trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Refusing to cite paywalled literature restricts scientific communication and reproducibility

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
3 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that refusing to cite paywalled literature restricts scientific communication and reproducibility?

Yes. Evidence establishes that open access to literature promotes research dissemination, transparency, and reproducibility, whereas restricting access via paywalls hinders these outcomes.

Verdict: SUPPORTED · 3 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

The analysis

Judged against the evidence record for claims of this kind.

Evidence for · 3
Open Science and the impact of Open Access, Open Data, and FAIR publishing principles on data-driven academic research: Towards ever more transparent, accessible, and reproducible academic output?
2024
Explains how greater accessibility (openness vs. paywalls) increases transparency and reproducibility.
Get citation
Umbach, G. (2024). Open Science and the impact of Open Access, Open Data, and FAIR publishing principles on data-driven academic research: Towards ever more transparent, accessible, and reproducible academic output?. peer-reviewed literature. https://doi.org/10.3233/SJI-240021

See more details
More for · 2
The impact of open access mandates on scientific research and technological development in the U.S.
2023
Shows that removing paywalls increases diffusion and use of scientific research.
Get citation
Probst, B. S., Lohmann, P. M., Kontoleon, A., & Anadón, L. D. (2023). The impact of open access mandates on scientific research and technological development in the U.S.. peer-reviewed literature. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.107740

Open Access and Reproducibility in Plant Pathology Research: Guidelines and Best Practices.
2024
Notes that open access publishing provides increased reproducibility and reuse.
Get citation
Grünwald, N., Bock, C. H., Chang, J. H., Souza, A. A. d., Ponte, E. D. D., Toit, L. D. d., Dorrance, A., Dung, J. K. S., Gent, D. H., Goss, E. M., Lowe-Power, T. M., Madden, L. V., Martin, F., McDowell, J. M., Naegele, R. P., Potnis, N., Quesada-Ocampo, L., Sundin, G., Thiessen, L., Vinatzer, B., & Zeng, Q. (2024). Open Access and Reproducibility in Plant Pathology Research: Guidelines and Best Practices.. peer-reviewed literature. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-12-23-0483-IA

What does the evidence say?

Judged against the evidence record for claims of this kind.

also asked as
  • Does refusing to cite paywalled literature restrict scientific communication and reproducibility?
  • Is it true that not citing paywalled literature hurts scientific communication and reproducibility?
  • Does the refusal to cite paywalled literature hinder scientific reproducibility and communication?
  • Can failing to cite paywalled papers limit scientific communication and reproducibility?
Receipt History
first checked05 Aug 2026
judged → SUPPORTED · 8205 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

See the evidence timeline

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work