Preprint
Article

The DOAJ Spring Cleaning 2016 and What Was Removed – Tragic Loss or Good Riddance?

Altmetrics

Downloads

288

Views

781

Comments

0

A peer-reviewed article of this preprint also exists.

This version is not peer-reviewed

Submitted:

22 January 2019

Posted:

23 January 2019

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
In December 2012, DOAJ’s parent company, IS4OA, announced they would introduce new criteria for inclusion in DOAJ [1] and that DOAJ would collect vastly more information from journals as part of the accreditation process – and that journals already included, would need to reapply in order to be kept in the registry. My hypothesis was that the journals removed from DOAJ on May 9th 2016 would chiefly be journals from small publishers (mostly single journal publishers) and that DOAJ journal metadata information would reveal that they were journals with a lower level of publishing competence than those that would remain in the DOAJ. Among indicators of publishing competence could be the use of APCs, permanent article identifiers, journal licenses, article level metadata deposited with DOAJ, archiving policy/solutions and/or having a policy in SHERPA/RoMEO. The analysis shows my concerns to be correct.
Keywords: 
Subject: Social Sciences  -   Library and Information Sciences
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

Subscribe

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated