SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Toward openness and transparency to better facilitate knowledge creation
16 references·1 citing·48 second hop
Toward openness and transparency to better facilitate knowledge creation (2022)Toward openness and transparency to bette…UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science (2021)UNESCO Recommendation on Open…The evolving role of preprints in the dissemination of COVID-19 research and their impact on the science communication landscape (2021)The evolving role of preprint…Open is not forever: A study of vanished open access journals (2021)Open is not forever: A study …Open is not forever: A study of vanished open access journals (2021)Open is not forever: A study …Open peer review: promoting transparency in open science (2020)Open peer review: promoting t…The troubles of high-profile open access megajournals (2019)The troubles of high-profile …Motivations, understandings, and experiences of open‐access mega‐journal authors: Results of a large‐scale survey (2019)Motivations, understandings, …Ten considerations for open peer review (2018)Ten considerations for open p…Cultural Diversity and the Digital Humanities (2018)Cultural Diversity and the Di…What is open peer review? A systematic review (2017)What is open peer review? A s…Open-access mega-journals (2017)Open-access mega-journalsCrowd-based peer review can be good and fast (2017)Crowd-based peer review can b…Academics' behaviors and attitudes towards open access publishing in scholarly journals (2017)Academics' behaviors and atti…Open access (The MIT Press Essential Knowledge Series) (2013)Open access (The MIT Press Es…Policy Guidelines for the Development and Promotion of Open Access (2012)Policy Guidelines for the Dev…Die beiden Grundprobleme der Erkenntnistheorie (2011)Die beiden Grundprobleme der …It Takes a Village! Editorship, Advocacy, and Research in Running an Open Access Data Journal (2024)It Takes a Village! Editorshi…Open access self-archiving: An author study (2005)Ten-Year Cross-Disciplinary Comparison of the Growth of Open Access and How it Increases Research Citation Impact (2006)Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research (2010)Drivers and Implications of Scientific Open Access Publishing (2016)Charting the digital transformation of science (2020)Open Science for private Interests? How the Logic of Open Science Contributes to the Commercialization of Research (2020)Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality? (2003)Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services (2013)Open access: The true cost of science publishing (2013)Demarcating spectrums of predatory publishing: Economic and institutional sources of academic legitimacy (2020)Discipline-specific open access publishing practices and barriers to change: an evidence-based review (2020)Article processing charges for open access journal publishing: A review (2023)Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication (2000)Publication fees in open access publishing: Sources of funding and factors influencing choice of journal (2011)A study of open access journals using article processing charges (2012)Discipline-specific open access publishing practices and barriers to change: an evidence-based review (2018)What happens when a journal converts to open access? A bibliometric analysis (2021)Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals (2006)Peer Review: A Flawed Process at the Heart of Science and Journals (2006)Open Science: One Term, Five Schools of Thought (2013)The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future (2018)AI-assisted peer review (2021)Open science saves lives: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic (2021)Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation (2001)Bias in peer review (2012)Evaluation of untrustworthy journals: Transition from formal criteria to a complex view (2020)Innovative Strategies for Peer Review (2020)Peer-reviewing in Surgical Journals: Revolutionize or Perish? (2021)Who's Afraid of Peer Review? (2013)The Pandemic as a Portal: Reimagining Psychological Science as Truly Open and Inclusive (2022)How to improve scientific peer review: Four schools of thought (2023)The crisis of peer review: Part of the evolution of science (2024)The Development of Open Access Journal Publishing from 1993 to 2009 (2011)Who's Afraid of Peer Review? (2013)The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis (2015)Artificial intelligence-assisted tools for redefining the communication landscape of the scholarly world (2021)National differences in dissemination and use of open access literature (2022)Why do journals discontinue? A study of Australian ceased journals (2022)The publishing delay in scholarly peer-reviewed journals (2013)Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations (2020)Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: a multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations (2020)ChatGPT and the rise of large language models: the new AI-driven infodemic threat in public health (2023)Rejecting “the given” in systematics (2006)Novel Predictions and the No Miracle Argument (2013)Wissenschaftstheorie und Theologie (2023)The APC-barrier and its effect on stratification in open access publishing (2023)Missing institutions in OpenAlex: possible reasons, implications, and solutions (2024)Evaluating the linguistic coverage of OpenAlex : An assessment of metadata accuracy and completeness (2025)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2021The evolving role of preprints in the dissemination of COVID-19 research and their impact on the science communication landscape556 cited
  • 2017What is open peer review? A systematic review453 cited
  • 2021UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science446 cited
  • 2020Open peer review: promoting transparency in open science167 cited
  • 2017Open-access mega-journals138 cited
  • 2011Die beiden Grundprobleme der Erkenntnistheorie134 cited
  • 2017Academics' behaviors and attitudes towards open access publishing in scholarly journals107 cited
  • 2012Policy Guidelines for the Development and Promotion of Open Access105 cited
  • 2021Open is not forever: A study of vanished open access journals84 cited
  • 2018Ten considerations for open peer review81 cited
  • 2021Open is not forever: A study of vanished open access journals64 cited
  • 2018Cultural Diversity and the Digital Humanities48 cited
  • 2017Crowd-based peer review can be good and fast37 cited
  • 2019Motivations, understandings, and experiences of open‐access mega‐journal authors: Results of a large‐scale survey33 cited
  • 2019The troubles of high-profile open access megajournals21 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

  • 2013Open access (The MIT Press Essential Knowledge Series)17 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2024It Takes a Village! Editorship, Advocacy, and Research in Running an Open Access Data Journal8 cited