科学网高能物理学论文在arXiv中的开放仓储产生5倍的引用优势

发布时间：2016-08-25 14:17

  本文关键词：高能物理学论文，由笔耕文化传播整理发布。

 

王应宽 编译

2009-07-20

UTC-6 CST

UMN, St Paul

 

 

高能物理学论文在arXiv中的开放仓储产生5倍的引用优势

 

 

Gentil-Beccot等对高能物理学领域人们阅读与引用行为的重要研究，得出以下有充分根据的结论：

 

（1）开放存取研究论文可以显著增加其影响。

 

（2）论文开放存取越早，其影响越大。

 

（3）高能物理学研究人员是最早将其论文开放存取的（始于1991年，而且是在没有被要求的情况下自愿做的）。

 

（4）金色OA并未在绿色OA基础上产生更进一步的影响优势。

 

但是，在理解此文时需要记住以下附加说明：

 

 

 

 

 

结 论

 

 

3）在“金色的”开放存取期刊发表论文没有额外增加明显的引用优势。

 

 

1 无论对于个体的作者，，还是学科整体，免费及时的传播学术思想都具有巨大的优势，可加快科学研究的进程。

 

2 开放存取在高能物理学领域的优势尽显，且没有强制要求，也没有争辩。广泛的采纳开放存取源于对作者自身的直接利益。

 

3 同行评审期刊作为科学交流的工具丧失了其应有的地位，而学术交流的途径事实上已转向学科仓储。

 

 

附：背景小知识

 

绿色开放存取（Green OA）VS. 金色开放存取（Gold OA）

 

根据布达佩斯开放存取倡议（BOAI），主要有两种开放存取途径，即自己存档或开放仓储，开放存取期刊。Stevan Harnad把BOAI-1（开放存档）和BOAI-2（开放存取期刊）实现开放存取的两种策略，对应称为绿色之路和金色之路。Keith G Jeffery也采用这种提法。绿色之路，又称绿色开放存取（Green OA）, 指作者可以对自己论文的预印本、后印本、经同行评审过的会议论文或专著进行存档，提供开放访问。绿色之路通过与各种出版系统并存合作实现出版物的免费访问，但其自己并不真正出版。金色之路，又称金色开放存取（Gold OA），指作者或作者所在机构向出版者付费在开放存取期刊发表论文，出版者自出版之日起就提供论文的免费访问。金色之路是一种电子出版，但目前大多数电子出版物都是非OA模式，通过付费访问（Toll-access）获取订阅费。OA期刊和OA存档或仓储的主要区别在于OA期刊实行同行评审机制，而OA存档没有采用同行评审，其它的差别，特别是创建和运行成本与困难等均源于此。这两种途经并非截然对立、相互排斥，而可以共存，并可对其进行有机整合。

 

摘自：王应宽. 中国科技学术期刊的开放存取出版研究[博士论文].北京:北京大学,2006,12. 

另参见博文：?id=21497

 

 

引用：Gentil-Beccot, Anne; Salvatore Mele, Travis Brooks (2009) Citing and Reading Behaviours in High-Energy Physics: How a Community Stopped Worrying about Journals and Learned to Love Repositories.

 

 

This is an important study, and most of its conclusions are valid:

 

(1) Making research papers open access (OA) dramatically increases their impact.

(2) The earlier that papers are made OA, the greater their impact.

(3) High Energy Physics (HEP) researchers were among the first to make their papers OA (since 1991, and they did it without needing to be mandated to do it!) 

(4) Gold OA provides no further impact advantage over and above Green OA.

 

However, the following caveats need to be borne in mind, in interpreting this paper:

 

(a) HEP researchers have indeed been providing OA since 1991, unmandated (and computer scientists have been doing so since even earlier). But in the ensuing years, the only other discipline that has followed suit, unmandated, has been economics, despite the repeated demonstration of the Green OA impact advantage across all disciplines. So whereas still further evidence (as in this paper by Gentil-Beccot et al) confirming that OA increases impact is always very welcome, that evidence will not be sufficient to induce enough researchers to provide OA; only mandates from their institutions and funders can ensure that they do so.

 

(b) From the fact that when there is a Green OA version available, users prefer to consult that Green OA version rather than the journal version, it definitely does not follow that journals are no longer necessary. Journals are (and always were) essentially peer-review service-providers and cerifiers, and they still are. That essential function is indispensable. HEP researchers continue to submit their papers to peer-reviewed journals, as they always did; and they deposit both their unrefereed preprints and then their refereed postprints in arxiv (along with the journal reference). None of that has changed one bit.

 

(c) Although it has not been systematically demonstrated, it is likely that in fields like HEP and astrophysics, the journal affordability/accessibility problem is not as great as in many other fields. OA's most important function is to provide immediate access to those who cannot afford access to the journal version. Hence the Early Access impact advantage in HEP -- arising from making preprints OA well before the published version is available -- translates, in the case of most other fields, into the OA impact advantage itself, because without OA many potential users simply do not have access even after publication, hence cannot make any contribution to the article's impact. 

 

(d) Almost no one has ever argued (let alone adduced evidence) that Gold OA provides a greater OA advantage than Green OA. The OA advantage is the OA advantage, whether Green or Gold. (It just happens to be easier and more rigorous to test and demonstrate the OA advantage through within-journal comparisons [i.e Green vs. non-Green articles] than between-journal comparisons [Gold vs. non-Gold journals].)

 

Stevan Harnad

EXCERPTS: from Gentil-Beccot et al:

 

ABSTRACT: Contemporary scholarly discourse follows many alternative routes in addition to the three-century old tradition of publication in peer-reviewed journals. The field of High- Energy Physics (HEP) has explored alternative communication strategies for decades, initially via the mass mailing of paper copies of preliminary manuscripts, then via the inception of the first online repositories and digital libraries. 

 

This field is uniquely placed to answer recurrent questions raised by the current trends in scholarly communication: is there an advantage for scientists to make their work available through repositories, often in preliminary form? Is there an advantage to publishing in Open Access journals? Do scientists still read journals or do they use digital repositories? 

 

The analysis of citation data demonstrates that free and immediate online dissemination of preprints creates an immense citation advantage in HEP, whereas publication in Open Access journals presents no discernible advantage. In addition, the analysis of clickstreams in the leading digital library of the field shows that HEP scientists seldom read journals, preferring preprints instead....

 

...

 

...arXiv was first based on e-mail and then on the web, becoming the first repository and the first “green” Open Access5 platform... With the term “green” Open Access we denote the free online availability of scholarly publications in a repository. In the case of HEP, the submission to these repositories, typically arXiv, is not mandated by universities or funding agencies, but is a free choice of authors seeking peer recognition and visibility... The results of an analysis of SPIRES data on the citation behaviour of HEP scientists is presented... demonstrat[e] the “green” Open Access advantage in HEP... With the term “gold” Open Access we denote the free online availability of a scholarly publication on the web site of a scientific journals.... There is no discernable citation advantage added by publishing articles in “gold” Open Access journals...

 

...

 

Conclusions

 

Scholarly communication is at a cross road of new technologies and publishing models. The analysis of almost two decades of use of preprints and repositories in the HEP community provides unique evidence to inform the Open Access debate, through four main findings:

 

1. Submission of articles to an Open Access subject repository, arXiv, yields a citation advantage of a factor five.

 

2. The citation advantage of articles appearing in a repository is connected to their dissemination prior to publication, 20% of citations of HEP articles over a two-year period occur before publication.

 

3. There is no discernable citation advantage added by publishing articles in “gold” Open Access journals.

 

 

4. HEP scientists are between four and eight times more likely to download an article in its preprint form from arXiv rather than its final published version on a journal web site.

 

Taken together these findings lead to three general conclusions about scholarly communication in HEP, as a discipline that has long embraced green Open Access:

 

1. There is an immense advantage for individual authors, and for the discipline as a whole, in free and immediate circulation of ideas, resulting in a faster scientific discourse.

 

2. The advantages of Open Access in HEP come without mandates and without debates. Universal adoption of Open Access follows from the immediate benefits for authors.

 

3. Peer-reviewed journals have lost their role as a means of scientific discourse, which has effectively moved to the discipline repository.

 

HEP has charted the way for a possible future in scholarly communication to the full benefit of scientists, away from over three centuries of tradition centred on scientific journals. However, HEP peer-reviewed journals play an indispensable role, providing independent accreditation, which is necessary in this field as in the entire, global, academic community. The next challenge for scholarly communication in HEP, and for other disciplines embracing Open Access, will be to address this novel conundrum. Efforts in this direction have already started, with initiatives such as SCOAP3...

 

 

上一篇：美国访学见闻（5）：博伊西与月面环形山火山口
下一篇：美国访学见闻（6）：神奇的黄石国家公园

  本文关键词：高能物理学论文，由笔耕文化传播整理发布。

本文编号：103265