GOAJ3: First piece of the marathon

I’ve started in on GOAJ3, Gold Open Access Journals 2012-2017, which meansL:

  1. I’ve downloaded the DOAJ metadata (at 12:30 a.m. UMT on January 1, which was easy to do the afternoon of December 31).
  2. I’ve matched rows with the previous report where possible, since I don’t plan to recount 2012-2016 or revisit simplified subject assignments more often than necessary. (Matching is a multistage process.)
  3. I’ve tried to match remaining DOAJ rows with the “gray OA” spreadsheet to show cases where journals were either restored or have gained DOAJ status.
  4. I’ve started the actual data sweep, which will continue for somewhere between 10 more weeks and 88 more days (or more), after which comes revisiting cases needing revisits. [More plausible estimates, all assuming no significant personal or household crises: very optimistic: 10 weeks; mildly optimistic: 95 days; mildly pessimistic: 19 weeks.]
  5. In the process of starting tat, I’ve decided what’s worth trying to add to the analysis beyond the past two reports–which turns out to be mostly a crude measure of the transparency of APC status and amount. (As in, was the information reasonably readily available on the journal site or did I give up and rely on DOAJ?)

I’m a tenth of the way through–and that far only because of BioMed Central (I’m doing the data sweep alphabetically by publisher), with more than 200 journals that were exceedingly easy to get data for.

A couple of observations on that first tenth–actually a bit more:

  • Thanks to the group of hikers/walkers I go with on most Wednesday morning, I have eliminated the single “XT/couldn’t translate” omission from previous years. (The de facto leader of the Amblers, one of the three subgroups within the hiking group, is from India and I know the journal’s Indian. He agreed to take a look. It turns out to be in Hindi, not a language he reads–but a friend his *does* read Hindi and gave me the article coults.)
  • So far, it appears that Indonesia has a malware problem. 10 of 74 Indonesian journals checked so far are flagged by Malwarebytes as malware, The only other cases are five of 63 Romanian (I think one of those is actually an invalid security certificate) and two of 89 from Bosnia and Herzegovina. Naturally, those numbers will change–and I recheck all cases of malware (but I do not ever ignore Malwarebytes: problematic journals are one reason I use Malwarebytes Pro along with Windows Defender).

No real significance here; just a note along the (extended) way.


[Slowed down a bit because of a glitch in my two-display setup: after a $6 cable purchase, I’m now trying to determine whether it’s the cable or, more likely, a 12.5-year-old display. We shall see… ]

Comments are closed.