 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
"Some college administrators seem so distracted with fund raising, academic infighting, and community initiatives that they set up their emergency communications departments very poorly. Training is poor to nonexistent, secretaries are pressed into service with tremendous responsibilities for running 'notification systems' 24/7 and on weekends because no one else knows how to do it and the administration won’t pay for additional staff. Procedures are seat-of-the-pants and dependent on HIPPO (highest paid person’s opinion), except when something like Virginia Tech happens and there is some sort of scramble to do something different." --Donna
Most Colleges Avoid Risk Management, Report Says
U. of Georgia Paid 2 Fraternities $2.4-Million to Relocate, Contracts Show
The two were among five that houses on property where the university plans to build new academic facilities.
New Allegations in Admissions Controversy at U. of Illinois Suggest Ex-Provost Played a Role
Linda P.B. Katehi, the incoming chancellor of the University of California at Davis, has insisted she knew nothing of the admission of politically connected applicants at Illinois.
Sonoma State U. Foundation May Lose $350,000 on Loan to Former Board Member
The foundation will be forced to issue fewer scholarships in the 2010-11 academic year because of a diminished endowment, a university official said.
Court Overturns $2-Million Verdict for Former Coach at U. of Louisiana-Lafayette
The coach, one of the few African-Americans in big-time college football, was fired after three losing seasons. He sued, saying he had been dismissed because of his race.
The notorious vermin have forced Colorado State University at Fort Collins to cancel its annual Great Sofa Roundup, which allows students to donate unwanted couches.
College Suspends Student for Working in Gay Pornography | 58
President Obama's Visit to Notre Dame Carries Barely a Hint of Controversy That Preceded It | 58
Drug Sting Nabs 21 Students at U. of Illinois | 57
Faculty Members and Union Protest Staff Layoffs at Temple U. as 'Cruel' | 57
North Dakota Board's Vote Puts 'Fighting Sioux' Mascot on Thinner Ice | 57
Athletics
Community Colleges
Government & Politics
Information Technology
International
Money & Management
Northern Illinois
Research & Books
Short Subjects
Students
The Faculty
Prior days' news: By date | Search
This week's print issue
Back issues: By date | Search
May 15, 2006
Open Access Speeds Use by Others of Scientific Papers, Study Finds
In the continuing debate about open access to scientific literature, the pro-access side gained strength with a study, published this afternoon, that says that, during the first four to 16 months after publication, papers with free access get cited more often than those that require subscriptions. The study appears in an open-access journal, PLoS Biology, and was written by Gunther Eysenbach, of the University of Toronto, who also edits another open-access journal, the Journal of Medical Internet Research.
The study is the first to compare open-access and non-open-access papers from the same journal. Mr. Eysenbach compared papers published in the journal Proccedings of the National Academy of Sciences in the latter half of 2004. That journal began in June 2004 to offer authors the option of paying $1,000 to make their articles free online upon publication. If authors did not pay the extra fee, their papers remained password-protected for the first six months after publication.
Mr. Eysenbach found that the open-access papers were twice as likely as the password-protected articles to be cited four to 10 months after publication, and almost three times as likely from 10 to 16 months afterward. Not yet clear is whether the open-access advantage increases citation in the long run or whether the trend is similar for other journals.
The open-access movement has drawn additional strength in recent months from pressure in Congress to make taxpayer-supported research freely available (The Chronicle, May 3) and from the European Commission (The Chronicle, April 19).
Posted on Monday May 15, 2006 | Permalink |Comments
Previous: Judge Puts the Kibosh on Prowling Police at Washington State U.
Next: 3rd Duke Lacrosse Player Is Indicted on Rape Charges
The Eysenbach study is certainly not “the first to compare open-access and non-open-access papers from the same journal”. See the growing bibliography of studies on the open-access citation advantage.
Other studies listed there will also give CHE readers a better idea of whether it is indeed ”[n]ot yet clear… whether the open-access advantage increases citation in the long run or whether the trend is similar for other journals.”
Stevan Harnad
American Scientist Open Access Forum
— Stevan Harnad May 15, 10:21 PM #
Many studies have confirmed citation advantages for articles available freely to the public, yet to believe that Open Access is the cause of more citations may be to wrongly ascribe cause.
In our study of mathematics articles that were posted to the arXiv , we could not find any evidence to support the postulate that Open Access leads to more citations.
The most likely cause was some form of self-selection, leading to better articles being posted to the arXiv. Open Access may have been merely an artifact, not a cause, of a citation differential.
see: Does the arXiv lead to higher citations and reduced publisher downloads for mathematics articles?
— Philip Davis May 16, 10:50 AM #
Harnad and Davis are both right. Yes, there have been previous studies on GREEN open access publishing, and as Davis notes, these studies have fundamental flaws, as the authors did not control for confounders, and because the arrow of causation is unclear. In contrast, the PLoS study is about GOLD OA publishing. In that area it is indeed the first such study, and the first study which addresses the self-selection concern.
— Gunther Eysenbach May 16, 09:51 PM #