{rfName}
At

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

63

Altmetrics

Grant support

This work was funded by the Universidad Internacional de La Rioja (grant no. B0036-1718-609). The authors would like to thank Rafael Repiso for his views on the initial conception of the study, Ana Belen Calvo for her suggestions on the first draft of the paper, the reviewers for their suggestions for revising the manuscript, and especially the respondents who generously contributed their time by completing the survey.

Analysis of institutional authors

Martin-Quevedo, JuanAuthor
Share
Publications
>
Article

Attitudes toward Open Access, Open Peer Review, and Altmetrics among Contributors to Spanish Scholarly Journals

Publicated to:Journal Of Scholarly Publishing. 50 (1): 48-70 - 2018-10-01 50(1), DOI: 10.3138/jsp.50.1.08

Authors: Segado-Boj, Francisco; Martin-Quevedo, Juan; Prieto-Gutierrez, Juan Jose;

Affiliations

Univ Int la Rioja, Fac Educ, Logrono, La Rioja, Spain - Author
Univ Int La Rioja, Fac Law Social Sci & Humanities, Logrono, La Rioja, Spain - Author
Univ Int la Rioja, Logrono, La Rioja, Spain - Author

Abstract

This paper aims for a better understanding of the perspectives of contributors to Spanish academic journals regarding open access, open peer review, and altmetrics. Specifically, it explores how age, gender, years of professional experience, and perception and use of social media influence authors' opinions of these developments in scholarly publishing. A sample of 295 contributors to Spanish academic journals participated in a survey about the aforementioned topics. They were found to hold a favourable opinion of open access but were more cautious about open peer review and altmetrics. The responses of younger and female scholars indicated more reluctance to accept open peer review practices. A positive attitude toward social networks did not necessarily translate into enthusiasm for emerging trends in scholarly publishing. Despite this, ResearchGate users were more aware of altmetrics.

Keywords
AltmetricsGenderLibraryOpen accessOpen peer reviewScholarly communicationsScienceSocial media

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Journal Of Scholarly Publishing due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency Scopus (SJR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2018, it was in position , thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Media Technology.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations provided by WoS (ESI, Clarivate), it yields a value for the citation normalization relative to the expected citation rate of: 1.45. This indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

This information is reinforced by other indicators of the same type, which, although dynamic over time and dependent on the set of average global citations at the time of their calculation, consistently position the work at some point among the top 50% most cited in its field:

  • Weighted Average of Normalized Impact by the Scopus agency: 2.5 (source consulted: FECYT Feb 2024)
  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR) from Dimensions: 23.46 (source consulted: Dimensions May 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-05-17, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 27
  • Scopus: 36
  • OpenCitations: 22
Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-05-17:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 62.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 61 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 24.048.
  • The number of mentions on the social network X (formerly Twitter): 13 (Altmetric).

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

  • The work has been submitted to a journal whose editorial policy allows open Open Access publication.