• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利：CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法，用中文像聊天一样搜索，搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐，让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版，准确专业，支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式，支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述，25分钟生成高质量综述，智能提取关键信息，辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

即时开放获取的选择及其与期刊排名和出版与阅读协议的关系。

Choices of immediate open access and the relationship to journal ranking and publish-and-read deals.

作者信息

Wenaas Lars

机构信息

TIK Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

Front Res Metr Anal. 2022 Oct 20;7:943932. doi: 10.3389/frma.2022.943932. eCollection 2022.

DOI:10.3389/frma.2022.943932
PMID:36339745
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9632291/
Abstract

The role of academic journals is significant in the reward system of science, which makes their rank important for the researcher's choice in deciding where to submit. The study asks how choices of immediate gold and hybrid open access are related to journal ranking and how the uptake of immediate open access is affected by transformative publish-and-read deals, pushed by recent science policy. Data consists of 186,621 articles published with a Norwegian affiliation in the period 2013-2021, all of which were published in journals ranked in a National specific ranking, on one of two levels according to their importance, prestige, and perceived quality within a discipline. The results are that researchers chose to have their articles published as hybrid two times as often in journals on the most prestigious level compared with journals on the normal level. The opposite effect was found with gold open access where publishing on the normal level was chosen three times more than on the high level. This can be explained by the absence of highly ranked gold open access journals in many disciplines. With the introduction of publish-and-read deals, hybrid open access has boosted and become a popular choice enabling the researcher to publish open access in legacy journals. The results confirm the position of journals in the reward system of science and should inform policymakers about the effects of transformative arrangements and their costs against the overall level of open access.

摘要

学术期刊在科学奖励体系中发挥着重要作用，这使得它们的排名对于研究人员决定向何处投稿的选择至关重要。该研究探讨了即时金色开放获取和混合开放获取的选择与期刊排名之间的关系，以及即时开放获取的采用情况如何受到近期科学政策推动的变革性“出版并阅读”协议的影响。数据包括2013年至2021年期间以挪威机构名义发表的186,621篇文章，所有这些文章均发表在按国家特定排名排序的期刊上，根据其在某一学科内的重要性、声望和感知质量分为两个级别之一。结果表明，与普通级别的期刊相比，研究人员选择在最具声望级别的期刊上以混合形式发表文章的频率是前者的两倍。在金色开放获取方面则发现了相反的效果，选择在普通级别上发表的次数是高级别上的三倍。这可以通过许多学科中缺乏高排名的金色开放获取期刊来解释。随着“出版并阅读”协议的引入，混合开放获取得到了推动并成为一种受欢迎的选择，使研究人员能够在传统期刊上以开放获取的方式发表文章。研究结果证实了期刊在科学奖励体系中的地位，并应让政策制定者了解变革性安排的影响及其相对于开放获取总体水平的成本。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/cb8e19288fb5/frma-07-943932-g0011.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/8841a365d9d0/frma-07-943932-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/7fb44af78170/frma-07-943932-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/ead5e5d5b8c5/frma-07-943932-g0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/0f4a7b005d4c/frma-07-943932-g0004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/bdffdded5eb3/frma-07-943932-g0005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/12a3b0b270a6/frma-07-943932-g0006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/013e118a1c56/frma-07-943932-g0007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/b23f0ff2a6fb/frma-07-943932-g0008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/5f243827682d/frma-07-943932-g0009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/c0dbc96b5887/frma-07-943932-g0010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/cb8e19288fb5/frma-07-943932-g0011.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/8841a365d9d0/frma-07-943932-g0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/7fb44af78170/frma-07-943932-g0002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/ead5e5d5b8c5/frma-07-943932-g0003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/0f4a7b005d4c/frma-07-943932-g0004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/bdffdded5eb3/frma-07-943932-g0005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/12a3b0b270a6/frma-07-943932-g0006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/013e118a1c56/frma-07-943932-g0007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/b23f0ff2a6fb/frma-07-943932-g0008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/5f243827682d/frma-07-943932-g0009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/c0dbc96b5887/frma-07-943932-g0010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8065/9632291/cb8e19288fb5/frma-07-943932-g0011.jpg

相似文献

1
Choices of immediate open access and the relationship to journal ranking and publish-and-read deals.即时开放获取的选择及其与期刊排名和出版与阅读协议的关系。
Front Res Metr Anal. 2022 Oct 20;7:943932. doi: 10.3389/frma.2022.943932. eCollection 2022.
2
Where on earth to publish? A sample survey comparing traditional and open access publishing in the oncological field.发表何处？比较肿瘤学领域传统出版与开放获取出版的抽样调查
J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Jan 22;32(1):4. doi: 10.1186/1756-9966-32-4.
3
Best practices for scholarly authors in the age of predatory journals.掠夺性期刊时代学术作者的最佳实践。
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016 Feb;98(2):77-9. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2016.0056.
4
The Growth of Poorly Cited Articles in Peer-Reviewed Orthopaedic Journals.同行评议矫形外科期刊中引用不佳文章的增长。
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019 Jul;477(7):1727-1735. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000727.
5
Understanding author choices in the current conservation publishing landscape.了解当前保护出版格局下作者的选择。
Conserv Biol. 2025 Apr;39(2):e14369. doi: 10.1111/cobi.14369. Epub 2024 Sep 3.
6
Awareness of "Predatory" Open-Access Journals among Prospective Veterinary and Medical Authors Attending Scientific Writing Workshops.参加科研写作工作坊的兽医和医学作者对“掠夺性”开放获取期刊的认知。
Front Vet Sci. 2015 Aug 13;2:22. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2015.00022. eCollection 2015.
7
Open access journals are as likely to be referenced by the Orthopaedic literature, despite having a lower impact factor than subscription-based journals.尽管开放获取期刊的影响因子低于订阅型期刊，但骨科文献引用它们的可能性是一样的。
SICOT J. 2021;7:64. doi: 10.1051/sicotj/2021062. Epub 2021 Dec 21.
8
Open access publishing: a study of current practices in orthopaedic research.开放获取出版：骨科研究现状研究。
Int Orthop. 2014 Jun;38(6):1297-302. doi: 10.1007/s00264-013-2250-5. Epub 2014 Jan 3.
9
Predatory publishing or a lack of peer review transparency?-a contemporary analysis of indexed open and non-open access articles in paediatric urology.掠夺性出版还是缺乏同行评审透明度？-小儿泌尿外科索引开放和非开放获取文章的当代分析。
J Pediatr Urol. 2019 Apr;15(2):159.e1-159.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpurol.2018.08.019. Epub 2019 Feb 15.
10
Perceptions of open access publishing: interviews with journal authors.对开放获取出版的认知：对期刊作者的访谈
BMJ. 2005 Apr 2;330(7494):756. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38359.695220.82. Epub 2005 Jan 26.

引用本文的文献

1
Global research trends in necrotizing pancreatitis: a bibliometric analysis from 2013 to 2024.坏死性胰腺炎的全球研究趋势：2013年至2024年的文献计量分析
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Jan 22;12:1515418. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1515418. eCollection 2025.

本文引用的文献

1
Evaluating the impact of open access policies on research institutions.评估开放获取政策对研究机构的影响。
Elife. 2020 Sep 14;9:e57067. doi: 10.7554/eLife.57067.
2
Researcher's Perceptions on Publishing "Negative" Results and Open Access.研究者对发表“负面”结果和开放获取的看法。
Nucleic Acid Ther. 2021 Jun;31(3):185-189. doi: 10.1089/nat.2020.0865. Epub 2020 Jul 27.
3
Discipline-specific open access publishing practices and barriers to change: an evidence-based review.特定学科的开放获取出版实践与变革障碍：基于证据的综述
F1000Res. 2018 Dec 11;7:1925. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.17328.2. eCollection 2018.
4
Use of the Journal Impact Factor in academic review, promotion, and tenure evaluations.在学术评审、晋升和终身职位评估中使用期刊影响因子。
Elife. 2019 Jul 31;8:e47338. doi: 10.7554/eLife.47338.
5
Readers beware! Predatory journals are infiltrating citation databases.读者请注意！掠夺性期刊正在渗透到引文数据库中。
Int J Public Health. 2019 Nov;64(8):1123-1124. doi: 10.1007/s00038-019-01284-3. Epub 2019 Jul 24.
6
Do authors comply when funders enforce open access to research?当资助者强制要求研究成果开放获取时，作者会遵守规定吗？
Nature. 2018 Oct;562(7728):483-486. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-07101-w.
7
Will open access increase journal CiteScores? An empirical investigation over multiple disciplines.开放获取会提高期刊的 CiteScores 吗？对多个学科的实证研究。
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 30;13(8):e0201885. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201885. eCollection 2018.
8
How Unpaywall is transforming open science.Unpaywall如何改变开放科学。
Nature. 2018 Aug;560(7718):290-291. doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-05968-3.
9
Problems and challenges of predatory journals.掠夺性期刊的问题与挑战。
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018 Sep;32(9):1441-1449. doi: 10.1111/jdv.15039. Epub 2018 May 29.
10
The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles.开放获取（OA）的现状：对开放获取文章的患病率和影响的大规模分析。
PeerJ. 2018 Feb 13;6:e4375. doi: 10.7717/peerj.4375. eCollection 2018.