The Open Access Landscape: 16. Library Science

Library Science
includes bibliography, archives and museums and some aspects of information science (that did not appear to be based on computer science). It’s not the smallest set of journals (two others are smaller), but at least for 2013, it’s the smallest set of articles: 77 journals that published 1,363 articles in 2013 and 1,460 in 2014.

Grades

Grade Journals %J Articles %A A/J
A

56

73%

1,213

89%

22

Free

53

95%

1,158

95%

22

Pay

3

5%

55

5%

18

B

1

1%

37

3%

37

Free

1

100%

37

100%

37

C

1

1%

60

4%

60

Unk

1

100%

60

100%

60

D

19

25%

53

4%

3

Free

18

95%

53

100%

3

Pay

1

5%

0%

0

Table 16.1. Journals and articles by grade

Table 16.1 shows the number of journals and 2013 articles for each grade; free, pay and unknown numbers; and average 2013 articles per journal. Since there are no over-$1000 journals, APC-charging B grade journals, free or APC-charging C-grade journals or unknown D journals, those lines are omitted. Boldface percentages are percentages of all journals or articles; others are percentages of the grade above.

Library science journals are distinctly atypical in that the APC-charging journals published fewer articles per journal than the free ones, but there are so few APC-charging journals that this may not mean much.

The percentage of D journals is slightly on the high side but accounts for very few articles, and includes these subgroups: C (ceased), four journals with no 2013 articles; D (dying), one journal with three articles; E (erratic), one journal with three articles; H (hiatus?), two journals with 12 articles; S (small), 11 journals with 35 articles.

Article Volume (including all of 2014)

2014 2013 2012 2011
Journals

70

71

74

70

%Free

96%

96%

95%

94%

Articles

1,400

1,303

1,406

1,288

%Free

96%

96%

94%

93%

Table 16.2. Journals and articles by date

Table 16.2 shows the number of free and APC-charging journals that actually published articles in each year (including all of 2014), how many articles those journals published, and what percentage of journals and articles were free. The single journal with unknown APC is omittied; additionally, some journals didn’t publish articles in any given year.

These are somewhat unusual numbers, as the very high percentage of non-APC journals and articles actually increased in 2013 and 2014; after a significant increase in OA activity from 2011 to 2012, there was an apparent (but possibly not entirely genuine) decrease in 2013—and a return to 2012 levels in 2014.

Looked at on a journal-by-journal basis, 36 journals published more articles in 2014 than in 2013; eight published the same number; 33 published fewer articles in 2014. In terms of significant change, 31 journals (40%) published at least 10% more articles; 15 (19%) published roughly the same number; 31 (40%) published at least 10% fewer articles, including seven that—as of mid-April 2015—do not show any 2014 articles.

Journals No-Fee % Articles No-Fee %
Medium

5

80%

349

83%

Small

31

90%

680

93%

Sparse

41

98%

334

97%

Table 16.3. Journals by peak article volume

Table 16.3 shows the number of journals in each size category (omitting prolific and large journals, which don’t exist among OA library science journals), 2013 articles for journals in that group, and what percentage is or is in no-fee journals. Only one journal published more than 100 articles (or more than 65 articles, for that matter) in a year. This is one case where library science does follow the overall pattern: larger journals are more likely to charge fees, although the numbers are very small.

Fees (APCs)

APC Jour. %Fee %All Art. %Fee %All
Low

2

50%

3%

46

84%

4%

Nominal

2

50%

3%

9

16%

1%

None

72

95%

1,248

96%

Table 16.4. Journals and articles by fee range

Table 16.4 shows the number of journals in each fee range (omitting High and Medium, since there aren’t any—the highest APC is $400) and the number of 2013 articles for those journals. There are so few APC-charging journals that comments about relative balance are pointless. It may be worth noting that only one of the two nominal-fee journals published any articles in 2013 or 2014.

Starting Dates and the Gold Rush

Year Total Free%
Pre-1960

1

100%

1960-69
1970-79

1

100%

1980-89

1

100%

1990-91

1

100%

1992-93

1

100%

1994-95

2

100%

1996-97

6

100%

1998-99

5

100%

2000-01

2

100%

2002-03

9

89%

2004-05

6

100%

2006-07

16

94%

2008-09

8

100%

2010-11

14

79%

2012-13

4

100%

Table 16.5. Starting dates for library science OA journals

Table 16.5 shows library science OA journals by starting date, including the percentage of journals started in a given period that currently don’t charge APCs. With so few APC-charging journals, there’s no real sense of a “gold rush,” although it is true that three of the four started between 2006 and 2011, the period that seems to represent a gold rush overall.

Figure 16.1 shows much the same information (with markers so that the separate starting points for fee journals are visible) and also shows the growth trend in library science journals.

Figure 16.1. Library science OA journals by starting date

Year Journals Articles Art/Jrnl
Pre-1960

1

33

33

1960-69
1970-79

1

9

9

1980-89

1

21

21

1990-91

1

8

8

1992-93

1

5

5

1994-95

2

41

21

1996-97

5

40

8

1998-99

5

237

47

2000-01

2

21

11

2002-03

9

168

19

2004-05

5

77

15

2006-07

15

243

16

2008-09

7

124

18

2010-11

13

247

19

2012-13

4

89

22

Table 16.6. Articles per journal by starting date

Table 16.6 shows journals that actually published articles in 2013, when they started, and average 2013 articles per journal. The 1998-99 time period stands out for fairly large numbers of articles—just as 1996-97 stands out for very few.

Overall, this is a group with relatively small journals and very few APC-charging journals, where OA has stayed fairly steady over the past few years.

Definitions and notes

See The Open Access Landscape: 1. Background for definitions and notes

If you’re interested in a book-form version of this material (with an additional bonus graph and probably some additional analysis added in each chapter), let me know, either in a comment or by email to waltcrawford at gmail dot com.

Comments are closed.