Klaus Graf wrote :
"Is there any empirical evidence that there are more self-archived
articles in the web than articles free after an embargo? There is a
lot af free backfile access for TA journals. And even you exclude that
you have to proof your assertion."
Yes, there is a lot of free backfile access in some periodicals and there is
also a lot of articles from the Academie des Sciences published in the 18th
century in our Archive HAL .
But I doubt that the following article, for example, published in 1700 and
describing the human urethra could accelerate the progress in research on
sida or cancer, today.
http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/index.php?halsid=648bte0jlr7coh80702n258hf6&
view_this_doc=ads-00104349&version=1
Hélène Bosc
----- Original Message ----- From: "Klaus Graf" <klausgraf_at_GOOGLEMAIL.COM>
To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: Chronicle of Higher Education: Misunderstanding about the Evans
& Reimer OA Impact Study
2009/2/24 Stevan Harnad <amsciforum_at_gmail.com>:
> (Re: Phil Davis) No, E & R do not show that
>
> "the vast majority of freely-accessible scientific articles are not
> published in OA journals, but are made freely available by non-profit
> scientific societies using a subscription model."
>
> E & R did not even look at the vast majority of freely-accessible
> articles,
> which are the ones self-archived by their authors. E & R looked only at
> journals that make their entire contents free after an access-embargo of
> up
> to a year or more.
Is there any empirical evidence that there are more self-archived
articles in the web than articles free after an embargo? There is a
lot af free backfile access for TA journals. And even you exclude that
you have to proof your assertion.
Klaus Graf
Received on Wed Feb 25 2009 - 10:52:11 GMT