Open access citation advantage

{{short description|Tendency of scholars to cite journals with open access}}{{Redirect|FUTON|the Japanese bedding style|Futon}}

{{use mdy dates |date=September 2020}}

Open access citation advantage (OACA) is a type of bias whereby scholars tend to cite academic journals with open access (OA)—that is, journals that make their full text available on the Internet without charge and not behind a paywall—in preference to toll-access publications. The concept was first introduced under the name FUTON bias ("full text on the net") by UK medical researcher Reinhard Wentz in a letter to The Lancet in 2002.

Scholars in some fields can more easily discover and access articles whose full text is available online, which increases authors' likelihood of reading and citing these articles, an issue that was first raised and has been mainly studied in connection with medical research.{{Cite journal |last1=Murali |first1=N. S. |last2=Murali |first2=H. R. |last3=Auethavekiat |first3=P. |last4=Erwin |first4=P. J. |last5=Mandrekar |first5=J. N. |last6=Manek |first6=N. J. |last7=Ghosh |first7=A. K. |year=2004 |title=Impact of FUTON and NAA bias on visibility of research |journal=Mayo Clinic Proceedings |volume=79 |issue=8 |pages=1001–1006 |doi=10.4065/79.8.1001 |pmid=15301326 |s2cid=20536645}}{{Cite journal |last1=Ghosh |first1=A. K. |last2=Murali |first2=N. S. |year=2003 |title=Online access to nephrology journals: The FUTON bias |journal=Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation |volume=18 |issue=9 |pages=1943; author reply 1943 |doi=10.1093/ndt/gfg247 |pmid=12937253 |doi-access=}}{{Cite journal |last1=Mueller |first1=P. S. |last2=Murali |first2=N. S. |last3=Cha |first3=S. S. |last4=Erwin |first4=P. J. |last5=Ghosh |first5=A. K. |year=2006 |title=The effect of online status on the impact factors of general internal medicine journals |url=http://www.njmonline.nl/article.php?a=386&d=248&i=77 |journal=The Netherlands Journal of Medicine |volume=64 |issue=2 |pages=39–44 |pmid=16517987}}{{Cite journal |last1=Krieger |first1=M. M. |last2=Richter |first2=R. R. |last3=Austin |first3=T. M. |year=2008 |title=An exploratory analysis of PubMed's free full-text limit on citation retrieval for clinical questions |journal=Journal of the Medical Library Association |volume=96 |issue=4 |pages=351–355 |doi=10.3163/1536-5050.96.4.010 |pmc=2568849 |pmid=18974812}} In the context of evidence-based medicine, articles in expensive journals that do not provide open access may be "priced out of evidence", giving a greater weight to open access publications.{{Cite journal |last=Gilman |first=I. |year=2009 |title=Opening up the Evidence: Evidence-Based Practice and Open Access |url=http://commons.pacificu.edu/libfac/4 |journal=Faculty Scholarship |publisher=Pacific University Libraries |access-date=July 5, 2011 |archive-date=February 21, 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110221233556/http://commons.pacificu.edu/libfac/4/ |url-status=dead }} Open access citation advantage may increase the impact factor of open access journals relative to journals without open access.{{Cite journal |last1=Clayson |first1=Peter E. |last2=Baldwin |first2=Scott A. |last3=Larson |first3=Michael J. |date=2021-06-01 |title=The open access advantage for studies of human electrophysiology: Impact on citations and Altmetrics |journal=International Journal of Psychophysiology |language=en |volume=164 |pages=103–111 |doi=10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2021.03.006 |pmid=33774077 |s2cid=232409668 |issn=0167-8760|doi-access=free }}

One study concluded that authors in medical fields "concentrate on research published in journals that are available as full text on the internet, and ignore relevant studies that are not available in full text, thus introducing an element of bias into their search result".{{Cite journal |last=Wentz |first=R. |year=2002 |title=Visibility of research: FUTON bias |url=https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(02)11264-5/fulltext |journal=The Lancet |volume=360 |issue=9341 |pages=1256 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11264-5 |pmid=12401287 |s2cid=5084231|doi-access=free}} Authors of another study conclude that "the OA advantage is a quality advantage, rather than a quality bias", that authors make a "self-selection toward using and citing the more citable articles—once OA self-archiving has made them accessible", and that open access "itself will not make an unusable (hence uncitable) paper more used and cited".{{Cite journal |last1=Gargouri |first1=Y. |last2=Hajjem |first2=C. |last3=Larivière |first3=V. |last4=Gingras |first4=Y. |last5=Carr |first5=L. |last6=Brody |first6=T. |last7=Harnad |first7=S. |year=2010 |title=Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research |journal=PLoS ONE |volume=5 |issue=10 |pages=e13636 |arxiv=1001.0361 |bibcode=2010PLoSO...513636G |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0013636 |pmc=2956678 |pmid=20976155 |doi-access=free}}

A similar phenomenon, termed the "no abstract available bias" or NAA bias, is a scholar's tendency to cite journal articles that have an abstract available online more readily than articles that do not—this affects articles' citation count similarly to open access citation advantage.