Can open access increase LIS research’s policy impact? Using regression analysis and causal inference

Zong, Qianjin; Huang, Zhihong; Huang, Jian-shi

doi:10.1007/s11192-023-04750-1

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparing citations of journal articles by policy documents, Tai & Robinson [ 205 ], Vilkins & Grant [ 215 ], and Zong et al . [ 216 ] found an advantage for OA over closed access. This indicates that OA publications were consulted more often as a reference by policymakers.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The societal impact of Open Science: a scoping review

Cole,

Kormann,

Klebel

et al. 2024

R. Soc. Open Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Science (OS) aims, in part, to drive greater societal impact of academic research. Government, funder and institutional policies state that it should further democratize research and increase learning and awareness, evidence-based policy-making, the relevance of research to society's problems, and public trust in research. Yet, measuring the societal impact of OS has proven challenging and synthesized evidence of it is lacking. This study fills this gap by systematically scoping the existing evidence of societal impact driven by OS and its various aspects, including Citizen Science (CS), Open Access (OA), Open/FAIR Data (OFD), Open Code/Software and others. Using the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews and searches conducted in Web of Science, Scopus and relevant grey literature, we identified 196 studies that contain evidence of societal impact. The majority concern CS, with some focused on OA, and only a few addressing other aspects. Key areas of impact found are education and awareness, climate and environment, and social engagement. We found no literature documenting evidence of the societal impact of OFD and limited evidence of societal impact in terms of policy, health, and trust in academic research. Our findings demonstrate a critical need for additional evidence and suggest practical and policy implications.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The societal impact of Open Science: a scoping review

Cole,

Kormann,

Klebel

et al. 2024

R. Soc. Open Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Policy impact is thereby measured through citations of OA literature within policy documents. Comparing citations of journal articles by policy documents, Tai and Robinson (202), Vilkins and Grant (212), and Zong et al (213) found an advantage for OA over closed access. This indicates that OA publications were consulted more often as a reference by policymakers.…”

Section: Societal Impact Of Open Accessmentioning

confidence: 99%

The societal impact of Open Science–a scoping review

Cole,

Kormann,

Klebel

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Science (OS) aims, in part, to drive greater societal impact of academic research. Government, funder and institutional policies state that it should further democratise research and increase learning and awareness, evidence-based policy-making, the relevance of research to society’s problems, and public trust in research. Yet, measuring societal impact of OS has proven challenging and synthesised evidence of it is lacking. This study fills this gap by systematically scoping the existing evidence of societal impact driven by OS and its various aspects, including Citizen Science (CS), Open Access (OA), Open/FAIR Data (OFD), Open Code/Software, and others. Using the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews and searches conducted in Web of Science, Scopus, and relevant grey literature, we identified 196 studies that contain evidence of societal impact. The majority concern CS, with some focused on OA, and only a few addressing other aspects. Key areas of impact found are education and awareness, climate and environment, and social engagement. We found no literature documenting evidence of the societal impact of OFD and limited evidence of societal impact in terms of policy, health, and trust in academic research. Our findings demonstrate a critical need for additional evidence and suggest practical and policy implications.

show abstract