On Thu, 11 Dec 2003, Sally Morris wrote:
> I would question Stevan's estimate that 2.5% of articles are published in OA
> journals. While it does indeed look as if 2 - 2.5% of peer reviewed
> journals are OA (that is, if all those listed by Lund et al are peer
> reviewed), I very much doubt that they carry as many articles as the rest.
> This is because OA journals are, almost without exception, relatively new
> and extremely long-established journals tend to be far, far, bigger in terms
> of issues and articles published per year.
I don't disagree with Sally's suggestion that 2.5% of journals does
not necessarily mean 2.5% of articles published in journals. I was
very deliberately using a very conservative, high-end estimate (sometimes
I even use 5%) merely to illustrate how minuscule is the amount of OA that
can currently be provided via the OA journal route ("gold") and hence
how important it is to supplement it via the OA self-archiving route
("green"), today.
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/self-archiving_files/Slide0024.gif
Stevan Harnad
NOTE: A complete archive of the ongoing discussion of providing open
access to the peer-reviewed research literature online is available at
the American Scientist Open Access Forum (98 & 99 & 00 & 01 & 02 & 03):
http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/index.html
Post discussion to: american-scientist-open-access-forum_at_amsci.org
Dual Open-Access-Provision Policy:
BOAI-2 ("gold"): Publish your article in a suitable open-access
journal whenever one exists.
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/boaifaq.htm#journals
BOAI-1 ("green"): Otherwise, publish your article in a suitable
toll-access journal and also self-archive it.
http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/
http://www.soros.org/openaccess/read.shtml
http://www.eprints.org/signup/sign.php
Received on Thu Dec 11 2003 - 21:29:06 GMT
