Visibility and (alt)metrics of the Croatian Open Access (OA) journals

569 views

Published on

Presented at the 8th Munin Conference on Scholarly Publishing 2013 - Entering the Next Stage, Tromso, Norway, 25-26 November 2013

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
569
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
151
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Visibility and (alt)metrics of the Croatian Open Access (OA) journals

  1. 1. Jadranka Stojanovski University of Zadar / Ruđer Bošković Institute Croatia The 8th Munin Conference on Scholarly Publishing 2013 - Entering the Next Stage, Tromso, Norway, 25-26 November 2013
  2. 2. Croatia 4.5M population 11k scholars 7 universities, 25 research institutes Ministry of Science, Education and Sports 2120 research projects 25k papers per year 1300 islands
  3. 3. fee and free journals „fee” and „free” journals „open acces journal” as a synonym for APC model journals - not „real” journals, more portals very prominent journals = high JIF journals = very for-profit journals „international journals” and „local journals” „regional journals” journal as an old concept from the printed world journal as a main channel of scholarly communication journals slowing down a development?, not implementing IT advantages and possibilities, or at very slow pace Journals
  4. 4. Why are Croatian journals important? communication of science in Croatia research topics of local or national interest Croatian language development of skills and competences: editing, publishing and writing (& citing) need to get/raise credibility • promotion of Croatian research • raising awareness about importance of science in the decision processes
  5. 5. are local (regional) journals a priori low quality journals? what makes a journal international and high quality? what is the role of local journals? what can be done to improve their visibility, readability, citeability, impact is the predominantly used metrics (JIF) fair enough? what can we do to improve the quality of Croatian journals? Questions?
  6. 6. history goals 2002 – few journals online 2005 – HRČAK project proposal 2006 – HRČAK lounching simple tool to make online version of the (printed) journal single access point for all Croatian open access journals (scholarly, professional and popular science) metadata and full-text articles repository data sharing –international repositories, databases, archives HRČAK
  7. 7. Open Access journal portal as a solution for some problems •low visibility •difficulties with distribution •small number of subscribers •low circulation •insufficient finances •poor infrastructure (including ICT) •low readability •low citation impact • sometimes not-reliable peer review policies •lack of interational standards in editorial processes
  8. 8. HRČAK today – http://hrcak.srce.hr • improved communication between editorials • education
  9. 9. Top ten journals by content (# of full-text papers): • Theological Review (5964) • CollegiumAntropologicum (2379) • Folk Art: Croatian Journal of Ethnology and Folklore Research (2305) • Acta ClinicaCroatica (1796) • Dairy Industry (1671) • Renewed Life (1595) • Journal for General Social Issues (1387) • Acta stomatologicaCroatica (1366) • The Journal of the Institute of Croatian History (1139) • PoliticalThought (1125)
  10. 10. HRČAK journals by discipline biomedicine and health 11% biotechnical sciences 7% sciences 10% humanities 33% social sciences 28% technical sciences 11%
  11. 11. 318 active scholarly, professional and popular OA journals included in HRCAK 100% in Google Scholar (GS) 93 in DOAJ 53 inWoS 106 in Scopus ... biomedicine and health, 12% biotechnical sciences, 9% sciences, 21% humanities, 18% social sciences , 18% technical sciences, 16% HRCAK journals in WoS
  12. 12. high By humans: 6M visits/year 0.5M visits/month By robots: 4.500 /month OAI-PMH
  13. 13. top visited and downloaded journals overlap with top HRCAK journals by content popularity 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 81 91 101 111 121 131 141 151 161 171 181 191 201 211 221 231 241 251 261 271 281 291 301 311 321 331 341 visits+downloads (Oct 2012-Oct2013) average article is visited+downloaded 340 times
  14. 14. low 1. CROAT CHEM ACTA 2. FOOD TECHNOL BIOTECH 3. CROAT MED J 4. COLLEGIUM ANTROPOL 5. MATH INEQUAL APPL 6. CHEM BIOCHEM ENG Q 7. PERIOD BIOL 8. ACTA PHARMACEUT 9. BIOCHEM MEDICA 10. ARCH IND HYGTOXICOL 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 242526 27 2829 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 444546 47 484950 h-index WoS#articles
  15. 15. 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 0.002 0.0025 0.003 0.0035 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 EIGENFACTORSCORE TOTALCITESWoS impact low TOTAL CITESVS. EIGENFACTOR SCORE
  16. 16. max JIF – 1.873 (medicine) max 5-year JIF – 1.612 (medicine) max SNIP – 1.8 (technical sci.) max SJR – 0.903 (mathematics!) 20 journals JIF, 5-year JIF, SNIP, SJR...
  17. 17. formal citations doesn’t correlate with number of visits and downloads
  18. 18. 1 WoS citation 674 downloads 1293 visits
  19. 19. WHAT IS FACULTY OF 1000? • An article-by-article review service • Highlights and recommends the most important articles published in biology and medicine • Articles selected by our global expert ‘Faculty’ of the world’s most prestigious scientists and clinicians • Faculty Members and their evaluations are organized into over 40 faculties, which are further subdivided into over 300 sections (specialties)
  20. 20. EVALUATIONS • Browse & Search • Abstract • Comments • Dissents • Article rankings http://f1000.com/evaluations
  21. 21. What Faculty members do Faculty members evaluate ~1-2 papers/month, which they: 1. Comment on: 2-3 sentences 2. Rate: Recommended / Must Read / Exceptional 3. Classify: “Interesting hypotheses”, “New finding”, “Important confirmation”, “Technical advance”, “Controversial finding” 4. Categorize: assign all most relevant Sections
  22. 22. no perpective for Croatian journals?
  23. 23. „Wrapping” is more important then the content Existing flat indicators (STM) often misused impact factor SJR SNIP eigenfactor h-index article influence number of citations number of papers ...
  24. 24. Possible metrics for an article total number of citations (Google Scholar, Scopus, WoS…) – deduplicated # visits # downloads # comments # bookmarks at social networks, sharing, mentioning expert’s rating, grades, „likes”... # discussions (blogs) # appearance in other media (newspapers…) Peter Binfield
  25. 25. Dynamical, multilayer, interactive, multimedia content „Machine readable” articles RDF, linked data Research data Different formats (beyond PDF) Author identification (ORCID?) Publication identification (DOI? OpenURL?) everything is in OA publishers are selling „added value” Future
  26. 26. Thank you for your attention!  J. Stojanovski – jadranka.stojanovski@irb.hr

×