The importance of open bibliographic repositories is widely accepted by the scientific community. For evaluation processes, however, there is still some skepticism: Even if large repositories of open access articles and free publication indexes exist and are continuously growing, assessment procedures still rely on proprietary databases, mainly due to the richness of the data available in these proprietary databases and the services provided by the companies they are offered by. This paper investigates the status of open bibliographic data of three of the most used open resources, namely Microsoft Academic Graph, Crossref, and OpenAIRE, evaluating their potentialities as substitutes of proprietary databases for academic evaluation processes. We focused on the Italian National Scientific Qualification (NSQ), the Italian process for university professor qualification, which uses data from commercial indexes, and investigated similarities and differences between research areas, disciplines, and application roles. The main conclusion is that open data sets are ready to be used for some disciplines, among them mathematics, natural sciences, economics, and statistics, even if there is still room for improvement; but there is still a large gap to fill in others—such as history, philosophy, pedagogy, and psychology—and greater effort is required from researchers and institutions.

This content is only available as a PDF.

Author notes

Handling Editor: Staša Milojević

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For a full description of the license, please visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.