The citation performance of open access journals: A disciplinary investigation of citation distribution models

Countries positioning in open access journals system: An investigation of citation distribution patterns

“…One may then assume that OA papers in Engineering & Material Sciences are likely to improve their performance as they get older. Our previous analyses conducted across subject fields in the discipline demonstrated identical results (SOTUDEH & HORRI, 2007a). However, given the weaker correlation observed and the high standard errors, further investigation is required to get more reliable outcomes.…”

“…1 The identification and validation methods and rationale for the selection of the journals are respectively described in SOTUDEH & HORRI [2007A;2007B] and are described here in brief.…”

“…It is worth mentioning that Multidisciplinary Sciences, having only 4 subject categories, was unreliable to be studied individually [SOTUDEH & HORRI, 2007A]. Moreover, of 146 contributing countries, almost half (75 countries) were in an appropriate situation to be included in the study, in that they had at least one OA contribution in each of the studied years and received citations (Appendix B).…”

“…The data verification showed that of 170 subject categories currently covered by SCI, 67 are covered by the OAJs [SOTUDEH & HORRI, 2007A]. An updated version of the journal classification scheme invented by KATZ & HICKS [1995] was provided and approved by Professor Katz.…”

The integration of open access journals in the scholarly communication system: Three science fields

“…Furthermore, OAJs are dominantly lower-ranking journals in their field measured by Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and Immediacy Index although OAJs rank higher by Immediacy Index, than by JIF. Sotudeh and Horri (2007a) analyse the performance of OAJs in terms of expected citation rates and conclude that OA is widely recognised by scientific communities.…”