Scientists continuously generate research data but only a few of them are published. If these data were accessible and reusable, researchers could examine them and generate new knowledge. Our purpose is to determine whether there is a relationship between the impact factor and the policies concerning open availability of raw research data in journals of Information Science & Library Science (ISLS) subject category from the Web of Science database. We reviewed the policies related to public availability of papers and data sharing in the 85 journals included in the ISLS category of the Journal Citation Reports in 2012. The relationship between public availability of published data and impact factor of journals is analysed through different statistical tests. The variable "statement of complementary material" was accepted in 50% of the journals; 65% of the journals support "reuse"; 67% of the journals specified "storage in thematic or institutional repositories"; the "publication of the manuscript in a website" was accepted in 69% of the journals. We have found a fifty per cent of journals that include the possibility to deposit data as supplementary material, and more than sixty per cent accept reuse, storage in repositories and publication in websites. There is a clear positive relationship between being a top journal in impact factor ranking of JCR and having an open policy.

The studies based on scientific publications do not help us reliably identify the contribution of the HRIs because their observed production is much lower than the potential output, although their visibility tends to increase over time. This article highlights the importance of HRI members including the institute among their work addresses to increase the visibility of these organisations and to facilitate studies aimed at assessing their activity in the national and international context.

As open publication has become a goal in scholarly communication, interest in how it relates to other features of the research process has grown. This paper focuses on the relationship between funding and open access (OA) in the Spanish National Research Council’s Web of Science publications in three scientific fields with different research practices, namely, Biology & Biomedicine (BIOL), Humanities & Social Sciences (HSS) and Materials Science (MATE). Firstly, the three fields are characterised in relation to OA practices (OA status and OA routes) and acknowledged funding (funding status and funding origin). Secondly, the relationship between OA and funding is explored, and the role of additional influential factors, such as the internationality of research and national/foreign leadership of papers, is unravelled through logistic regression. BIOL shows a higher OA share (66%) than do the other two fields (around 33%). Funded research shows higher OA rates than unfunded research in the experimental fields, but not in HSS, where it is related to a shift towards more publications with article-processing charges. The internationality of research, measured through international collaboration or foreign funding, increases OA, albeit with differences across fields. Foreign-funded papers are more likely to be led by foreign researchers in all three fields, but a foreign first author increases the chances of OA publication in HSS only, perhaps because Spanish leaders in this field have not internalised the importance of OA. The research’s policy implications are reviewed.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract