Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.018233486 = sum of:
  0.015209509 = product of:
    0.060838036 = sum of:
      0.060838036 = weight(_text_:authors in 448) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.060838036 = score(doc=448,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24157293 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052990302 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 448, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=448)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.0030239774 = product of:
    0.006047955 = sum of:
      0.006047955 = weight(_text_:e in 448) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.006047955 = score(doc=448,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.07616667 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052990302 = queryNorm
          0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 448, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=448)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

With the growth of open access (OA), the financial flows in scholarly journal publishing have become increasingly complex, but comprehensive data on and transparency of these flows are still lacking. The opacity is especially concerning for hybrid OA, where subscription-based journals publish individual articles as OA if an optional fee is paid. This study addresses the lack of transparency by leveraging Elsevier article metadata and provides the first publisher-level study of hybrid OA uptake and invoicing. Our results show that Elsevier's hybrid OA uptake has grown steadily but slowly from 2015 to 2019, doubling the number of hybrid OA articles published per year and increasing the share of OA articles in Elsevier's hybrid journals from 2.6 to 3.7% of all articles. Further, we find that most hybrid OA articles were invoiced directly to authors, followed by articles invoiced through agreements with research funders, institutions, or consortia, with only a few funding bodies driving hybrid OA uptake. As such, our findings point to the role of publishing agreements and OA policies in hybrid OA publishing. Our results further demonstrate the value of publisher-provided metadata to improve the transparency in scholarly publishing.

Language

e

0.002138275 = product of:
  0.00427655 = sum of:
    0.00427655 = product of:
      0.0085531 = sum of:
        0.0085531 = weight(_text_:e in 944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0085531 = score(doc=944,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07616667 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052990302 = queryNorm
            0.112294525 = fieldWeight in 944, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=944)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Delayed open access (OA) refers to scholarly articles in subscription journals made available openly on the web directly through the publisher at the expiry of a set embargo period. Although a substantial number of journals have practiced delayed OA since they started publishing e-versions, empirical studies concerning OA have often overlooked this body of literature. This study provides comprehensive quantitative measurements by identifying delayed OA journals and collecting data concerning their publication volumes, embargo lengths, and citation rates. Altogether, 492 journals were identified, publishing a combined total of 111,312 articles in 2011; 77.8% of these articles were made OA within 12 months from publication, with 85.4% becoming available within 24 months. A journal impact factor analysis revealed that delayed OA journals have citation rates on average twice as high as those of 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 and by including a substantial proportion of high-impact journals.

Language

e

0.0015119887 = product of:
  0.0030239774 = sum of:
    0.0030239774 = product of:
      0.006047955 = sum of:
        0.006047955 = weight(_text_:e in 1194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006047955 = score(doc=1194,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07616667 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052990302 = queryNorm
            0.07940422 = fieldWeight in 1194, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1194)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Language

e

0.0012095909 = product of:
  0.0024191819 = sum of:
    0.0024191819 = product of:
      0.0048383637 = sum of:
        0.0048383637 = weight(_text_:e in 333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0048383637 = score(doc=333,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07616667 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052990302 = queryNorm
            0.063523374 = fieldWeight in 333, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=333)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Language

e