Elsevier

commercial academic publishing company that publishes medical and scientific literature

Elsevier is a Dutch publishing and analytics company specialized in scientific contents.

Elsevier
IndustryPublishing
Founded1880; 140 years ago (1880)
Headquarters
ParentRELX
Websitewww.elsevier.com

Major productsEdit

Elsevier provides various services to support researchers. Some of them are similar to Google Scholar by Google.

ScienceDirectEdit

ScienceDirect is a website which gives subscription-based access to a large database of scientific and medical research.[1][2][3][4] It stores many papers and academic journals as PDF.

ScopusEdit

Scopus is Elsevier’s abstract and citation database launched in 2004.[5][6][7][8][9][10] It gives four types of quality measure for each title; those are h-Index,[11][12][13][14] CiteScore,[15][16] SJR (SCImago Journal Rank[17][18]) and SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper).

International relationshipsEdit

Elsevier is not a non-profit organization. Therefore, some of their products are not cheap. Due to this difficulty, some universities have terminated their contract with Elsevier.

FranceEdit

The French Couperin consortium agreed in 2019 to a 4-year contract with Elsevier.[19] This agreement was made despite criticism from the scientific community.[20]

GermanyEdit

Almost no academic institution in Germany is subscribed to Elsevier.[21][22]

ItalyEdit

CRUI (an association of universities in Italy) sealed a 5-year-long deal for 2018–2022.[23] This decision was made despite protests from the scientific community.

TaiwanEdit

In 2016, CONCERT (an association of universities in Taiwan) announced it would not renew its contract with Elsevier.[24][25][26]

Legal actionsEdit

Lobbying efforts against open accessEdit

Elsevier have been known to be involved in lobbying against open access.[27] These have included the likes of:

LawsuitsEdit

In 2015, Elsevier filed a lawsuit against the sites Sci-Hub and Library Genesis. They were making copyright-protected articles available for free. Elsevier also claimed illegal access to institutional accounts.[44][45]

ReferencesEdit

  1. Tober, M. (2011). PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus or Google Scholar–Which is the best search engine for an effective literature research in laser medicine?. Medical Laser Application, 26(3), 139-144.
  2. Gies, T. (2018). The ScienceDirect accessibility journey: A case study. Learned publishing, 31(1).
  3. Munnolli, S. S. (2005). Harnessing the online resources: A case study of ScienceDirect in India. The International Information & Library Review, 37(4), 353-363.
  4. Bengtson, J. (2011). ScienceDirect Through SciVerse: A New Way To Approach Elsevier. Medical reference services quarterly, 30(1), 42-49.
  5. Burnham, J. F. (2006). Scopus database: a review. Biomedical digital libraries, 3(1), 1-8.
  6. Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213-228.
  7. de Moya-Anegón, F., Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z., Vargas-Quesada, B., Corera-Álvarez, E., Muñoz-Fernández, F., González-Molina, A., & Herrero-Solana, V. (2007). Coverage analysis of Scopus: A journal metric approach. Scientometrics, 73(1), 53-78.
  8. Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., & Wang, L. (2006). Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomedical digital libraries, 3(1), 7.
  9. Aghaei Chadegani, A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of Science and Scopus databases. Asian social science, 9(5), 18-26.
  10. Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787-804.
  11. Bar-Ilan, J. (2008). Which h-index?—A comparison of WoS, Scopus and Google Scholar. Scientometrics, 74(2), 257-271.
  12. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2007). What do we know about the h index?. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology, 58(9), 1381-1385.
  13. Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H. D. (2005). Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work?. Scientometrics, 65(3), 391-392.
  14. Hirsch, J. E. (2007). Does the h index have predictive power?. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(49), 19193-19198.
  15. Da Silva, J. A. T., & Memon, A. R. (2017). CiteScore: A cite for sore eyes, or a valuable, transparent metric?. Scientometrics, 111(1), 553-556.
  16. Fernandez-Llimos, F. (2018). Differences and similarities between journal impact factor and citescore. Pharmacy Practice (Granada), 16(2).
  17. Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., & Karageorgopoulos, D. E. (2008). Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. The FASEB journal, 22(8), 2623-2628.
  18. DELGADO‐LÓPEZ‐CÓZAR, E., & CABEZAS‐CLAVIJO, Á. (2013). Ranking journals: could Google scholar metrics be an alternative to journal citation reports and Scimago journal rank?. Learned publishing, 26(2), 101-114.
  19. Consortium Couperin (2019-06-11). "Communiqué sur la négociation Elsevier" (PDF).
  20. "Embrouilles à propos de l'accès aux revues scientifiques" (in French). 2019-05-13. Retrieved 2019-08-26.
  21. Haufe, Gottfried (20 November 2018). "Vertragskündigungen Elsevier 2018". www.projekt-deal.de. Retrieved 6 March 2019.
  22. Else, Holly (5 February 2019). "Thousands of scientists run up against Elsevier's paywall". Nature. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-00492-4. Retrieved 6 March 2019.
  23. "I ricercatori italiani potranno beneficiare dell'accesso continuo al database ScienceDirect di Elsevier - CRUI - Conferenza dei Rettori delle Università italiane".
  24. "關於Elsevier資料庫合約談判 CONCERT聲明". Retrieved 27 December 2016.
  25. "Taiwan Tech to Discontinue Subscription to Elsevier ScienceDirect Starting 2017 - NTUST Library". Retrieved 27 December 2016.
  26. Schmitt, Jason (2017-03-30). "Asia Advances Open Access Research". Huffington Post. Retrieved 2017-04-29.
  27. "Lobbying Spending Database - RELX Group, 2017". Opensecrets.org. Retrieved 2017-08-30.
  28. "Federal Research Public Access Act (Alliance for Taxpayer Access)". Taxpayeraccess.org. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  29. "Legislation to Bar Public-Access Requirement on Federal Research Is Dead". The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2012-02-27. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  30. "How Corporations Score Big Profits By Limiting Access To Publicly Funded Academic Research". ThinkProgress. 2013-03-03. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  31. Contributor. "The Dangerous "Research Works Act"". TechCrunch. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  32. Hu, Jane C. "Academics Want You to Read Their Work for Free". The Atlantic. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  33. Elsevier. "Message on the Research Works Act". Elsevier.com. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  34. Kakaes, Konstantin (2012-02-28). "Scientists' Victory Over the Research Works Act Is Like the SOPA Defeat". Slate. ISSN 1091-2339. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  35. "Elsevier withdraws support from Research Works Act, bill collapses". Boing Boing. 2012-02-28. Retrieved 2017-03-25.
  36. "Academic publishers have become the enemies of science". The Guardian. 2012-01-16. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2017-03-26.
  37. "Muscle from Brussels as open access gets an €80bn boost". Times Higher Education (THE). 2012-05-17. Retrieved 2017-03-26.
  38. "Horizon 2020 to promote open access". Gowers's Weblog. 2012-05-17. Retrieved 2017-03-26.
  39. "Horizon 2020: A €80 Billion Battlefield for Open Access". Science. 2012-05-24. Retrieved 2017-03-26.
  40. "European Union links research grants to open access". Retrieved 2017-03-26.
  41. "Inside Higher Ed: Big push for open access". Times Higher Education (THE). 2013-02-26. Retrieved 2017-03-26.
  42. "Elsevier distances itself from open-access article". Times Higher Education (THE). 2013-05-22. Retrieved 2017-03-26.
  43. "How Corporations Score Big Profits By Limiting Access To Publicly Funded Academic Research". ThinkProgress. 2013-03-03. Retrieved 2017-03-26.
  44. McLaughlin, Stephen Reid (18 March 2016). "Elsevier v. Sci-Hub on the docket". Retrieved 2016-06-28.
  45. "Simba Information: Five Professional Publishing News Events of 2015 Signal Times Are A-Changin'". PR Newswire. 17 December 2015. Retrieved 28 June 2016.

Other websitesEdit