3PO Index · Open · Access · Impact
The Pyrrhic Press Open-Access Index measures publishing openness, infrastructure, reach, accessibility, and trust using ten evidence-based dimensions totaling exactly 100 points.
Each dimension is scored from publicly reviewable evidence available on the assessment date. Partial credit is permitted only where the published scale below permits it. Missing, inaccessible, or unverifiable evidence receives no credit.
Immediate access to the complete work without payment or required registration.
Authors can publish without mandatory submission, processing, or publication charges.
Reuse rights are clear at both publication and article level.
DOIs or comparable durable identifiers support citation and long-term discovery.
Verifiable evidence shows that published work is being found and cited.
ORCID iDs support reliable author identification and attribution.
Content is usable across devices and offered in accessible, durable formats.
Research reaches communities beyond conventional scholarly citations.
Metadata, indexing, search visibility, and preservation practices help readers find work.
Public policies explain editorial responsibility, peer review, corrections, conflicts, rights, preservation, and complaints.
A 3PO score describes alignment with this framework at a specific point in time. It is not an impact factor, accreditation, database-indexing decision, or judgment of individual articles.
Strong, documented alignment across access, infrastructure, reach, and trust.
Clear open practice with specific infrastructure or evidence gaps.
Meaningful open practices exist, but several barriers or documentation gaps remain.
Substantial access barriers, missing infrastructure, or insufficient public evidence.
Publishing a methodology is not enough. Pyrrhic Press used the same criteria to identify its own strengths and shortcomings.
Inaugural disclosed self-assessment · September 11, 2026 · Methodology version 2.0
Disclosure: The 3PO Index is administered by Pyrrhic Press. This result is therefore explicitly labeled a self-assessment. Pyrrhic Press received no ownership or “home-field” credit; points were awarded only under the published criteria and available evidence.
| Dimension | Score | Assessment finding |
|---|---|---|
| Free to Read | 15/15 | Published journal content is available without a reader fee or required login. |
| Free to Publish | 15/15 | Pyrrhic Press publicly states that it does not charge mandatory author publication fees. |
| Open Licensing | 8/10 | Open terms are published, but license display should be standardized at the individual-article level. |
| Persistent Identifiers | 2/10 | Identifier coverage is incomplete. DOI assignment must become consistent for new publications and expand through the archive. |
| Scholarly Citations | 4/10 | Some citation presence exists, but consolidated, reproducible citation evidence has not yet been published. |
| ORCID Adoption | 3/5 | Publisher leadership maintains an ORCID record connected to Pyrrhic Press work. Routine collection and article-level metadata integration remain incomplete. |
| Accessible Availability | 8/10 | Content is freely accessible and generally usable across the site, with room for more consistent accessible article formats and metadata. |
| Social & Alternative Reach | 4/5 | Pyrrhic Press actively distributes research and publishing opportunities beyond conventional citation channels. |
| Research Discovery | 5/10 | Website search and public web discovery are available, but external indexing, identifiers, and structured metadata require expansion. |
| Transparency & Ethics | 12/15 | Extensive ethics, peer-review, preservation, rights, and other policies are public; consistency and consolidation can still improve. |
| Total | 76/100 | Strongly Open |
