.

The proposed twimpact factor may be a useful and timely metric to measure uptake of research findings and to filter research findings resonating with the public in real time. Not surprisingly the paper has been tweeted more than times in the first few days after publication, and will certainly become highly cited. I have deeper reservations about this paper. I'm leery of editors who view their journal as a publication outlet for their own work In my mind, there is nothing wrong and nothing unusual about editors talking about their work as an editor in their own journal.

The bottom line of the paper is that at least in the context of JMIR, tweets are useful metrics, predictive for citations, and they are potentially also useful for other journals. That's what the paper says, not more and not less. I was very careful not to generalize this to other journals. Added 23 April Claire Bower , Twimpact factors: can tweets really predict citations? Want to peer a year or two into the future of a scientific field?

It is important to know which published topics in generalist biomedical informatics journals elicit the most interest from the scientific community, and whether this interest changes over time, so that journals can better serve their readers. It is also important to understand whether free access to biomedical informatics articles impacts their citation rates in a significant way, so authors can make informed decisions about unlock fees, and journal owners and publishers understand the implications of open access.

To better understand the effects of free access in article dissemination, the number of citations per month after publication for articles published in versus was compared, since there was a significant change in free access to JAMIA articles between those years. Results suggest that there is a positive association between free access and citation rate for JAMIA articles. Added 12 February ; updated 4 March Sears, J. Often, however, data sets supporting research articles are not openly accessible and interlinked.

This analysis tests whether open sharing and linking of supporting data through the PANGAEA data library measurably increases the citation rate of articles published between and in the journal Paleoceanography as reported in the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database. The This relationship between openly available, curated data and increased citation rate may incentivize researchers to share their data.

Includes data plot. Added 25 November Henneken, E. In this presentation we will show this is indeed the case: articles with links to data result in higher citation rates than articles without such links. Added 25 November Xia, J. Added 25 November Henneberger, S. Analyzed with nonparametric methods, download data give information about the visibility of electronic publications on the Internet. The analytical method NoRA was successfully applied to data from Institutional Repositories of four universities. In each case, groups of publications were identified that differed significantly in their usage.

Similarities in the results reveal factors that influence the usage data, which have not been taken into account previously. The presented results imply further applications of NoRA but also raise doubts about the value of download data of single publications. Added 25 November Tarrant, D. This thesis proposes a new family of co-citation based impact measures, describes a system to evaluate their effectiveness against a large citation database, and justifies the results of this evaluation against an analysis of a diverse range of research metrics.

Added 25 November Yuan, S. The results indicate that LIS OA journals have become a significant component of the scholarly communication system. Added 25 November Priem, J. The goal of this study is to better understand the potential of altmetrics. Added 25 November Wang, M. To determine whether a difference in research impact existed, two research impact indicators were used, that is, open access articles as a percentage of all published titles and mean citation rate of open access articles and those not freely available online.

The study shows that for 72 LIS scholars who were subjects of the investigation, 64 of them had published articles within the previous ten years: articles in Chinese and 66 articles in English; of these were OA articles, and were non-OA articles; OA articles constituted The mean citation rate of OA versus non-OA article citation was 1.

Online preview. The first batches of results web pages from keyword searching were selected as evaluation samples in the two search phases, the first 50 and 10 results were chosen, respectively , and a total of 3, samples were evaluated for authority based on the evaluation framework.

The results show that the average authority value for free online scholarly information is about 3. Different domain names, resource types, and disciplines of free online scholarly information perform differently when scored in terms of authority. In conclusion, the authority of free online scholarly information has been unsatisfactory, and needs to be improved. Added 25 November Davis, P. In Learned Publishing , Vol. Using traditional bibliometric indicators for institutions in sub-Saharan Africa, we analyze whether institutional access to TEEAL a digital collection of journal articles in agriculture and allied subjects increases: 1 article production; 2 reference length; and 3 number of citations to journals included in the TEEAL collection.

We report that access to TEEAL does not appear to result in higher article production, although it does lead to longer reference lists an additional 2. We discuss how traditional bibliometric indicators may not provide a full picture of the effectiveness of free and discounted literature programs. Added 12 February Jeffrey Furman and Scott Stern Climbing atop the Shoulders of Giants: The Impact of Institutions on Cumulative Research American Economic Review , 5 , , August From the Abstract: This paper assesses the impact of a specific institution, a biological resource center, whose objective is to certify and disseminate knowledge.

We disentangle the marginal impact of this institution on cumulative research from the impact of selection, in which the most important discoveries are endogenously linked to research-enhancing institutions. Exploiting exogenous shifts of biomaterials across institutional settings and employing a difference-in-differences approach, we find that effective institutions amplify the cumulative impact of individual scientific discoveries. From the paper: Our empirical analysis focuses on whether articles associated with materials exogenously shifted into a BRC receive a boost in citations after their deposit into the BRC, controlling for article-specific fixed effects and fixed effects for article age and calendar year.

Both approaches provide evidence for the marginal impact of BRCs on subsequent knowledge; the post-deposit citation boost is estimated to be between 57 percent and percent across different specifications. Empirical checks of our key identification assumptions reinforce our overall findings. We find that the marginal impact of BRC deposit is marginally higher for articles published in less prestigious journals and that the citation boost is concentrated in follow-on research articles involving more complex subject matter.

The study analyzes the total amount of citations and citation impact observed in Web of Science WoS and Google Scholar GS received during the five-year period February by the two publication types, the citation distributions over the individual sample publications and observed years as well as over external, institutional and personal self-citations.

The results demonstrate that the open access working papers publicly accessible through the DIIS e-archive became far less cited than the corresponding sample of DIIS journal articles published in printed form. However, highly cited working papers have higher impact than the average of the lower half of cited articles. Citation time series show identical distinct patterns for the articles in WoS and GS and working papers in GS, more than doubling the amount of citations received through the latter source.

See also Open access working papers not good enough , ScienceNordic. The analysis is based on the rankings that are correlated with book sales on Amazon. Statistical methods include the sampling of the sales ranking of randomly selected books from each press. The results of one-way ANOVA analyses show that there is no significant difference in the ranking of printed books sold by AUPress in comparison with traditional university presses. However, AUPress, can demonstrate a significantly larger readership for its books as evidenced by the number of downloads of the open electronic versions.

Added 18 August Davis, P. It also examines the extent to which the biomedical literature is used by the general public. Researchers report that their access to the scientific literature is generally good and improving. For authors, the access status of a journal is not an important consideration when deciding where to publish. There is clear evidence that free access increases the number of article downloads, although its impact on article citations is not clear. Recent studies indicate that large citation advantages are simply artifacts of the failure to adequately control for confounding variables.

The effect of free access on the general public's use of the primary medical literature has not been thoroughly evaluated. The research articles from the developed countries receive higher number of citations subsequently resultant research impact compared to those of the developing world. The study may help and pave way for framing policies and strategies to increase the impact of research in the developing world.

Added 06 July Yan, K. We found that the spread of information displays two distinct decay regimes: a rapid downfall in the first month after publication, and a gradual power law decay afterwards. We identified these two regimes with two distinct driving processes: a short-term behavior driven by the fame of a paper, and a long-term behavior consistent with citation statistics. Added 06 July Xia, J. This research is an attempt to add selected OA journals to the journal quality rankings using library and information science LIS as an example.

The results primarily relate to the number of journals, not to the number of documents published in these journals, and show that in all the disciplinary groups, the presence of green road journals widely surpasses the percentage of gold road publications. Comment on this paper: Harnad, S. The citations from to of papers published in were collected to determine the peak time of citation frequency CF of medical papers.

Added 04 April Davis, P. Using a randomized controlled trial of open access publishing, involving 36 participating journals in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities, we report on the effects of free access on article downloads and citations. These results may be explained by social stratification, a process that concentrates scientific authors at a small number of elite research universities with excellent access to the scientific literature. The real beneficiaries of open access publishing may not be the research community but communities of practice that consume, but rarely contribute to, the corpus of literature.

See also this author's earlier dissertation. News articles on this paper: Corbyn, Z. In comments appended to this article Davis says: "the piece is not balanced. Zoe focuses on the weaknesses of the study and not its strengths" Wieder, B. Davis says he doesn't see his study as a blow to open access - if anything, he thinks it calls into question the wisdom of looking only at citation counts to measure the impact of a journal article, particularly given the ease of tracking article downloads online.

Your article does not answer this overly-broad question. Why do you pose it here? I see the world as a more complicated and nuanced place than through the lens of advocacy. The methodological flaw, still uncorrected, has been pointed out before. Readers can be trusted to draw their own conclusions as to whether this study, tirelessly touted as the only methodologically sound one to date, is that -- or an exercise in advocacy. Bruggeman, D. The headline-level synopsis of this and other studies attempting to discern the impacts of open access research obscure a multitude of methodological concerns.

They also downplay significant differences found when breaking the data down by field, country, or other factors. Harnad, S. Universities adopt open access mandates in order to maximize their research impact. The large body of evidence, in field after field, that open access increases citation impact, helps motivate universities to mandate open access self-archiving of their research output, to make it accessible to all its potential users -- rather than just those whose universities can afford subscription access -- so that all can apply, build upon and cite it.

These inferences are not welcomed because they are based on flawed methodology and insufficient statistical power and yet they are being widely touted particularly by the publishing industry lobby as being the sole methodologically sound test of the open access citation advantage!

Ignore the many positive studies. They are all methodologically flawed. The definitive finding, from the sole methodologically sound study, is negative. So there's no access problem, researchers have all the access they need -- and hence there's no need to mandate open access self-archiving. No, this string of inferences is not a "blow to open access" -- but it would be if it were taken seriously. Scholarly Kitchen, Apr 5, The Scholarly Kitchen's own Phil Davis consider this your conflict-of-interest statement attempts to do away with selection bias by looking at a randomized set of papers.

The access status of the articles in the study OA or under subscription-access control was determined at random, not by author or editorial choice. The randomization is important here, as it allows Davis to compare equal groups of articles and control for other sources of bias. If the goal of the OA movement is to create a scientific literature with a broader reach, then it is succeeding admirably. Did they really compare OA articles with non-OA articles under similar conditions?

Or did they in fact find a citation advantage for articles that are available in any fashion online versus those that are not? In the law journal study, unequal comparison groups makes it unclear whether the authors are measuring access or something else entirely. The study also falls prey to potential issues of selection bias. This study discovers that: there exists OACA for open access articles, in this case Added 15 February McCabe, M. We examine other sources of heterogeneity including whether JSTOR benefits "long-tail" or "superstar" articles more.

See also Kolowich, S. The fact that there are many of these poor studies in the literature, or that their claims have achieved consensus among certain like-minded individuals, does not make for good science, nor does it help to inform good science policy. Ottaviani, J. Can you point me to where open access is treated independently from online access, or as a distinct subset of it, in their analysis? Davis, P. Their manuscript needs to be read in context of two prior papers by James Evans, who reported significant online and open access effects using a similar methodology.

Extending their conclusion to citation pattern differences between expensive, restricted online access and free, unrestricted access open is a big leap OA is about providing access to those who don't have subscription access; this paper is about providing online access to those who had subscription access before, but on paper, and now have online access. Moreover, it is in a field economics where there is wide posting of OA preprints not taken into account at all.

McCabe, M. So, using the same technique in both cases should produce similar results. The following response to comments by McCabe above can be found appended to the same article or in this separate source: Harnad, S. Flaws there may well be in the methodology of studies comparing citation counts before and after the year in which a journal goes online. But these are not the flaws of studies comparing citation counts of articles that are and are not made OA within the same journal and year. If "selection bias" refers to authors' bias toward selectively making their better hence more citeable articles OA, then this was controlled for in the comparison of self-selected vs.

But the most compelling findings on the OA citation advantage come from OA author self-archiving of articles published in non-OA journals , not from OA journal publishing. Those are the studies that show the OA citation advantage, and the advantage does not cost the author a penny! Added 04 April Saadat, R. Findings showed that out of journals, journals Added 15 February Lee, K.

PLoS ONE , 5 12 , e, 15 Dec From the Abstract: Despite the positive impact of emerging communication technologies on scientific research, our results provide striking evidence for the role of physical proximity as a predictor of the impact of collaborations. From the Discussion: There have been numerous articles that reported Open Access publications have higher chance to be cited more.

It may be that publications in Open Access journals have higher citation, which may not necessarily be related to collaboration and collocation. However, its impact on our results is uncertain as there are also growing number of articles that are reporting no evidence of Open Access advantage in different disciplines. Comment on this paper: Moed, H. Moed, commenting on the paper by Lee et al.

Added 15 February Xia, J. We discover a correlation between the two variables; namely, multiple OA availability of an article has a positive impact on its citation count. The statistical analysis reveals that for every increase in the availability of OA articles, citation numbers increase by 2. Added 6 December Davis. Introduction: In order to isolate the effect of access on readership and citations, we conducted a randomized controlled trial of open access publishing on articles published electronically in 11 APS journals. This report details the findings three years after the commencement of the experiment.

Discussion: The results of this experiment suggest that providing free access to the scientific literature may increase readership as measured by article downloads and reach a larger potential audience as measured by unique visitors , but have no effect on article citations.

The Surprising Reach of FDA Regulation of Cannabis, Even After Descheduling

These results are consistent with an earlier report of the APS study after one year and the results of other scientific journals after two years. The fact that we observe an increase in readership and visitors for Open Access articles but no citation advantage suggests that scientific authors are adequately served by the current APS model of information dissemination, and second, that the additional readership is taking place outside this core research community.

Use the Next in Topic link to follow the debate. Extracts: Davis, P. All of the articles in our study have now aged 3-years and we report that our initial findings were robust: articles receiving the open access treatment received more article downloads but no more citations. By focusing on the fact that I do not have the statistical power to detect very small differences is really an admission that an OA citation advantage -- if one truly exists -- can be largely explained by other theories e.

That's why all of our studies have been based on samples that have been orders of magnitude bigger than for example yours. But let's not confuse effect-size and the sample-size needed to detect a statistically significant effect; that's not a question about effect size but about variability. The size of the OA citation advantage does indeed vary considerably from field to field, year to year, and sample to sample.