How Do Open and Closed Access Journals Compare in Citations, Altmetrics, and Social Media Engagement for Pesticide Research?

This study analyzes the roles of altmetric and citation scores in open and closed-access pesticide research journals from 2013 to 2023, revealing key insights into impact metrics across publishing models. Traditional citations predominantly favor subscription-based journals, which account for 68.03% of the total citations. In contrast, green open-access journals excel in altmetric scores, primarily driven by social media engagement on platforms such as Mendeley, Twitter, and Facebook. Green open-access documents record the highest cumulative citations (13,143) and altmetric scores (5,768), suggesting greater online visibility and broader social reach. Statistical analysis shows no significant difference between altmetrics and citations, indicating that both metrics contribute complementary perspectives on research impact. Descriptive statistics highlight variations in citation patterns, with open-access journals showing a more concentrated distribution. Toxicology journals, where much pesticide research is published, are predominantly closed access, though citation patterns and altmetric attention vary by journal. Leading journals such as Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety emphasize citations, while Food and Chemical Toxicology focuses on altmetrics, underscoring the dual approach to research visibility and impact in pesticide studies. These findings emphasize the evolving role of altmetrics in complementing traditional citations, especially for studies with high public and social relevance.