Scholarly Literature in Digital Humanities: A Comparative Analysis of Open Access and Non-Open Access Publications
Abstract
Digital Humanities (DH), as a research area, has attracted the attention of scholars across the globe. The present study attempts to trace the publication and citation trends in DH literature with a comparative analysis of Open Access (OA) and Non-Open Access (Non-OA) publications using a dataset of 3,731 publications collected from Scopus. DH literature is characterized by a steady growth from 1971 to 2024. The highest number of publications have been produced during 2022 (475). Although a consistent increase in OA publications can be witnessed since 2009, a significant portion of DH literature (65%) is non-open access. In terms of citations, OA publications show greater potential. Mann Whitney U test shows that the mean rank of citation counts for OA publications (2036.47) is higher than that of non-OA publications (1772.56). The result is statistically significant (p-value=.000). Green OA is the most preferred OA channel, with 27% of OA publications. USA is the top contributor to DH literature with 23% of publications, while Belgium tops the list with 62% open access publication output. Computer Science (48%) is the most predominant subject area in DH. Articles and conference papers constitute 86% of the total literature, indicating authors’ preference for scholarly communication.
References
[2] Basak, M., Roy, S. B. (2022). Mapping the literature on digital humanities: A bibliometric study using Scopus data. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 42(6), 354. [3] Changes to Scopus Open Access (OA) document tagging | Elsevier Scopus Blog. (n.d.). Retrieved June 26, 2024, from https://blog.scopus.com/posts/changes-to-scopus-open-access-oa-document-tagging [4] Chansanam, W., Ahmad, A. R., Li, C. (2022). Contemporary and future research of digital humanities: A scientometric analysis. Bulletin of Electrical Engineering and Informatics, 11(2), 1143–1156. [5] Chua, S., Qureshi, A. M., Krishnan, V., Pai, D. R., Kamal, L. B., Gunasegaran, S., Afzal, M., Ambawatta, L., Gan, J., Kew, P., Winn, T., Sood, S. (2017). The impact factor of an open access journal does not contribute to an article’s citations. F1000Research, 6, 208. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10892.1 [6] Dalbello, M. (2011). A genealogy of digital humanities. Journal of Documentation, 67(3), 480–506. [7] Dorta-González, P., Dorta-González, M. I. (2023). The influence of funding on the open access citation advantage. Journal of Scientometric Research, 12(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.12.1.010 [8] Gupta, N., Chakravarty, R. (2021). Science mapping analysis of digital humanities research: A scientometric study. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), (September), 1–15. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ libphilprac/6126/ [9] Koler-Povh, T., Južniè, P., Turk, G. (2014). Impact of open access on citation of scholarly publications in the field of civil engineering. Scientometrics, 98(2), 1033–1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1101x [10] Liu, A. (2013). The meaning of the digital humanities. PMLA, 128(2), 409–423. [11] Luhmann, J., Burghardt, M. (2022). Digital humanities—A discipline in its own right? An analysis of the role and position of digital humanities in the academic landscape. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 73(2), 148–171. [12] Makwana, P. N., Gadhavi, G. G. (2023). Literature survey and analysis of digital humanities and libraries in recent years. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 43(4). [13] Sahu, D. K., Gogtay, N. J., Bavdekar, S. B. (2005). Effect of open access on citation rates for a small biomedical journal. Paper presented at the Fifth International Conference on Peer Review and Biomedical Publication, Chicago, IL. [14] Smith, M. N. (2002). Computing: What’s American literary study got to do with IT? American Literature, 74(4), 833–857. [15] Tang, M. C., Cheng, Y. J., Chen, K. H. (2017). A longitudinal study of intellectual cohesion in digitalhumanities using bibliometric analyses. Scientometrics, 113, 985–1008. [16] Wang, Q. (2018). Distribution features and intellectual structures of digital humanities: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Documentation, 74(1), 223–246. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-05-2017-0076 [17] Wang, X., Liu, C., Mao, W., Fang, Z. (2015). The open access advantage considering citation, article usage and social media attention. Scientometrics, 103(2), 555–564. [18] Zhang, Y. (2006). The effect of open access on citation impact: A comparison study based on web citation analysis.
