Visitors   Views   Downloads

Open access levels: a quantitative exploration using Web of Science and oaDOI data

View preprint
@dasaptaerwin @OBi_Ojemany @Science_Open I Thanks, will dive in. Seen our preprint on detailed OA levels by fiekd, ciuntry etc. based on @webofscience and @oaDOI_org ? Wonder what you think of it. (Sorry, long read). https://t.co/Tv9ABrSJ8s
RT @ASCLibrary: Interesting: Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya, Ghana and other African countries show much higher #openaccess levels than rich Wes…
RT @MVanholsbeeck: New methodology based on #oaDOI and #WoS to track Gold #OpenAccess levels, taking research field, language, country, ins…
RT @jeroenbosman: Levels of open access 2010-2017 based on new @webofscience filter and @oaDOI_org data. Explored in our preprint @thePeerJ…
RT @mnkrchrd: „EU countries will not manage the 100% OA in 2020 they agreed to in 2016 by merely relying on the ‘trend’“ | OA explored with…
RT @ASCLibrary: Interesting: Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya, Ghana and other African countries show much higher #openaccess levels than rich Wes…
RT @ASCLibrary: Interesting: Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya, Ghana and other African countries show much higher #openaccess levels than rich Wes…
RT @ASCLibrary: Interesting: Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya, Ghana and other African countries show much higher #openaccess levels than rich Wes…
RT @ASCLibrary: Interesting: Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya, Ghana and other African countries show much higher #openaccess levels than rich Wes…
RT @jeroenbosman: Levels of open access 2010-2017 based on new @webofscience filter and @oaDOI_org data. Explored in our preprint @thePeerJ…
RT @ASCLibrary: Interesting: Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya, Ghana and other African countries show much higher #openaccess levels than rich Wes…
4 days ago
RT @ASCLibrary: Interesting: Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya, Ghana and other African countries show much higher #openaccess levels than rich Wes…
5 days ago
RT @jeroenbosman: Levels of open access 2010-2017 based on new @webofscience filter and @oaDOI_org data. Explored in our preprint @thePeerJ…
RT @bijan_ranjbar: A thorough analysis of #openaccess by exploring #WoS and #oaDOI, thanks to @jeroenbosman and @MsPhelps. https://t.co/B…
Interesting: Tanzania, Ethiopia, Kenya, Ghana and other African countries show much higher #openaccess levels than rich Western countries @jeroenbosman @Msphelps https://t.co/sOwtpXUiSN
RT @PeerJPreprints: Over 1,000 views so far for the preprint 'Open access levels: a quantitative exploration using Web of Science and oaDOI…
Over 1,000 views so far for the preprint 'Open access levels: a quantitative exploration using Web of Science and oaDOI data' https://t.co/EaFDhIHBla
RT @MVanholsbeeck: New methodology based on #oaDOI and #WoS to track Gold #OpenAccess levels, taking research field, language, country, ins…
Open access explored with WoS & oaDOI https://t.co/ZUdxNOku10 via @PeerJPreprints
RT @jafurtado: Open access levels: a quantitative exploration using Web of Science and oaDOI data, by Jeroen Bosman (@jeroenbosman), Bianca…
5 days ago
RT @jeroenbosman: Levels of open access 2010-2017 based on new @webofscience filter and @oaDOI_org data. Explored in our preprint @thePeerJ…
RT @jeroenbosman: Levels of open access 2010-2017 based on new @webofscience filter and @oaDOI_org data. Explored in our preprint @thePeerJ…
New methodology based on #oaDOI and #WoS to track Gold #OpenAccess levels, taking research field, language, country, institution, funder and topic as variables. Results show there is huge diversity in open access levels on all dimensions. https://t.co/0lRItIaHAO @SabinaLeonelli
RT @bijan_ranjbar: A thorough analysis of #openaccess by exploring #WoS and #oaDOI, thanks to @jeroenbosman and @MsPhelps. https://t.co/B…
RT @bijan_ranjbar: A thorough analysis of #openaccess by exploring #WoS and #oaDOI, thanks to @jeroenbosman and @MsPhelps. https://t.co/B…
NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

Additional Information

Competing Interests

Jeroen Bosman and Bianca Kramer are both affiliated to Utrecht University Library which supports and promotes open access and runs its own repository. They also run the project 101 Innovations in Scholarly Communication and as such, are also involved in the execution of the National Plan Open Science of the Netherlands.

Author Contributions

Jeroen Bosman conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Bianca Kramer conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

Zenodo: scripts at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1137861 and data at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1143707

Funding

The authors received no funding for this work.


Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies