Directory of Open Access Journals in Keywords. Distribution and Themes of Articles


Researchers depend on consultation with previous work in their field, most of which is published in scientific journals. The open access movement has affected journals and articles, providing new alternatives for accessing scientific content, and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) is the most specialized and multidisciplinary database of open access journals. The main goal of this study is to analyze publications that include “DOAJ” in their keywords, to determine how researchers in the areas of Library and Information Science and Social Science are studying it. The specific objectives are: a) to describe the characteristics of journals indexed in the Web of Science, DOAJ, or SCOPUS that have published articles with “DOAJ” as a keyword; b) to identify the institutional affiliations of the authors of those articles; and c) to classify the articles according to subject area. We identified 39 articles from 29 journals. The countries with the largest numbers of journals are the United States and the United Kingdom (six journals each). Most of the journals were open access, of which universities were the biggest publishers. The countries with the largest numbers of authors were India (12), and Italy and Russia (11 each), and the journal that published the most articles was the University of Nebraska’s Library Philosophy and Practice (four articles). Most articles analyze the quality (65.5%), followed by the growth (25.6%), of the Open Access Movement. An analysis of the subject areas covered revealed significant gaps, as the economic, legal and technological aspects of DOAJ were not represented.


Open access; DOAJ; Research on open access; Scientific Communication; Scholarly journals.

Full Text:




Abadal, Ernest. 2017. “Las Revistas Científicas En El Contexto Del Acceso Abierto”. In Revistas Científicas: Situación Actual y Retos de Futuro, edited by Ernest Abadal, 181–95. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona.

Aspesi, Claudio, Nicole Starr Allen, Raym Crow, Shawn Daugherty, Heather Joseph, Joseph Thomas William McArthur, and Nick Shockey. 2019. “SPARC Landscape Analysis: The Changing Academic Publishing Industry – Implications for Academic Institutions”.

Beasley, Gerald. 2016. “Article Processing Charges: A New Route to Open Access?” Information Services & Use 36 (3–4):163–70.

Björk, Bo-Christer, and David Solomon. 2014. “Developing an Effective Market for Open Access Article Processing Charges”. London: Wellcome Trust.

Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, and Ronald R. Powell. 2010. Basic Research Methods for Librarians. 5th ed. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited.

DOAJ. 2019. “About”. 2019.

Elo, Satu, and Helvi Kyngäs. 2008. “The Qualitative Content Analysis Process”. Journal of Advanced Nursing 62 (1):107–15.

Goldenberg, Mirian. 2007. A Arte de Pesquisar: Como Fazer Pesquisa Qualitativa Em Ciências Sociais. Rio de Janeiro: Record.

Hsieh, Hsiu-Fang, and Sarah E. Shannon. 2005. “Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis”. Qualitative Health Research 15 (9):1277–88.

Larivière, Vincent, Stefanie Haustein, and Philippe Mongeon. 2015. “Big Publishers, Bigger Profits: How the Scholarly Community Lost the Control of Its Journals”. MediaTropes 5 (2):102–10.

López-Cózar, Emilio, Daniel Salinas, and Álvaro López. 2007. “El Fraude En La Ciencia: Reflexiones a Partir Del Caso Hwang”. El Profesional de La Informacion 16 (2):143–50.

Matthias, Lisa, Najko Jahn, and Mikael Laakso. 2019. “The Two-Way Street of Open Access Journal Publishing: Flip It and Reverse It”. Publications 7 (2):1–29.

Meadows, A. J. 2008. Science and Controversy: A Biography of Sir Norman Lockyer. 2nd ed. London: Macmillan.

Merton, Robert K. 1973. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Piwowar, Heather, Jason Priem, Vincent Larivière, Juan Pablo Alperin, Lisa Matthias, Bree Norlander, Ashley Farley, Jevin West, and Stefanie Haustein. 2018. “The State of OA: A Large-Scale Analysis of the Prevalence and Impact of Open Access Articles”. PeerJ 6 (e4375):1–23.

Rodrigues, Rosângela, Vitor Taga, and Mariana Passos. 2016. “Research Articles about Open Access Indexed by Scopus: A Content Analysis”. Publications 4 (4):1–14.

Van Noorden, Richard. 2013. “The True Cost of Science Publishing: Cheap Open-Access Journals Raise Questions about the Value Publishers Add for Their Money”. Nature News 495 (28):426–29.

Whitley, Richard. 2007. “Changing Governance of the Public Sciences: The Consequences of Establishing Research Evaluation Systems for Knowledge Production in Different Countries and Scientific Fields”. In edited by Richard Whitley and Jochen Gläser, 3–27. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

Xia, Jingfeng. 2011. “Constructing the Structure Underlying Open Access Practices”. Journal of Information Science 37 (3):322–31.

———. 2014. “An Imbalanced Journal Publishing Market”. Learned Publishing 27 (3):236–38.

Ziman, John. 1979. Conhecimento Público. Belo Horizonte: Itatiaia.

———. 1981. A Força Do Conhecimento: A Dimensão Científica Da Sociedade. Belo Horizonte: Itatiaia.

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Rosangela Schwarz Rodrigues, Breno Kricheldorf Araújo, Laura Lavinia Santos, Ana Lidia Brisola

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. is a journal of the SAGAS Department, University of Florence, published by EUM, Edizioni Università di Macerata (Italy).