On Impact of OA, the Jury is Still Out.


  • David Flaxbart




The author discusses the impact of open access (OA) publishing. He notes that objective and quantifiable evidence is needed in order to negate the claims of publishers that OA is evil and prove to all stakeholders that OA is worth the further investment and advocacy. He mentions that authors tend to be indifferent on the issue of OA as they are ignorant of its existence and already have subscription access paid for by their institutions. He mentions the aim of OA advocates that involves the broadening of audience for scholarly literature.


Download data is not yet available.


Davis, Philip M., Lewenstein, Bruce V., Simon, Daniel H., Booth, James G. Booth, and Connolly, Mathew J.L. 2008. Open access publishing, article downloads, and citations: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 337, a568. [Online]. Available: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/337/jul31_1/a568 [Accessed August 11, 2008].

Davis, Philip. 2008. Comment in response to Kent Andersen, "Open access doesn't drive citations," posted August 6, 2008, [Online]. Available: http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2008/07/31/open-access-doesnt-drive-citations/ [Accessed August 7, 2008].




How to Cite

Flaxbart, D. (2008). On Impact of OA, the Jury is Still Out. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, (54). https://doi.org/10.29173/istl2455
Share |

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>