Open Access (OA) 논문의 비중과 방식, 피인용 유도 효과에 대한 국가 간 차이 분석
Analysis of Differences between Countries in the Proportion, Method and Citation-inducing Effect of Open Access (OA) Articles
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구는 Web of Science (WoS) 논문을 기반으로 주요 5개국의 Open Access (OA) 논문 비중과 방식을 분석하고 조절효과(Moderating Effect) 검증을 통해 OA의 피인용 유도에 차이가 나타나는지 검증하였다. 분석 결과, OA 비중은 영국이 62.7%로 가장 높았으며, 중국이 38.0%로 가장 낮게 나타났다. 또한 셀프 아카이빙과 Gold Hybrid가 OA의 주요 실천 방법 중 하나로 나타난 영미와 달리, 중국과 한국의 OA 논문은 Gold 저널 출판에 집중되어 있는 것으로 분석되었다. 두 번째, 조절효과 분석 결과, 우수 논문의 OA 출판 및 유통이 활성화된 영국, 미국, 일본의 경우 OA 비중이 높을수록 피인용량을 유도하는 효과가 커지는 것으로 나타났으나, 한국(B=-0.00003, p<0.01)과 중국(B=-0.00001, p<0.01)에서는 역의 방향성이 나타나 차이를 보였다. 더불어 대부분의 학문분야에서 OA가 피인용을 유도하였으나 공학 분야(B=-0.00002, p<0.01)에서는 역의 방향성을 보이는 것으로 분석되었다.
Abstract
This study empirically analyzed the proportion and method of Open Access (OA) in Korea, China, Japan, the United States, United Kingdom based on the Web of Science (WoS) papers. In addition, through the verification of the moderating effect, it was verified whether there is a difference in the effect of the amount of citation depending on the maturity of OA according to the countries or academic fields. As a result of the analysis, the proportion of OA was the highest in the UK at 62.7%, and the lowest in China at 38.0%. Second, the UK and US had a high proportion of indicators through self-archiving and APC-based Gold Hybrid, while only the Gold indicators were found to be prominent in China and Korea. Third, in the UK, US and Japan, the higher the proportion of OA, the greater the effect of inducing the citations. However, Korea (B=-0.00003, p<0.01) and China (B=-0.00001, p<0.01) showed the opposite direction. In addition, in most academic fields, the OA proportion had an effect of inducing citation, but a negative effect was found in the engineering field (B=-0.00002, p<0.01).
참고문헌 (38)
- 김상수, "이분형 자료를 이용한 수질평가", Journal of The Korean Data Analysis Society, 7(1), pp.151~158 (2005), 한국자료분석학회
- 김소영, "해외 공공연구기금에 의한 학술논문의 오픈 액세스 정책 분석", 한국문헌정보학회지, 50(4), pp.209~229 (2016), 한국문헌정보학회[DOI]
- 국내외 오픈액세스 출판 동향과 시사점: Web of Science 등재지를중심으로, "김환민", KISTI, ~, pp.KISTI 이슈브리프, 42 (2022)
- 배병렬, "조절효과 및 매개효과 분석 : 이론과 실제" (2021), 청람
- "정부 지원받아 ‘부실 의심 학술지' 논문 게재 폭증" (2022)[URL]
- "한국연구재단 등 국내 주요 학술정보 기관 오픈액세스 공동 선언 추진" (2021), 한국연구재단[URL]
- "オープンサイエンス促進に向けた研究成果の取扱いに関するJSTの基本方針" (2017)[URL]
- "研究大学コンソーシアム（RUC）のメンバーを中心とする国内10大学がシュプリンガーネイチャーとオープンアクセス論文出版の促進に関する合意書に署名, プレスリリース․研究成果" (2022)[URL]
- "Proportion of Open Access Papers Published in Peer-Reviewed Journals at the European and World Levels—1996-2013" (2014)[URL]
- "OA agreements in China"[URL]
- "OA agreements in South Korea"[URL]
- 차미경, "Awareness and Perceptions of Korean Researchers on Open Access", Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice, 10(3), pp.68~82 (2022), 한국과학기술정보연구원[DOI]
- "Open Access" (2023)[URL]
- Dorta-González, P., "Citation differences across research funding and access modalities", The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 49(4), pp.102734~ (2023)[DOI]
- "Accessibility, Sustainability, Excellence: How to Expand Access to Research Publications" (2012)[URL]
- Hayes, A. F., "Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis:A Regression-Based Approach" (2017), Guilford Press
- "Open Access in China: Interview with Xiaolin Zhang of the National Science Library" (2019)[URL]
- "OpenDOAR" (2023)[URL]
- Lewis, C. L., "The open access citation advantage : does it exist and what does it mean for libraries", Information Technology and Libraries, 37(3), pp.50~65 (2018)[DOI]
- Martin-Martin, A., "Evidence of open access of scientific publications in google scholar : a large-scale analysis", Journal of Informetrics, 12(3), pp.819~841 (2018)[DOI]
- "Adapting to a Transformative Future: Open Access and PlanS" (2019)[URL]
- McManus, C., "Funding research in brazil", Scientometrics, 126, pp.801~823 (2021)[DOI]
- McManus, C., "Brazilian publication profiles : where and how brazilian authors publish", An Acad Bras Cienc, 92(2), pp.e20200328~ (2020)[DOI]
- Momeni, F., "What happens when a journal converts to open access? A Bibliometric Analysis", Scientometrics, 126(12), pp.9811~9827 (2021)[DOI]
- "Increasing Access to the Results of Federally Funded Scientific Research" (2013)[URL]
- "OSTP Issues Guidance to Make Federally Funded Research Freely Available Without Delay" (2022)[URL]
- "OASPA Members’ Output in Fully OA Journals is Accelerating" (2022)[URL]
- "Read & Publish in China: Chinese Academy of Sciences and OUP’s landmark cooperation" (2020)[URL]
- Piwowar, H., "The state of OA: a large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of open access articles", PeerJ, 6, pp.e4375~ (2018)[DOI]
- Robinson-Garcia, N., "Open access uptake by universities worldwide", PeerJ, 8, pp.e9410~ (2020)[DOI]
- "Article Processing Charges (APCs) and Subscriptions" (2016)[URL]
- "FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions to Advance Open and Equitable Research" (2023)[URL]
- "UKRI Open Access Policy - Explanation of Policy Changes" (2021)[URL]
- Valderrama-Zurián, J. C., "On the bibliometric nature of a foreseeable relationship : open access and education", Scientometrics, 120, pp.1031~1057 (2019)[DOI]
- Van Leeuwen, T. N., "Exploring possibilities to use bibliometric data to monitor gold open access publishing at the national level", JASIST, 69(8), pp.1161~1173 (2018)[DOI]
- "Investments in Open Association of Research Libraries US University Member Expenditures on Services, Collections, Staff, and Infrastructure in Support of Open Scholarship" (2022)[URL]
- Zhang, L., "The prevalence and impact of different types of open access articles from china and USA", 18th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics, pp.1325~1336 (2021)
- Zhang, X., "The prices of open access publishing: the composition of APC across different fields of sciences", Ilmenau Economics, 26(145) (2020)[DOI]