Open Access and ISI-indexed journals and articles

From: Stevan Harnad <>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 20:20:33 +0000

    "Open Access Journals in the ISI Citation Databases:
     Analysis of Impact Factors and Citation Patterns"

ISI have reported (see excerpts below) that 395,052 (53%) of the 747,060
articles indexed in the 2003 Journal Citation Reports were published
in non-OA journals for which it is known that their publishers have
given their authors the green light to make them OA by self-archiving them
(56% if we add the 22,095 articles published in the OA journals). (ISI
rightly ignores the superfluous yellow/blue subdistinctions, counting
them as green.)

This means, at the very least, that 56% of those ISI-indexed articles
could be made immediately OA if their authors simply performed the few
keystrokes needed to self-archive them.

But the data are far stronger than that: ISI report that from the sample
of ISI-indexed publishers for which their author self-archiving policy
is known, 3056/3403 (90%) of the journals are green (which agrees quite
well with the figures from ).

If we assume (reasonably) that this sample can also be taken as an
estimate of the percentage green among the remaining 2504 journals
(whose publishers' self-archiving policy is not known), then a total of
about 5316/5907 (90%) of the ISI-indexed journals are probably green.

(Reckoned in terms of ISI-indexed articles, 417147/489824 (85%) of those
articles come from the known green-journal sample, hence 635001/747060
(85%) of them could already be self-archived by their authors with their
publishers' blessing!)

As neither (1) the publishers' green light nor (2) the growing
evidence of the enhanced impact of OA vs. non-OA research
yet seem sufficient to induce most of the authors of those articles
to self-archive them (only about 20% are as yet doing so, according
to our own estimates, gathered with the help of the ISI database),
even though, for example, 34,000 authors signed an Open Letter
demanding OA
the time does appear to be ripe for a self-archiving mandate from
researchers funders and employers in order to maximise the access
and impact of their research output
particularly as authors themselves, when surveyed, have declared that they
will self-archive willingly if it is mandated (but not otherwise!) (Swan &
Brown 2004).

Stevan Harnad

    "Open Access Journals in the ISI Citation Databases:
     Analysis of Impact Factors and Citation Patterns"

    "The majority of publishers have only one or a few journals in the
    Thomson ISI citation databases, and were not listed on the Project
    Romeo site."

    "We found 133 publishers (and/or their subsidiaries) with information
    on author archiving policy. Of these publishers, 108 have a stated
    policy permitting some type of author archiving."

    "Along with the publishers of the covered OA journals, publishers
    supporting some form of author archiving produce nearly 52% of the
    journals in the 2003 JCR Science Edition.

    "It is possible that some of the publishers with no archiving policy
    yet listed on Project ROMEO would allow self-archiving by their
    authors, which would further increase the number of journals whose
    content is available for author archiving."

    "Because archiving is accomplished at the article level, we calculated
    the number of articles in journals that allow author archiving:
    395,052 (53%) of 747,060 "citable items" in the 2003 Journal Citation
    Reports could be available, theoretically, for authors to post to
    individual or institutional archives. When the 22,095 articles and
    reviews in OA journals in 2003 are considered, the findings suggests
    that fully 56% of the article content indexed by Thomson could be
    deposited in one or more institutional archives."
Received on Tue Nov 02 2004 - 20:20:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:47:39 GMT