Downloads provided by UsageCounts
Data available at: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3549020 The analysis presented in this report, carried out by Utrecht University Library, aims to provide cOAlition S, an international group of research funding organizations, with initial quantitative and descriptive data on the availability and usage of various open access options in different fields and subdisciplines, and, as far as possible, their compliance with Plan S requirements. Plan S, launched in September 2018, aims to accelerate a transition to full and immediate Open Access. In the guidance to implementation, released in November 2018 and updated in May 2019, a gap analysis of Open Access journals/platforms was announced. Its goal was to inform Coalition S funders on the Open Access options per field and identify fields where there is a need to increase the share of Open Access journals/platforms. The report should be seen as a first step: an exploration in methodology as much as in results. Subsequent interpretation (e.g. on fields where funder investment/action is needed) and decisions on next steps (e.g. on more complete and longitudinal monitoring of Plan S-compliant venues) is intentionally left to cOAlition S and its members. This work was commissioned on behalf of cOAlition S by the Dutch Research Council (NWO), a member of cOAlition S. Bianca Kramer and Jeroen Bosman of Utrecht University Library were appointed to lead the project.
The dataset accompanying this report is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3549020
open access, Creative Commons licenses, DOAJ, publication cultures, SHERPA/RoMEO, Web of Science, copyright retention, gold open access, cOAlition S, gap analysis, Unpaywall, green open access, Plan S, hybrid journals
open access, Creative Commons licenses, DOAJ, publication cultures, SHERPA/RoMEO, Web of Science, copyright retention, gold open access, cOAlition S, gap analysis, Unpaywall, green open access, Plan S, hybrid journals
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 3K | |
| downloads | 2K |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts