9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The relationship between bioRxiv preprints, citations and altmetrics

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          A potential motivation for scientists to deposit their scientific work as preprints is to enhance its citation or social impact. In this study we assessed the citation and altmetric advantage of bioRxiv, a preprint server for the biological sciences. We retrieved metadata of all bioRxiv preprints deposited between November 2013 and December 2017, and matched them to articles that were subsequently published in peer-reviewed journals. Citation data from Scopus and altmetric data from Altmetric.com were used to compare citation and online sharing behavior of bioRxiv preprints, their related journal articles, and nondeposited articles published in the same journals. We found that bioRxiv-deposited journal articles had sizably higher citation and altmetric counts compared to nondeposited articles. Regression analysis reveals that this advantage is not explained by multiple explanatory variables related to the articles’ publication venues and authorship. Further research will be required to establish whether such an effect is causal in nature. bioRxiv preprints themselves are being directly cited in journal articles, regardless of whether the preprint has subsequently been published in a journal. bioRxiv preprints are also shared widely on Twitter and in blogs, but remain relatively scarce in mainstream media and Wikipedia articles, in comparison to peer-reviewed journal articles.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The history and meaning of the journal impact factor.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Factors affecting number of citations: a comprehensive review of the literature

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research

              Background Articles whose authors have supplemented subscription-based access to the publisher's version by self-archiving their own final draft to make it accessible free for all on the web (“Open Access”, OA) are cited significantly more than articles in the same journal and year that have not been made OA. Some have suggested that this “OA Advantage” may not be causal but just a self-selection bias, because authors preferentially make higher-quality articles OA. To test this we compared self-selective self-archiving with mandatory self-archiving for a sample of 27,197 articles published 2002–2006 in 1,984 journals. Methdology/Principal Findings The OA Advantage proved just as high for both. Logistic regression analysis showed that the advantage is independent of other correlates of citations (article age; journal impact factor; number of co-authors, references or pages; field; article type; or country) and highest for the most highly cited articles. The OA Advantage is real, independent and causal, but skewed. Its size is indeed correlated with quality, just as citations themselves are (the top 20% of articles receive about 80% of all citations). Conclusions/Significance The OA advantage is greater for the more citable articles, not because of a quality bias from authors self-selecting what to make OA, but because of a quality advantage, from users self-selecting what to use and cite, freed by OA from the constraints of selective accessibility to subscribers only. It is hoped that these findings will help motivate the adoption of OA self-archiving mandates by universities, research institutions and research funders.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Quantitative Science Studies
                Quantitative Science Studies
                MIT Press - Journals
                2641-3337
                April 01 2020
                : 1-21
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, Kiel, Germany
                [2 ]GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Cologne, Germany
                [3 ]Kiel University, Kiel, Germany
                Article
                10.1162/qss_a_00043
                b8a7ca5a-dcfa-4d2e-924f-b00c46a9989d
                © 2020
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article