| Title |
Evaluating big deal journal bundles
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1073/pnas.1403006111 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Theodore C. Bergstrom, Paul N. Courant, R. Preston McAfee, Michael A. Williams |
| Abstract |
Large commercial publishers sell bundled online subscriptions to their entire list of academic journals at prices significantly lower than the sum of their á la carte prices. Bundle prices differ drastically between institutions, but they are not publicly posted. The data that we have collected enable us to compare the bundle prices charged by commercial publishers with those of nonprofit societies and to examine the types of price discrimination practiced by commercial and nonprofit journal publishers. This information is of interest to economists who study monopolist pricing, librarians interested in making efficient use of library budgets, and scholars who are interested in the availability of the work that they publish. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 209 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 47 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 27 | 13% |
| Canada | 10 | 5% |
| Australia | 6 | 3% |
| Germany | 5 | 2% |
| France | 4 | 2% |
| Sweden | 3 | 1% |
| Spain | 3 | 1% |
| Ireland | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 29 | 14% |
| Unknown | 72 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 130 | 62% |
| Scientists | 44 | 21% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 28 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 280 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 21 | 8% |
| Germany | 6 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 5 | 2% |
| Spain | 5 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 1% |
| Canada | 3 | 1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Norway | 2 | <1% |
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 10 | 4% |
| Unknown | 220 | 79% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | 75 | 27% |
| Researcher | 39 | 14% |
| Other | 29 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 9% |
| Other | 62 | 22% |
| Unknown | 23 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 64 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 38 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 32 | 11% |
| Arts and Humanities | 18 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 18 | 6% |
| Other | 80 | 29% |
| Unknown | 30 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 883. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 November 2022.
All research outputs
#20,312
of 25,761,363 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#622
of 103,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105
of 230,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#12
of 937 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,761,363 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 103,680 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 230,172 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 937 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.