Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2011 Jul;99(3):208-17.
doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.99.3.008.

The impact of free access to the scientific literature: a review of recent research

Affiliations
Review

The impact of free access to the scientific literature: a review of recent research

Philip M Davis et al. J Med Libr Assoc. 2011 Jul.

Abstract

Objectives: The paper reviews recent studies that evaluate the impact of free access (open access) on the behavior of scientists as authors, readers, and citers in developed and developing nations. It also examines the extent to which the biomedical literature is used by the general public.

Method: The paper is a critical review of the literature, with systematic description of key studies.

Results: Researchers report that their access to the scientific literature is generally good and improving. For authors, the access status of a journal is not an important consideration when deciding where to publish. There is clear evidence that free access increases the number of article downloads, although its impact on article citations is not clear. Recent studies indicate that large citation advantages are simply artifacts of the failure to adequately control for confounding variables. The effect of free access on the general public's use of the primary medical literature has not been thoroughly evaluated.

Conclusions: Recent studies provide little evidence to support the idea that there is a crisis in access to the scholarly literature. Further research is needed to investigate whether free access is making a difference in non-research contexts and to better understand the dissemination of scientific literature through peer-to-peer networks and other informal mechanisms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Open Access Now. (Mis)leading open access myths [Internet] BioMed Central [cited 29 Nov 2010] < http://www.biomedcentral.com/openaccess/inquiry/myths/?myth=all>.
    1. Willinsky J. The access principle: the case for open access to research and scholarship. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2006.
    1. Association of Research Libraries. Create change [Internet] Washington, DC: Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition; 2002 [cited 11 Feb 2011]. < http://www.arl.org/createchange/bm∼doc/createchange2003.pdf>.
    1. Thatcher S.G. The crisis in scholarly communication. Chron Higher Educ. 1995 Mar 3;41(25):B1.
    1. English R. Scholarly communication and the academy: the importance of the ACRL initiative. Portal-Libr Acad. 2003 Apr;3(2):337–40.

Publication types