Difference in the impact of open-access papers published by China and the USA

We analyze the impact of open-access (OA) articles published by China and the USA by using Web of Science (WoS) data covering a period of 5 years (2011–2015), five indexes (citation and four altmetric indexes), five disciplines, and three types of articles. With regard to article type, Type I papers are those wherein the authors are all from China or the USA. Type II are those in which the first author is from China or the USA. Type III includes those in which the first author is not from China or the USA. We found that the proportion of OA papers in WoS has been growing in recent years. In terms of citations and altmetric indexes, the mean value of the USA is larger than that of China in general; Type II articles possess the highest value among all papers in the USA, whereas Type III has the highest value in China. Compared with the scenario in citations, social sciences and humanities possess larger altmetric values in China and the USA. The correlation among indicators is similar for the OA papers from China and the USA. Generally, citations cannot effectively represent the altmetric indexes. The gap between China and the USA is the largest in the altmetric attention score and Type I, and the smallest in citations and Type III. Measuring the international impact of OA papers using only citations underestimates the gap between China and the USA.

[1]  Li Tang,et al.  China's Global Growth in Social Science Research: Uncovering Evidence from Bibliometric Analyses of SSCI Publications (1978–2013) , 2015, J. Informetrics.

[2]  Siluo Yang,et al.  Breadth and depth of citation distribution , 2015, Inf. Process. Manag..

[3]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Usage metrics versus altmetrics: confusing terminology? , 2015, Scientometrics.

[4]  GorraizJuan,et al.  Usage metrics versus altmetrics , 2015 .

[5]  Feng Xia,et al.  Identifying Anomalous Citations for Objective Evaluation of Scholarly Article Impact , 2016, PloS one.

[6]  Iain D. Craig,et al.  Do open access articles have greater citation impact?: A critical review of the literature , 2007, J. Informetrics.

[7]  Peter Kraker,et al.  Comparison of downloads, citations and readership data for two information systems journals , 2014, Scientometrics.

[8]  Dietmar Wolfram,et al.  The relationship between the author byline and contribution lists: a comparison of three general medical journals , 2017, Scientometrics.

[9]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  Do Altmetrics Work? Twitter and Ten Other Social Web Services , 2013, PloS one.

[10]  Ross Mounce.  Open access and altmetrics: Distinct but complementary , 2013 .

[11]  Pablo Dorta-González,et al.  Comparing journals from different fields of science and social science through a JCR subject categories normalized impact factor , 2012, Scientometrics.

[12]  Weina Hua,et al.  Scholarly impact measurements of LIS open access journals: based on citations and links , 2011, Electron. Libr..

[13]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics , 2014, J. Informetrics.

[14]  C. Lee Giles,et al.  On the Relationship between Open Access and Altmetrics , 2015 .

[15]  Vincent Larivière,et al.  Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[16]  Stacy Konkiel,et al.  The open access advantage considering citation, article usage and social media attention , 2015 .

[17]  Yin Leng Theng,et al.  Altmetrics: an analysis of the state-of-the-art in measuring research impact on social media , 2016, Scientometrics.

[18]  Jiancheng Guan,et al.  China's emerging presence in nanoscience and nanotechnology: A comparative bibliometric study of several nanoscience ‘giants’ , 2007 .

[19]  Tianwei He,et al.  International scientific collaboration of China with the G7 countries , 2009, Scientometrics.

[20]  Peter Willett,et al.  Bibliometric analysis of Chinese superconductivity research, 1986-2007 , 2011, Aslib Proc..

[21]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  The European Union, China, and the United States in the top-1% and top-10% layers of most-frequently cited publications: Competition and collaborations , 2014, J. Informetrics.

[22]  Sujit Bhattacharya,et al.  China and India: The two new players in the nanotechnology race , 2012, Scientometrics.

[23]  Ping Zhou,et al.  The growth momentum of China in producing international scientific publications seems to have slowed down , 2013, Inf. Process. Manag..

[24]  S. Harnad,et al.  Comparing the Impact of Open Access (OA) vs. Non-OA Articles in the Same Journals , 2004 .

[25]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  Beyond Bibliometrics: Harnessing Multidimensional Indicators of Scholarly Impact , 2015, Online Inf. Rev..

[26]  Jonathan Adams.  Collaborations: The fourth age of research , 2013, Nature.

[27]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Is collaboration among scientists related to the citation impact of papers because their quality increases with collaboration? An analysis based on data from F1000Prime and normalized citation scores , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[28]  Johan A. Wallin,et al.  The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact? , 2015, Scientometrics.

[29]  Ying Ding,et al.  Measuring Scholarly Impact , 2014, Springer International Publishing.

[30]  Fulu Tao,et al.  The changing dynamics in citation index publication position China in a race with the USA for global leadership , 2012, Scientometrics.

[31]  Henk F. Moed,et al.  Multidimensional assessment of scholarly research impact , 2014, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[32]  K. Antelman.  Do Open-Access Articles Have a Greater Research Impact? , 2004 .

[33]  David W. Lewis,et al.  The Inevitability of Open Access , 2012, Coll. Res. Libr..

[34]  Houqiang Yu,et al.  Context of altmetrics data matters: an investigation of count type and user category , 2017, Scientometrics.

[35]  Stefanie Haustein,et al.  Grand challenges in altmetrics: heterogeneity, data quality and dependencies , 2016, Scientometrics.

[36]  Ludo Waltman,et al.  A review of the literature on citation impact indicators , 2015, J. Informetrics.

[37]  Wolfgang Glänzel,et al.  Is China also becoming a giant in social sciences? , 2007, Scientometrics.

[38]  Mike Thelwall,et al.  Can Mendeley bookmarks reflect readership? A survey of user motivations , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[39]  G. Eysenbach.  The Open Access Advantage , 2006, Journal of medical Internet research.

[40]  R. Werner.  The focus on bibliometrics makes papers less useful , 2015, Nature.