Opposite Day for a Pro-OA Paper

A paper asserting benefits from OA looks like someone advocating for budget

Opposite Day for a Pro-OA Paper

A recent paper in PNAS purports to show “. . . empirical insight into public use of National Academies reports, and, more broadly, the use of open access science.” Those who are predisposed to amplify any pro-OA finding have written that the authors “find widespread use of open research in the public sphere.”

But is it true? And, if so, does this paper demonstrate it?

Looking more closely at the paper — which came through as a PNAS Direct Submission — the claim may fall short in a number of ways.

In the end, it may actually say the opposite of what its authors assert.