Advertisement

Scientific and Technical Information Processing

, Volume 45, Issue 4, pp 219–234 | Cite as

Russian Scientific Periodicals in the Directory of Open-Access Journals

  • T. N. DomninaEmail author
Article
  • 19 Downloads

Abstract

The current state of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is characterized and the quality criteria of its periodicals are discussed. Russian scientific journals included in the Directory, their topics, publishers, language, and licenses are comprehensively considered. Journal ratings based on generally accepted international scientometric indicators used by the Russian Science Citation Index, Scopus, and Web of Science are analyzed. Periodicals are ranked using bibliometric indicators.

Keywords

Russian Open Access scientific periodicals DOAJ Creative Commons licenses bibliometric indicators RSCI Scopus and Web of Science 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Introduction to Open Access, UNESCO, 2015, p. 19. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002319/231920E. pdf. Accessed May 30, 2018.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Suber, P., Open Access, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2012, p. 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION of 17 July 2012 on Access to and Preservation of Scientific Information, 2012. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32012H0417&rid= 1. Accessed June 30, 2018.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    H2020 Programme. Guidelines to the Rules on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Open Access to Research Data in Horizon 2020. Version 3.2 March 21, 2017. http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilotguide_en.pdf. Accessed June 30, 2018.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Johansson, A.-L. and Wahlgren, I., The One Stop Shop to Open Access Journals—DOAJ, 2008. http://portal. research.lu.se/ws/files/3867639/1361286.pdf. Accessed May 28, 2018.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Adams, C., Directory of Open Access Journals Introduces New Standards to Help Community Address Quality Concerns, 2005. https://sparcopen.org/news/2015/directory-of-open-access-journals-introduces-newstandards-to-help-community-address-quality-concerns/. Accessed June 30, 2018.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Olijhoek, T., Mitchell, D., and Bjornshauge, L., Criteria for Open Access and Publishing, 2015. https://www. scienceopen.com/document/read?vid=2befee62-f9c0-4dc8-93c5-790d6102877d. Accessed May 24, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    About the Directory of Open Access Journals. https://doaj.org. Accessed June 15, 2018.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Laakso, M., Welling, P., Bukvova, H., Nyman, L., Björk, B.-C., and Hedlund, T., The development of open access journal publishing from 1993 to 2009, PLoS ONE, 2011, vol. 6, no. 6, e20961. https://doi.org/. July 3, 2018. doi 10.1371/journal.pone.0020961CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beall, J., Predatory publishers are corrupting open access, Nature, 2012, vol. 489, no. 7415, pp. 179–179. doi 10.1038/489179aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Al-Khatib, A., Protecting authors from predatory journals and publishers, Publ. Res. Q., 2016, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 281–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nwagwu, W.E., Open access in the developing regions: Situating the altercations about predatory publishing/l'acces libre dans les regions en voie de developpement: Situation de la controverse concernant les pratiques d’edition deloyales, Can. J. Inf. Libr. Sci., 2016, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 58–80.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Butler, D., The dark side of publishing, Nature, 2013, vol. 495, no. 7442, pp. 433–435. doi 10.1038/495433aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bohannon, J., Who’s afraid of peer review?, Science, 2013, vol. 342, no. 6154, pp. 60–65. doi 10.1126/science. 342.6154.60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Berger, M. and Cirasella, J., Beyond Beall’s list: Better understanding predatory publishers, Coll. Res. Libr. News, 2015, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 132–135. doi 10.5860/crln.76.3.9277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Crawford, W., Ethics and Access 1: The Sad Case of Jeffrey Beall, Cites Insights, 2014, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1–14. http://citesandinsights.info/civ14i4.pdf.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Neylon, C., Blog post, blacklists are technically infeasible, practically unreliable and unethical. Period, 2017. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2017/02/21/blacklists-are-technically-infeasible-practically-unreliableand-unethical-period/. Accessed July 4, 2018.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dalmeet Singh Chawla, Mystery as controversial list of predatory publishers disappears, 2018. Accessed May 31, 2018. doi 10.1126/science.aal0625Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. Committee on Publication Ethics, 2017. https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/principles-transparency-and-best-practicescholarly-publishing.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marchitelli, A., Galimberti, P., Bollini, A., and Mitchell, D., Improvement of editorial quality of journals indexed in DOAJ: A data analysis, JLIS.it, 2017, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–21. doi 10.4403/jlis.it-12052Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    FP7 post-Open Access publishing funds pilot. The OpenAIRE Consortium 2017. https://old.openaire.eu/postgrantoapilot. Accessed May 26, 2018.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    The Open Access Landscape in Scientific Publishing, 2015. http://blog.polygrant.com/post/123659374020/theopen-access-landscape-in-scientific-publishing.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Solomon, D., Types of open access publishers in Scopus, Publications, 2013, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 16–26. doi 10.3390/publications1010016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ivanov, V.V., Markusova, V.A., and Mindeli, L.E., Government investments and the publishing activity of higher educational institutions: Bibliometric analysis, Herald Russ. Acad. Sci., 2016, vol. 86, no. 4, pp. 314–321. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S1019331616040031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Belyaeva, S., Growth Place: Web of Science attracts Russian journals, Poisk, 2016, nos. 18–19, pp. 9–10.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moskaleva, O.V. and Pislyakov, V.V. Russian journals in EMERGING SOURCES CITATION INDEX, 2017. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316473644_ROSSIJSKIE_ZURNALY_V_EMERGING_ SOURCES_CITATION_INDEX. Accessed June 30, 2018.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vikhreva, G.M., Open access to electronic journals as a progressive model of information support of science, Tr. Gos. Publ. Nauchno-Tekh. Bibl. Sib. Otdel. Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2015, no. 8; Novye napravleniya deyatel’nosti traditsionnykh bibliotek v elektronnoi srede: materialy mezhregional’noi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii (22–26 sentyabrya 2014 g., g. Krasnoyarsk) (New Activities of Traditional Libraries in the Electronic Environment: Proc. Int. Sci.-Pract. Conf. (September 22–26, 2014, Krasnoyarsk)), Novosibirsk, 2015, pp. 75–80.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zasurskii, I. and Trishchenko, N., Open access and open science: On the threshold of inevitable evolution, 2017. http://www.unkniga.ru/copyright/copyrightcom/8030-otkrytiy-dostup-i-otkrytata-nauka.html. Accessed July 7, 2018.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Allerton Press, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.All-Russian Institute for Scientific and Technical InformationRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations