I am not well placed to answer that question and I do not even know if anyone can. These journals have made it possible to publish in open access for them to be able to publish studies with grants that require publications to be publicly available. If they start publishing too many open-access articles, been subscribed to the journal will become less attractive and they could start loosing a part of the market. The biggest threat for them is loosing public library subscriptions. They therefore need to provide a number of quality article that you need a subscription to access to. Therefore, if an article is of interest, and is methodologically sound, I would say it has more chance of been rapidly put into print.

I would advice to target journals for their aim and scope, their audience, and the interest editors have shown for a topic. If a research and an article is good, they will accept it whether you are in open access or not.

Dear Kunal,

I think it's true. At least I had similar situation in my experience. Maybe, I have a short history of publication, and it isn't "law"!

For Elsevier, I would be surprised if it did do a difference as academic editors do not have any direct interest in having a publication in open source. Nevertheless, they know it is more likely to be accessed and cited and therefore could improve the journal's IF. To prevent any possible bias, the easiest way is to have the choice of open source be available only once the a article is accepted.

For pure open source journals, I would say yes you are more likely to be published. This is however mainly due to the fact they are web based and have no constraints in limiting the number of articles per print.

In my point of view, for some researches like me that belong to a particular institute most of the journals are open access since their institute had bought the access. But for independent researches things are rather different. As I think most of researches work within a research lab or institute that provide accessibility for them, its more beneficial to make our papers subscribed.

Respected Prof. (Dr.) Vaucher and colleague Amir

I agree with your point but I am not asking for Paid and Open Access Journals. I am asking for journals in renowned publishing groups such as Elseviers, NPG, Springer, Wiley etc. I have seen many times that when we submit the manuscript to some journals they ask for whether author makes their article Open access (by paying open access fee ranging from USD 2500-3500 and above) or not? But they ask the amount after the peer review and acceptance of the manuscript.

My question is that when we select the option of open access while uploading the manuscript, is it enhances the chance of acceptance of manuscript (no saying surely accept the paper without peer reviewing)?

Thanks

I am not well placed to answer that question and I do not even know if anyone can. These journals have made it possible to publish in open access for them to be able to publish studies with grants that require publications to be publicly available. If they start publishing too many open-access articles, been subscribed to the journal will become less attractive and they could start loosing a part of the market. The biggest threat for them is loosing public library subscriptions. They therefore need to provide a number of quality article that you need a subscription to access to. Therefore, if an article is of interest, and is methodologically sound, I would say it has more chance of been rapidly put into print.

I would advice to target journals for their aim and scope, their audience, and the interest editors have shown for a topic. If a research and an article is good, they will accept it whether you are in open access or not.

Thank you Prof. (Dr.) Vaucher for your valuable answer. I agree with your point.

I think the high cost of open access publishing fee also not attract many authors for make their articles open access and this makes the subscribed articles more cited and improves the journal's IF.

I think it is true

So far I do believe that paying that fees doesn't affect the status of your paper to be accepted if its quality is not up to the standard of the journal. It is merely a way to offset coat for the publisher rather than a back door to get your paper published. I think in the future when more people will involve in this process the fees might be reduced or even eliminated.

Speaking from my experience with RSC journals, authors are given the option to make their article Open Access only after the manuscript is accepted. So whether or not you pay a publishing fee for OA should not effect your manuscript's fate.

Making your article Open Access could result in it being more widely read and/or cited after it is published -- thereby raising the impact of your research.

In my opinion, if the authors are given the option to make their article Open Access only after the manuscript is accepted, then their choice should not affect the odds of acceptance of the article in question. So, one should carefully check the journal's policy to see whether it is indeed the case.

In my view it will not cause a difference regarding whether your manuscript will be accepted. Especially not concerning reputable publishers. Moreover, in case of giving the option to publish it as an Open Access article after the manuscript has been accepted then it will not affect the possibility of acceptance.

I totally agree, the manuscript undergo through review process by 2/3 reviewers and comments from editors. The manuscript is accepted only after satisfactory revision. The authors may accept the option of payment or refuse( for open access), the final decision of acceptance is not affected. 

I think this will not affect the acceptance because the open access fees are to be charged after the acceptance and not before, so if your paper is not accepted you may not be asked to pay for the open access, that is to say if the paper accepted you will be asked and not before

follow