Skip to main content

Open access effect on uncitedness: a large-scale study controlling by discipline, source type and visibility

Abstract

There are many factors that affect the probability of being uncited during the first years after publication. In this study, we analyze three of these factors for journals, conference proceedings and book series: the field (in 316 subject categories of the Scopus database), the access modality (open access vs. paywalled), and the visibility of the source (through the percentile of the average impact in the subject category). We quantify the effect of these factors on the probability of being uncited. This probability is measured through the percentage of uncited documents in the serial sources of the Scopus database at about two years after publication. As a main result, we do not find any strong correlation between open access and uncitedness. Within the group of most cited journals (Q1 and top 10%), open access journals generally have somewhat lower uncited rates. However, in the intermediate quartiles (Q2 and Q3) almost no differences are observed, while for Q4 the uncited rate is again somewhat lower in the case of the OA group. This is important because it provides new evidence in the debate about open access citation advantage.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

References

  • Baas, J., Schotten, M., Plume, A., Côté, G., & Karimi, R. (2020). Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quantitative Science Studies,1(1), 377–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrell, Q. L. (2013). A stochastic approach to the relation between the impact factor and the uncitedness factor. Journal of Informetrics,7(3), 676–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorta-González, P., González-Betancor, S. M., & Dorta-González, M. I. (2017). Reconsidering the gold open access citation advantage postulate in a multidisciplinary context: An analysis of the subject categories in the Web of Science database 2009–2014. Scientometrics,112(2), 877–901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorta-González, P., & Santana-Jiménez, Y. (2018). Prevalence and citation advantage of gold open access in the subject areas of the Scopus database. Research Evaluation,27(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L. (2013). The functional relation between the impact factor and the uncitedness factor revisited. Journal of Informetrics,7(1), 183–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egghe, L., Guns, R., & Rousseau, R. (2011). Thoughts on uncitedness: Nobel laureates and fields medalists as case studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,62(8), 1637–1644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Betancor, S. M., & Dorta-González, P. (2019). Publication modalities ‘article in press’ and ‘open access’ in relation to journal average citation. Scientometrics,120(3), 1209–1223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heneberg, P. (2013). Supposedly uncited articles of Nobel laureates and Fields medalists can be prevalently attributed to the errors of omission and commission. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,64(3), 448–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández, J. M., & Dorta-González, P. (2020). Interdisciplinarity metric based on the co-citation network. Mathematics,8(4), 544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, Y. S., & Hartley, J. (2017). Sleeping beauties in psychology. Scientometrics,110(1), 301–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, J. W., & Huang, D. W. (2012). A scaling between impact factor and uncitedness. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications,391(5), 2129–2134.

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, Z., & Wu, Y. (2014). Regularity in the time-dependent distribution of the percentage of never-cited papers: An empirical pilot study based on the six journals. Journal of Informetrics,8(1), 136–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamat, P. V. (2018). Most cited versus uncited papers. What do they tell us? ACS Energy Letters,3(9), 2134–2135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, L., Zhong, Z., & Rousseau, R. (2015). Uncited papers, uncited authors and uncited topics: A case study in library and information science. Journal of Informetrics,9(1), 50–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lou, W., & He, J. (2015). Does author affiliation reputation affect uncitedness? Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology,52(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mavrogenis, A. F., Quaile, A., Pećina, M., & Scarlat, M. M. (2018). Citations, non-citations and visibility of International Orthopaedics in 2017. International Orthopaedics,42(11), 2499–2505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics,106(1), 213–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaisen, J., & Frandsen, T. F. (2019). Zero impact: A large-scale study of uncitedness. Scientometrics,119(2), 1227–1254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenkrantz, A. B., Chung, R., & Duszak, R. (2019). Uncited research articles in popular United States general radiology journals. Academic Radiology,26(2), 282–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thelwall, M. (2016). Are there too many uncited articles? Zero inflated variants of the discretised lognormal and hooked power law distributions. Journal of Informetrics,10(2), 622–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Leeuwen, T. N., & Moed, H. F. (2005). Characteristics of journal impact factors: The effects of uncitedness and citation distribution on the understanding of journal impact factors. Scientometrics,63(2), 357–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Noorden, R. (2017). The science that’s never been cited. Nature,552, 162–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Raan, A. F. (2015). Dormitory of physical and engineering sciences: Sleeping beauties may be sleeping innovations. PLoS ONE,10(10), e0139786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, M. L., Larivière, V., & Gingras, Y. (2009). Modeling a century of citation distributions. Journal of Informetrics,3(4), 296–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamashita, Y., & Yoshinaga, D. (2014). Influence of researchers’ international mobilities on publication: A comparison of highly cited and uncited papers. Scientometrics,101(2), 1475–1489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pablo Dorta-González.

Appendices

Appendix A

Mean uncited rate for OA and paywalled journals by subject area and category.

figure a
figure b
figure c
figure d
figure e
figure f
figure g

Appendix B

Scatter plot for OA journals in four subject categories (there are no OA conference proceedings in Electrical and Electronic Engineering, and only two OA book series in History).

Fig. 11
figure 11

Scatter plot between uncited rate and percentile for OA journals in four subject categories

Fig. 12
figure 12

Scatter plot between uncited rate and CiteScore for OA journals in four subject categories

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dorta-González, P., Suárez-Vega, R. & Dorta-González, M.I. Open access effect on uncitedness: a large-scale study controlling by discipline, source type and visibility. Scientometrics 124, 2619–2644 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03557-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03557-8

Keywords

  • Uncitedness ratio
  • Uncited rate
  • Open access
  • Differences by field
  • CiteScore