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

Library, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
DOI
10.7287/peerj.preprints.3520v1
Subject Areas
Science Policy
Keywords
open access, green open access, oaDOI, bronze open access, publishing, Web of Science, hybrid open access, scholarly communication, science policy, gold open access
Copyright
© 2018 Bosman et al.
Licence
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ Preprints) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
Cite this article
Bosman J, Kramer B. 2018. Open access levels: a quantitative exploration using Web of Science and oaDOI data. PeerJ Preprints 6:e3520v1

Abstract

Across the world there is growing interest in open access publishing among researchers, institutions, funders and publishers alike. It is assumed that open access levels are growing, but hitherto the exact levels and patterns of open access have been hard to determine and detailed quantitative studies are scarce. Using newly available open access status data from oaDOI in Web of Science we are now able to explore year-on-year open access levels across research fields, languages, countries, institutions, funders and topics, and try to relate the resulting patterns to disciplinary, national and institutional contexts. With data from the oaDOI API we also look at the detailed breakdown of open access by types of gold open access (pure gold, hybrid and bronze), using universities in the Netherlands as an example. There is huge diversity in open access levels on all dimensions, with unexpected levels for e.g. Portuguese as language, Astronomy & Astrophysics as research field, countries like Tanzania, Peru and Latvia, and Zika as topic. We explore methodological issues and offer suggestions to improve conditions for tracking open access status of research output. Finally, we suggest potential future applications for research and policy development. We have shared all data and code openly.

Author Comment

This is a preprint submission to PeerJ Preprints