School of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Murdoch University, Murdoch 6150, Western Australia.
Conserv Biol. 2010 Jun;24(3):872-80. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01509.x. Epub 2010 Apr 23.
Open access (OA) publishing, whereby authors, their institutions, or their granting bodies pay or provide a repository through which peer-reviewed work is available online for free, is championed as a model to increase the number of citations per paper and disseminate results widely, especially to researchers in developing countries. We compared the number of citations of OA and non-OA papers in six journals and four books published since 2000 to test whether OA increases number of citations overall and increases citations made by authors in developing countries. After controlling for type of paper (e.g., review or research paper), length of paper, authors' citation profiles, number of authors per paper, and whether the author or the publisher released the paper in OA, OA had no statistically significant influence on the overall number of citations per journal paper. Journal papers were cited more frequently if the authors had published highly cited papers previously, were members of large teams of authors, or published relatively long papers, but papers were not cited more frequently if they were published in an OA source. Nevertheless, author-archived OA book chapters accrued up to eight times more citations than chapters in the same book that were not available through OA, perhaps because there is no online abstracting service for book chapters. There was also little evidence that journal papers or book chapters published in OA received more citations from authors in developing countries relative to those journal papers or book chapters not published in OA. For scholarly publications in conservation biology, only book chapters had an OA citation advantage, and OA did not increase the number of citations papers or chapters received from authors in developing countries.
开放获取（OA）出版，即作者、他们的机构或资助机构付费或提供一个存储库，通过该存储库可以在线免费获取经过同行评审的作品，这种出版模式被吹捧为一种增加每篇论文引用次数并广泛传播研究成果的模式，尤其是向发展中国家的研究人员传播。我们比较了自 2000 年以来出版的六本期刊和四本图书中 OA 和非 OA 论文的引用数量，以检验 OA 是否总体上增加了引用数量，以及是否增加了发展中国家作者的引用数量。在控制论文类型（例如综述或研究论文）、论文长度、作者引用记录、每篇论文的作者数量以及作者或出版商是否将论文发布为 OA 后，OA 对期刊论文每篇引用数量没有统计学上的显著影响。如果作者之前发表过高引用论文、是大型作者团队的成员或发表相对较长的论文，则论文被引用的频率更高；但如果论文发表在 OA 资源中，则不会被引用得更频繁。尽管如此，作者存档的 OA 书籍章节比同一书籍中无法通过 OA 获取的章节多获得了多达八倍的引用，这可能是因为没有在线书籍章节摘要服务。也几乎没有证据表明，在 OA 中发表的期刊论文或书籍章节比未在 OA 中发表的期刊论文或书籍章节从发展中国家的作者那里获得更多的引用。对于保护生物学领域的学术出版物，只有书籍章节具有 OA 引文优势，并且 OA 并没有增加论文或章节从发展中国家作者那里获得的引文数量。
