, Volume 109, Issue 2, pp 1167–1189 | Cite as

Journal copyright restrictions and actual open access availability: a study of articles published in eight top information systems journals (2010–2014)

  • Mikael LaaksoEmail author
  • Juho Lindman


Most scholarly journals have explicit copyright restrictions for authors outlining how published articles, or earlier manuscript versions of such articles, may be distributed on the open web. Empirical research on the development of open access (OA) is still scarce and methodologically fragmented, and research on the relationship between journal copyright restrictions and actual free online availability is non-existent. In this study the free availability of articles published in eight top journals within the field of Information Systems (IS) is analyzed by observing the availability of all articles published in the journals during 2010–2014 (1515 articles in total) through the use of Google and Google Scholar. The web locations and document versions of retrieved articles for up to three OA copies per published article were categorized manually. The web findings were contrasted to journal copyright information and augmented with citation data for each article. Around 60 % of all published articles were found to have an OA copy available. The findings suggest that copyright restrictions weakly regulate actual author-side dissemination practice. The use of academic social networks (ASNs) for enabling online availability of research publications has grown increasingly popular, an avenue of research dissemination that most of the studied journal copyright agreements failed to explicitly accommodate.


Open access Copyright Information systems Academic social networks 


  1. Archambault, E., Amyot, D., Deschamps, P., Nicol, A., Provencher, F., Rebout, L., and Roberge, G. (2014). Proportion of open access papers published in peer-reviewed journals at the European and world levels: 1996–2013. Science-Metrix report. Produced for the European commission DG research and innovation. Accessed 1 Jul 2016.
  2. Arvidsson, V., Holmström, J., & Lyytinen, K. (2014). Information systems use as strategy practice: A multi-dimensional view of strategic information system implementation and use. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 23(1), 45–61. doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2014.01.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beall, J. (2013). The Open-access movement is not really about open access. tripleC, 11(2), 589–597. Accessed 1 Jul 2016.
  4. Björk, B.-C., & Paetau, P. (2012). Open access to the scientific journal literature—status and challenges for the information systems community. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 38(5), 39–44. doi: 10.1002/bult.2012.1720380512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Björk, B-C., Welling, P., Laakso, M. (2011). Open accessibility to information systems research articles. In Proceedings of the 2011 ECIS Conference. Paper 149. Accessed 1 Jul 2016.
  6. Bohannon, B. (2016). Who’s downloading pirated papers? Everyone. Science., 352(6285), 508–512. doi: 10.1126/science.352.6285.508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Craig, I., Plume, A., McVeigh, M., Pringle, J., & Amin, M. (2007). Do open access articles have greater citation impact? A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 1(3), 239–248. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2007.04.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gargouri, Y., Lariviére, V., Gingras, Y., and Harnad, S. (2012). Green and gold open access percentages and growth, by discipline. In E. Archambault, Y. Gingras, and V. Lariviére (Eds.), In Proceedings of 17th international conference on science and technology indicators. Montréal: Science-Metrix and OST. Accessed 20 Aug 2015.
  9. Harnad, S. (1995). Electronic scholarly publication: Quo vadis? Serials Review, 21(1), 70–72.
  10. Jamali, H. R., & Nabavi, M. (2015). Open access and sources of full-text articles in Google Scholar in different subject fields. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1635–1651. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1642-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kingsley, DA., Kennan, MA. (2015). Open access: The whipping boy for problems in scholarly publishing, Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 37(1), 329–350. Accessed 1 Jul 2016.
  12. Laakso, M. (2014). Green open access policies of scholarly journal publishers: a study of what, when, and where self-archiving is allowed. Scientometrics, 99(2), 475–494. doi: 10.1007/s11192-013-1205-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Laakso, M., & Björk, B.-C. (2013). Delayed open access: An overlooked high-impact category of openly available scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(7), 1323–1329. doi: 10.1002/asi.22856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Li, X., Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2015). The role of arXiv, RePEc, SSRN and PMC in formal scholarly communication. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 67(6), 614–635. doi: 10.1108/ajim-03-2015-0049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lindman, J. (2015). Open access: A cause, but not the cause. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37(1), 352–356. Available at: Accessed 20 Aug 2015.
  16. Lowry, P.B., Moody, G., Gaskin, J., Galletta, D.F., Humpherys, Sean, Barlow, J., and Wilson, D. (2013). Evaluating Journal Quality and the Association for Information Systems (AIS) Senior Scholars’ Journal Basket via Bibliometric Measures: Do Expert Journal Assessments Add Value? MIS Quarterly, 37(4), 993–1012. Accessed 20 Aug 2015.
  17. Martín-Martín, A., Orduña-Malea, E., Ayllón, J.M. and Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2014). Does Google Scholar contain all highly cited documents (1950–2013)? EC3 Working Papers, 19. Accessed 1 Jul 2016.
  18. Myers, M., Liu, F. (2009) What does the best is research look like? An analysis of the ais basket of top journals. PACIS 2009 Proceedings, 61.
  19. Niyazov, Y., Vogel, C., Price, R., Lund, B., Judd, D., et al. (2016). Open access meets discoverability: Citations to articles posted to PLoS One, 11(2), e0148257. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. repositories. Accessed 27 Mar 2016.
  21. Directory of open access repositories. Accessed 20 Aug 2015.
  22. Orduña-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2015). The dark side of open access in Google and Google Scholar: the case of Latin-American repositories. Scientometrics, 102(1), 829–846. doi: 10.1007/s11192-014-1369-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pitol, S. P., & De Groote, S. L. (2014). Google Scholar versions: do more versions of an article mean greater impact? Library Hi Tech, 32(4), 594–611. doi: 10.1108/LHT-05-2014-0039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ResearchGate (2015). Celebrating seven million members and seven years of ResearchGate. Retrieved August 13, 2015, from
  25. ResearchGate (2015). ResearchGate fact sheet. Retrieved August 13, 2015, from
  26. SHERPA/RoMEO (2016) SHERPA/RoMEO: Publisher copyright policies and self-archiving. Accessed 20 Aug 2015.
  27. Sotudeh, H., Ghasempour, Z., & Yaghtin, M. (2015). The citation advantage of author-pays model: The case of Springer and Elsevier OA journals. Scientometrics, 104(2), 581–608. doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1607-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. SPARC (2015) SPARC-The open access citation advantage: List of studies and results to date. Accessed 27 Mar 2016.
  29. Suber, P. (2012). Open access. MIT Press. Accessed 20 Aug 2015.
  30. van Noorden, R. (2014). Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network. Nature, 512, 126–129. doi: 10.1038/512126a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. van Noorden, R. (2016). Social-sciences preprint server snapped up by publishing giant Elsevier. Nature News,. doi: 10.1038/nature.2016.19932.Google Scholar
  32. Willinsky, J. (2005). The access principle: the case for open access to research and scholarship. MIT Press.

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Information Systems Science, Department of Management and OrganisationHanken School of EconomicsHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Applied Information TechnologyUniversity of Gothenburg/ChalmersGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations