KCSE
Search
- Page Path
- HOME > Search
Original Articles
- How open access diamond journals comply with industry standards exemplified by Plan S technical requirements
- Sci Ed. 2023;10(1):35-44. Published online February 16, 2023
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.295
- 4,218 View
- 262 Download
- 1 Web of Science
-
Abstract
PDF
Supplementary Material - Purpose: This study investigated how well current open access (OA) diamond journals in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and a survey conform to Plan S requirements, including licenses, peer review, author copyright, unique article identifiers, digital archiving, and machine-readable licenses.
Methods
Data obtained from DOAJ journals and surveyed journals from mid-June to mid-July 2020 were analyzed for a variety of Plan S requirements. The results were presented using descriptive statistics.
Results
Out of 1,465 journals that answered, 1,137 (77.0%) reported compliance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) principles. The peer review types used by OA diamond journals were double-blind (6,339), blind (2,070), peer review (not otherwise specified, 1,879), open peer review (42), and editorial review (118) out of 10,449 DOAJ journals. An author copyright retention policy was adopted by 5,090 out of 10,448 OA diamond journals (48.7%) in DOAJ. Of the unique article identifiers, 5,702 (54.6%) were digital object identifiers, 58 (0.6%) were handles, and 14 (0.1%) were uniform resource names, while 4,675 (44.7%) used none. Out of 1,619 surveyed journals, the archiving solutions were national libraries (n=170, 10.5%), Portico (n=67, 4.1%), PubMed Central (n=15, 0.9%), PKP PN (n=91, 5.6%), LOCKSS (n=136, 8.4%), CLOCKSS (n=87, 5.4%), the National Computing Center for Higher Education (n=6, 0.3%), others (n=69, 4.3%), no policy (n=855, 52.8%), and no reply (n=123, 7.6%). Article-level metadata deposition was done by 8,145 out of 10,449 OA diamond journals (78.0%) in DOAJ.
Conclusion
OA diamond journals’ compliance with industry standards exemplified by the Plan S technical requirements was insufficient, except for the peer review type.
- Charting variety, scope, and impact of open access diamond journals in various disciplines and regions: a survey-based observational study
- Sci Ed. 2022;9(2):120-135. Published online August 19, 2022
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.277
- 3,935 View
- 292 Download
- 4 Web of Science
- 4 Crossref
-
Abstract
PDFSupplementary Material
- Purpose: The variety, scope, and impact of open access (OA) diamond journals across disciplines and regions from July 22 to September 11, 2020 were charted to characterize the current OA diamond landscape.
Methods
The total number of diamond journals was estimated, including those outside the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The distribution across regions, disciplines, and publisher types was described. The scope of journals in terms of authorship and readership was investigated. Information was collected on linguistic diversity, journal dynamics and life cycle, and their visibility in scholarly databases.
Results
The number of OA diamond journals is estimated to be 29,000. OA diamond journals are estimated to publish 356,000 articles per year. The OA diamond sector is diverse in terms of regions (45% in Europe, 25% in Latin America, 16% in Asia, and 5% in the United States/Canada) and disciplines (60% humanities and social sciences, 22% sciences, and 17% medicine). More than 70% of OA diamond journals are published by university-owned publishers, including university presses. The majority of OA diamond journals are small, publishing fewer than 25 articles a year. English (1,210), Spanish (492), and French (342) are the most common languages of the main texts. Out of 1,619 journals, 1,025 (63.3%) are indexed in DOAJ, 492 (30.4%) in Scopus, and 321 (19.8%) in Web of Science.
Conclusion
The patterns and trends reported herein provide insights into the diversity and importance of the OA diamond journal landscape and the accompanying opportunities and challenges in supporting this publishing model. -
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
- Journal metrics, document network, and conceptual and social structures of the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology from 2017 to July 2022: a bibliometric study
Sun Huh
Korean Journal of Anesthesiology.2023; 76(1): 3. CrossRef - How open access diamond journals comply with industry standards exemplified by Plan S technical requirements
Science Editing.2023; 10(1): 35. CrossRef - Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions received the Journal Impact Factor, 4.4 for the first time on June 28, 2023
Sun Huh
Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions.2023; 20: 21. CrossRef - Plan S: estimating future developments
Johan Rooryck
Science Editing.2022; 9(2): 149. CrossRef
- Journal metrics, document network, and conceptual and social structures of the Korean Journal of Anesthesiology from 2017 to July 2022: a bibliometric study
First
Prev
