Abstract:
Debates occurred on the data underlying the Open Science Monitor, as Elsevier Scopus database was used for the analysis of Open Access versus non-Open Access publishing behaviour for the countries selected in the study. In this quantitative case study, a comparison between the outcomes of the first analysis on OA publishing as performed for the OSM, with results of a study CWTS has performed for another European project, Key Technology Domains (KTD) is analysed. The results show that while the two datasets differ in absolute numbers, patterns of the shares of OA publishing shown in the two studies is more or less the same. Both datasets can be used to monitor OA uptake and publishing. Further comparative analyses will be conducted to show the effect of having a more pluralist selection of data sources for monitoring OA publishing.
