IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v1y2013i3p113-139d29640.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Open Access Divide

Author

Listed:
  • Jingfeng Xia

    (School of Informatics and Computing, Indiana University, 755 W. Michigan St, UL 3100B, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA)

Abstract

This paper is an attempt to review various aspects of the open access divide regarding the difference between those academics who support free sharing of data and scholarly output and those academics who do not. It provides a structured description by adopting the W s doctrines emphasizing such questions as who, what, when, where and why for information-gathering. Using measurable variables to define a common expression of the open access divide, this study collects aggregated data from existing open access as well as non-open access publications including journal articles and extensive reports. The definition of the open access divide is integrated into the discussion of scholarship on a larger scale.

Suggested Citation

  • Jingfeng Xia, 2013. "The Open Access Divide," Publications, MDPI, vol. 1(3), pages 1-27, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:1:y:2013:i:3:p:113-139:d:29640
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/1/3/113/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/1/3/113/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jingfeng Xia, 2010. "A longitudinal study of scholars attitudes and behaviors toward open-access journal publishing," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(3), pages 615-624, March.
    2. King, C. Judson & Harley, Diane & Earl-Novell, Sarah & Arter, Jennifer & Lawrence, Shannon & Perciali, Irene, 2006. "Scholarly Communication: Academic Values and Sustainable Models," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt4j89c3f7, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.
    3. Harley, Diane & Acord, Sophia Krzys & Earl-Novell, Sarah & Lawrence, Shannon & King, C. Judson, 2010. "Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt15x7385g, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.
    4. Jingfeng Xia, 2010. "A longitudinal study of scholars attitudes and behaviors toward open‐access journal publishing," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(3), pages 615-624, March.
    5. Harley, Diane & Acord, Sophia Krzys & Earl-Novell, Sarah & Lawrence, Shannon & King, C. Judson, 2010. "Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines - Executive Summary," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt0kr8s78v, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.
    6. Don Schauder, 1994. "Electronic publishing of professional articles: Attitudes of academics and implications for the scholarly communication industry," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 45(2), pages 73-100, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Julia Gross & John Charles Ryan, 2015. "Landscapes of Research: Perceptions of Open Access (OA) Publishing in the Arts and Humanities," Publications, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-24, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Erin C McKiernan, 2017. "Imagining the “open” university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Jingfeng Xia, 2013. "Mandates and the Contributions of Open Genomic Data," Publications, MDPI, vol. 1(3), pages 1-14, October.
    3. Milan Frederik Klus & Alexander Dilger, 2020. "Success factors of academic journals in the digital age," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 1115-1143, November.
    4. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2013. "Open Access, Social Norms & Publication Choice," ICER Working Papers 03-2013, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    5. Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick & Mueller-Langer, Frank, 2014. "Open access to data: An ideal professed but not practised," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1621-1633.
    6. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni Ramello, 2013. "Open access, social norms and publication choice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 149-167, April.
    7. Hamid R. Jamali & David Nicholas & Eti Herman, 2016. "Scholarly reputation in the digital age and the role of emerging platforms and mechanisms," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 37-49.
    8. Alessio J. G. Brown & Klaus F. Zimmermann, 2017. "Three decades of publishing research in population economics," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 30(1), pages 11-27, January.
    9. Katarina Krapež, 2022. "Advancing Self-Evaluative and Self-Regulatory Mechanisms of Scholarly Journals: Editors’ Perspectives on What Needs to Be Improved in the Editorial Process," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, March.
    10. K. Brad Wray, 2016. "No new evidence for a citation benefit for Author-Pay Open Access Publications in the social sciences and humanities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1031-1035, March.
    11. Jinhyo Joseph Yun & Zheng Liu & Euiseob Jeong & Sangwoo Kim & Kyunghun Kim, 2022. "The Difference in Open Innovation between Open Access and Closed Access, According to the Change of Collective Intelligence and Knowledge Amount," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, February.
    12. Rongying Zhao & Xu Wang, 2019. "Evaluation and comparison of influence in international Open Access journals between China and USA," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 1091-1110, September.
    13. Esteban Morales & Erin C McKiernan & Meredith T Niles & Lesley Schimanski & Juan Pablo Alperin, 2021. "How faculty define quality, prestige, and impact of academic journals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(10), pages 1-13, October.
    14. Adrian Mulligan & Louise Hall & Ellen Raphael, 2013. "Peer review in a changing world: An international study measuring the attitudes of researchers," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(1), pages 132-161, January.
    15. Diane (DeDe) Dawson & Esteban Morales & Erin C McKiernan & Lesley A Schimanski & Meredith T Niles & Juan Pablo Alperin, 2022. "The role of collegiality in academic review, promotion, and tenure," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, April.
    16. Alexander Cuntz & Frank Mueller-Langer & Alessio Muscarnera & Prince C. Oguguo & Marc Scheufen, 2024. "Access to science and innovation in the developing world," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 78, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    17. Chieh Liu & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2022. "Exploring the relationships between altmetric counts and citations of papers in different academic fields based on co-occurrence analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(8), pages 4939-4958, August.
    18. Loliya Agbani Akobo, 2018. "Action learning through radio: exploring conceptual views and lived experiences of women entrepreneurs," Action Learning: Research and Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 235-248, September.
    19. Fei Shu & Wei Quan & Bikun Chen & Junping Qiu & Cassidy R. Sugimoto & Vincent Larivière, 2020. "The role of Web of Science publications in China’s tenure system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(3), pages 1683-1695, March.
    20. Sarah de Rijcke & Paul F. Wouters & Alex D. Rushforth & Thomas P. Franssen & Björn Hammarfelt, 2016. "Evaluation practices and effects of indicator use—a literature review," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 161-169.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:1:y:2013:i:3:p:113-139:d:29640. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.