Volume 23, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1388-3186
  • E-ISSN: 2352-2437
Preview this article:

There is no abstract available.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Albornoz, D., & Chan, L.(2018). Power and inequality in open science discourses. IRIS. Informação, Memória e Tecnologia, 4(1), 70–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Atchison, A.L.(2017). Negating the gender citation advantage in political science. Political Science & Politics, 50(2), 448–455. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096517000014
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bosman, J., & Kramer, B.(2017). Defining open science definitions.Retrieved from I&M Blog website: https://im2punt0.wordpress.com/2017/03/27/defining-open-science-definitions/
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Burchardt, J.(2014). Researchers outside APC-financed open access: Implications for scholars without a paying institution. Sage Open, 4(4), 1–11. https://doi-org.proxy.library.uu.nl/10.1177/2158244014551714
    [Google Scholar]
  5. cOAlition-S [Google Scholar]
  6. Czerniewicz, L., & Goodier, S.(2014). Open access in South Africa: A case study and reflections. South African Journal of Science, 110(9–10), 1–9. doi:10/1590/sajs.2014/20140111
    [Google Scholar]
  7. de Jong, S., Icaza, R., Vázquez, R., & Withaeckx, S.(2017). Editorial. Tijdschrift voor Genderstudies, 20(3), 227–231. doi:https://doi.org/10.5117/TVGN2017.3.JONG
    [Google Scholar]
  8. European Commission
    European Commission. (2018). OSPP-REC: Open science policy platform recommendations. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/pdf/integrated_advice_opspp_recommendations.pdf
  9. Eve, M.P.(2015). Co-operating for gold open access without APCs. Insights the UKSG Journal, 28(1), 73–77. doi:https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.166
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Ford, E.(2013). Defining and characterizing open peer review: A review of the literature. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 44(4), 311–326. doi:https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.44-4-001
    [Google Scholar]
    GENDERACTION. (2019a). The role of funding agencies in the promotion of gender equality in R&I [Briefing Paper]. Retrieved from genderaction.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/GENDERACTION_PolicyBrief_RFOs-March-8-2019.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
    GENDERACTION. (2019b). Report on strategic advice for enhancing the gender dimension of Open Science and Innovation Policy. Prague: Institute of Sociology of the Czech Academy of Sciences.
  13. Gould, T.H.P.(2010). Scholar as e-publisher: The future role of [anonymous] peer review within online publishing. Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 41(4), 428–448. doi:https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.41.4.428
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Haring, M.(2017). Open access en het Tijdschrift voor Genderstudies [Internal report]. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hedding, D.W.(2020). Comments on ‘Factors affecting global flow of scientific knowledge in environmental sciences’ by Sonne et al. (2020). Science of the Total Environment, 705. https://doi-org.proxy.library.uu.nl/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135933
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Murgia, A., & Poggio, B.(2018). Gender and precarious research careers: A comparative analysis. Abingdon: Routledge.
  17. Piron, F.(2018). Postcolonial open access. In U.Herb & J.Schopfel (Eds.), Open divide: Critical on open access (n.p.). Litwin Books. Retrieved from Université Laval https://corpus.ulaval.ca/jspui/handle/20.500.11794/16178
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Raju, R., & Pietersen, J.(2017). Library as publisher: From an African lens. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 20(2). doi:10.3998/3336451.0020.203
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Traynor, C., & Foster, L.(2017). Principles and practice in open science: Addressing power and inequality through ‘situated openness’. Retrieved from Natural Justice.org https://naturaljustice.org/principles-practice-open-science-addressing-power-inequality-situated-openness/
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Vicente-Saez, R., & Martinez-Fuentes, C.(2018). Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition. Journal of Business Research, 88, 428–436. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.12.043
    [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error