Akker, Wiljan 2016: Yes We Should. Research Assessment in the Humanities. In: Michael Ochsner, Sven E. Hug, Hans-Dieter Daniel (eds.) Research Assessment in the Humanities. Towards Criteria and Procedures (Springer), pp. 23–29.

Atanassova, Iana; Bertin, Marc; Mayr, Philipp 2015: Mining Scientific Papers for Bibliometrics: a (very) Brief Survey of Methods and Tools. 15th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI). Available online: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1505/1505.01393.pdf. 

Bohlin, Ingemar 2004: Communication Regimes in Competition: The Current Transition in Scholarly Communication Seen through the Lens of the Sociology of Technology. Social Studies of Science 34(3), pp. 365–391. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ingemar_Bohlin/publication/238432379_Communication_Regimes_in_Competition_The_Current_Transition_in_Scholarly_Communication_Seen_through_the_Lens_of_the_Sociology_of_Technology/links/547071800cf216f8cfa9f636/Communication-Regimes-in-Competition-The-Current-Transition-in-Scholarly-Communication-Seen-through-the-Lens-of-the-Sociology-of-Technology.pdf.

Briggle, Adam; Frodeman, Robert; Holbrook, Britt 2015: The Impact of Philosophy and the Philosophy of Impact: A guide to charting more diffuse influences across time. Impact of Social Sciences. LSE impact blog. Available online: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2015/05/26/the-impact-of-philosophy-and-the-philosophy-of-impact/. 

Cohen, Philipp 2016: Developing SocArXiv – a new open archive of the social sciences to challenge the outdated journal system. LSE impact blog. Available online: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2016/07/11/developing-socarxiv-an-open-archive-of-the-social-sciences/. 

Delfanti, Allesandro 2016: Beams of particles and papers. How digital preprint archives shape authorship and credit. Available online: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1602.08539. 

Dubucs, Jacques P. 2009: Humanities, Human Sciences and Digitalization. In: Changing Publication Cultures in the Humanities (27–28 November 2009). Budapest: Académie des sciences de Hongrie. Available online: http://archives.esf.org/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&g=0&t=1499544558&hash=74db983da78730e5e5ed2dce17d3ccdab9944ed9&file=/fileadmin/be_user/research_areas/HUM/Mtg_documents/Restricted_Pages/Changing_Publication_Cultures/JacquesDubucs_DIGITAL%20HUMANITIES%20%28Budapest%20nov%2009%29.pdf.

Gunnarsdóttir, Kristrún 2005: Scientific Journal Publications: On the Role of Electronic Preprint Exchange in the Distribution of Scientific Literature. Social Studies of Science 35(4), pp. 549–579. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25046659. 

Hammarfelt, Björn 2014: Using altmetrics for assessing research impact in the humanities. Scientometrics 101(2), pp. 1419–1430. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1261-3 (purchase PDF).

Larivière, Vincent; Haustein, Stefanie; Mongeon, Philippe 2015: The Oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the Digital Era. Plos One 10(6), e0127502. Available online: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0127502. 

Linmans, A. J. M. 2010: Why with bibliometrics the Humanities does not need to be the weakest link. Indicators for research evaluation based on citations, library holdings, and productivity measures. Scientometrics 83(2), pp. 337–354. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0088-9 (purchase PDF).

Luther, Judy 2017: The Stars Are Aligning for Preprints. Available online: https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/04/18/stars-aligning-preprints/?informz=1. 

Moed, Henk F. 2005: Citation analysis in research evaluation. “Information Science and Knowledge Management” 9. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

Niyazov, Y.; Vogel, C.; Price, R.; Lund, B.; Judd, D.; Akil, A.; Mortonson, M.; Schwartzman, J.; Shron, M. 2016: Open access meets discoverability: Citations to articles posted to Academia.edu. PLoS ONE, 11(2), e0148257. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148257; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0148257. 

Olmos-Peñuela, Julia’ Benneworth, Paul; Castro-Martínez, Elena 2014: Are ’STEM from Mars and SSH from Venus’?: Challenging disciplinary stereotypes of research’s social value. Science and Public Policy 41(3), pp. 384–400. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/sct071 (purchase PDF).

Parks, Robert P. 2002: The Faustian grip of academic publishing. Journal of Economic Methodolog 9(3), pp. 317–335. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178022000015122 (purchase PDF).

Rentier, Bernard 2016: Open science: a revolution in sight? Interlending & Document Supply 44(4). Available online: http://orbi.ulg.ac.be/bitstream/2268/198865/1/Open%20Science%20a%20revolution%20in%20sight_.pdf. 

Reyes-Galindo, Luis Ignacio 2016: Automating the Horae: Boundary-work in the age of computers. Social Studies of Science 3, pp. 107–111. Available online: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.03824. 

Sismondo, Sergio 2016: Sorting on arXiv: Introduction to an ad hoc section. Social Studies of Science 46(4), pp. 583–585. Available online: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0306312716661429. 

Suber, Peter 2005: Promoting Open Access in the Humanities. Syllecta Classica 16, pp. 231–246. Available online: https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/4729720/suber_promoting.htm?sequence=1. 

Van Leeuwen, Thed 2013: Bibliometric research evaluations, Web of Science and the Social Sciences and Humanities: a problematic relationship? Bibliometrie – Praxis und Forschung 2, pp. 8–1–18. Available online: http://www.bibliometrie-pf.de/article/download/173/218. 

Zic Fuchs, Milena 2014: Bibliometrics: use and abuse in the humanities. In: Bibliometrics: Use and Abuse in the Review of Research Performance (“Wenner-Gren International Series” 87; Portland Press Limited), pp. 107–116. Available online: http://www.portlandpress.com/pp/books/online/wg87/087/0107/0870107.pdf