In the era of "Publication Race," most of the scientists look for High Impact Open Acess journals and most of these journals charge very high APC. Scientists from underprivileged areas or institutions may not have enough funding to publish their work quickly in high impact journals.
Isn't it an "Elite Capture" and destroying scientific ethics?
Indubitably, high article processing charges practiced by some academic journals and magazines are considered a great impediment to intellectual development. It seems that the priority for economic gains is acting as a pandemic virus adversely affecting the creation and dissemination of knowledge.
This is a ruthless business; if you have money, you can publish a lot, advance in your career and become a famous (renown) scientist.
In the past few decades, there has been substantial increase in the amount of published peer-reviewed journals. As a consequence of the rapid development of the science-based publishing market, though, fraudulent journals have mushroomed, largely in order to raise revenue by means of "publishing fees" or pages of articles. Presently, the danger of bogus journals has become so large that fraudulent journals are compared to "academic contaminants." Large processing costs reduce the chance of good paper.
Indubitably, high article processing charges practiced by some academic journals and magazines are considered a great impediment to intellectual development. It seems that the priority for economic gains is acting as a pandemic virus adversely affecting the creation and dissemination of knowledge.
As you have rightly pointed out, 'elite capture' and it means those with money will get published. These publishers must look for alternative ways of raising cash instead of charging APC after all the reviewers are never paid anything.
If authors pay for publishing, then money will become more important than the quality (relevance) of papers, which is not good.
Other option is that readers pay for downloading papers, but publishers sometimes put too high prices and do not give anything to the author, which does not look fair. I remember one my case: more than five hundred downloads, forty dollars each download, and I was not given anything.
Publishers know that scientist must publish, and they see this as an opportunity to make money in one way or the other. In any case, it seems normal (to me) that readers pay a (modest) price for downloading a paper, not authors for publishing it.
It's one of the biggest problems in academia. But right now we are seeing an increase on open-system journals that, I believe, is a way to try to fight back. The author still gets no money (and should, in my opinion), but at least no one is making a profit out of it.
Daniel Santos Cardoso can add inputs on the theme, for sure.
It's part of the process of neoliberalization of academia that has been ongoing for a few decades now, and which has increased the precarity of academic work and the shoring up of socioeconomic disparities.
I am not sure if there is any global committee or institution that could regulate this! How we as a common voice can help control this?
I do not understand the question. The costs could suppress The number of submissions of value. That is a problem. I am unsure whether charge corrupts the ethics of submitting or of conducting the research. It would be good to see the budgets of such journals to see what costs justify the charges. The staff of the journals are entitled to be paid a living wage, but are referees paid (I never was). Is the editor paid? How much and why? Subscriptions to the journals should cover the costs of running the journal, which could have gone down with the digital technology replacing “snail mail“ And other costs. But all this is not exactly on point. How might it influence research ethics? Lots of factors do, but how might this factor?
It is definitely unfair. However, it is also unfair for the free of charge journals to take from one to two years to get your work published with them.
I completely agree with the points made by Hamed Alhasni
The reviewers are not paid anything in other journals. Open access fee shall be reduced as a lot of money (research funding is mostly taxpayers' money) is wasted in this. Instead it can be utilized in advancement of the technology/research facilities.
The high fees associated with open access journals provides them with speedy review processing in comparison to unpaid journals. The moderation in fees associated with paid journals as suggested by Saurabh Shukla is a good option to bridge the gap between paid and unpaid journals in order to prevent the loss of good researches owing to such factors.
There are different kinds of Open Access Journals:
1. Open Access payment only upon acceptance of the paper. If the journal is fully Open Access they are usually known as Gold Open Access journals.
2. Subscription based journals, with APC (article processing charge) for making the article open upon publication. These journals are known as Paid Open Access.
3. Some subscription-based journals charge submission fee.
Best regards
Prof. Dr. Mazin A. M. Al Janabi
Full Professor of Finance & Banking and Financial Engineering
EGADE Business School, Tecnologico de Monterrey,
Santa Fe Campus, Mexico City, Mexico.
Dear all,
I have elaborated further on the issue of “Open Access” and “Subscription-based” journals, detailed as follows:
There are different kinds of Open Access and Subscription-based Journals:
1. Open Access payment only upon acceptance of the paper. If the journal is fully Open Access they are usually known as Gold Open Access journals.
2. Subscription-based journals, with APC (Article Processing Charge) for making the article open access upon publication. These journals are known as Paid Open Access.
3. Some subscription-based journals charge submission fees, depending on the academic discipline. Some other these journals even charge fees for each and every revision!
4. There are many subscription-based journals that do not charge any fees at all.
5. There are many Predatory (JUNK) journals and publishers that offer Open Access and charge moderate to low Article Processing Charges (APC). Be careful! Predatory journals can damage your academic reputation because these publications will not be counted towards your promotion or tenure. I noticed that certain graduate students and some junior faculty fell prey to these journals. Thus, one needs to be very careful about these journals before making any submission. We need to act mutually to stop these predatory journals and publishers!
Best regards
Prof. Dr. Mazin A. M. Al Janabi
Full Professor of Finance & Banking and Financial Engineering
EGADE Business School, Tecnologico de Monterrey,
Santa Fe Campus, Mexico City, Mexico.
Dear all,
Below, I have clarified certain issues and elaborated further on the issue of “Open Access” and “Subscription-based” journals and Predatory Journals and Publishers, detailed as follows:
There are different kinds of Open Access and Subscription-based Journals:
1. Open Access payments, only upon the acceptance of the paper. If the journal is fully Open Access they are usually known as Gold Open Access journals.
2. Subscription-based journals, with an APC (Article Processing Charge) option for making the article open access upon publication. These journals are known as Paid Open Access.
3. Some subscription-based journals charge submission fees, depending on the academic discipline. Some of these journals even charge fees for each and every revision!
4. There are many subscription-based journals that do not charge any fees at all, again, depending on the academic discipline.
5. There are many Predatory (JUNK) Journals and Publishers that offer Open Access and usually charge moderate to low Article Processing Charges (APC).
6. Be careful! Predatory Journals and Publishers can damage your academic reputation because these publications will not be counted towards your promotion or tenure.
7. I have noticed that certain graduate students and some junior faculty fell prey to these Predatory Journals and Publishers. Thus, one needs to be very careful about these journals before making any submission. We need to act mutually to stop these Predatory Journals and Publishers because of the severe damage inflicted on academic institutions, competent and serious researchers!
Best regards
Prof. Dr. Mazin A. M. Al Janabi
Full Professor of Finance & Banking and Financial Engineering
EGADE Business School, Tecnologico de Monterrey,
Santa Fe Campus, Mexico City, Mexico.
High article processing charges for publication are unacceptable. It poses an extreme burden to the unemployed researcher/junior faculties. If it is not possible to publish free of cost, publishers may create an option for free publications of good articles/papers authored by students, junior faculties, or unemployed researchers.
Its become to business to convert the journals into open access, the poor scholars financially unable to provide the huge amount of money as per asked by the journals, and also the journals have become a platform for earning of many of researches are involved on the paid basis English language editing services, figure and other, now these days the journals are rejecting the papers as we submit the paper with1-2 day. journals are now interested to earn not promote to research, How it is ethically justified.
Yes,High Article Processing Charge Destroying Scientific Ethics because these are professional journals and are interested in making money. Their review process is not much rigid.
This is a very serious issue nowadays and authors from developing countries with no institutional support are suffering due to inability to pay APC for publication.
There are instances where for the same quality work, preference has been given to those who are paying APC to journals which is unjust and unethical.
Of course the criteria of publication now a days is not quality and professional work but to pay a huge amount of money particularly the researchers from developing world.Higher education authorities in developing world has recommended International Journals.These scientific journals require very high amount of money.The online journals invite experienced researcher to join their team without a penny and use their name in Editorial Board.These all are unjust and unethical.
Sushant K. Singh Right, but you could ask the question in different way "Is it ethical for open access journals to charge very high APC, and for conventional journals to sell articles to readers with very high price.
I do not think that might destroy ethics, those who can afford will submit, others journals are better for the rest. it is better to give a wider chance than competing in the same field of free journals. Besides, some unsupported journals need funds to run the publication process.
I think this is will make two categories free journals and paid ones and this is not good
Dear Sushant K. Singh ,
Important question related to the unwanted side-effects of the open access publishing model. However, no one should think that “in the old days” the system was perfect. The subscription-based model had a number of unwanted side effects as well, such as:
-First of all, the monopoly position of the big publishers like Elsevier that made it more and more impossible for even the rich universities to pay the ever-increasing license costs. It led to statements like “Make no mistake: The prices of scientific journals now are so high that not a single university in the US….can afford to subscribe to them all” (https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/3/1/18245235/university-of-california-elsevier-subscription-open-access)
-Furthermore, and related to their monopoly position “Elsevier's high operating profit margins (37% in 2018) and 950 million pounds in profits, often on publicly funded research works [7][8] and its copyright practices have subjected it to criticism by researchers” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsevier)
-Last but not least the subscription-based model had effectively caused a situation where a substantial part of the scientific community has no access to scientific information because it is hidden behind an unaffordable paywall
In other words, the ‘old’ situation led to quite some unethical aspects. These were important reasons for the start of the so-called open access movement. The idea (and ideal) included matters like:
-Break the monopoly position of the big players in publishing business
-Get some control on the seemingly unlimited increase in (licences) costs
-A proper waiver policy should ensure that everybody can submit to open access journals
-Make scientific information freely accessible for all interested
-Part of the research budget (or spending budget of a university and/or other research-oriented organization) should be allocated to enable payment of the APCs (and subsequently lowering the budget for subscription-based licences)
So much for the ‘theory’. Indeed, nowadays the transition towards the ‘new’ publishing model is facing some serious problems:
-The big publishers still try to maintain their position by charging exorbitant fees for their flagship journals like Nature Communications (4530 euro effective on and after 4th January 2021)
-The subscription-based journals acting as hybrid journals have often a standard and ridiculously high APC (at Springer Nature this is around 2500 euro)
-A new ‘universe’ of predatory journals and publishers is now out there (a bit out of topic but just look for predatory, Beall’s list, hijacked etc. and you find vivid discussions here on RG and by using Google)
So yes, charging high APCs created a new ethical dilemma. Longing back to how things were is not the solution. For now, the only one can do are things like:
-Remember there are countless number of good and genuine subscription-based journals still out there where one can publish free of costs
-A substantial number of open access journals charge no fees, see for example: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Scientific_Journals_with_Open_Access_and_no_APC_free_charges_for_authors
-The scientific community should stand up against those players that still think they can manipulate the market (to ‘normalize’ the costs for journals like Nature Communications, Science Advances etc.). The fact that some research groups can afford the high costs and receive ‘reputation and status’ in return is business wise understandable but in terms of equal changes, beneficial for science etc. highly undesirable
-The scientific community should demand a real and proper waiver system to ensure that there are no financial barriers, nowadays it is not functioning properly (not even in a country like Germany, see for example: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Open_Access_publication_fees_and_how_to_pay_them )
Anyway, indeed a serious topic that requires action from the scientific community (but also from politicians, governments, EU, United Nations etc. in terms of a real policy and proper regulations).
Best regards.
There is no direct correlation between APCs and the journal prestige. However, it is seen that generally high APCs are always associated with publishing in reputed international journals with high impact factor. While the less reputed or local journals have lower APCs but the reach is low as well. Although researchers prefer publishing in the reputed journals as the target audience is larger, but most of the times end up publishing in the local journals to avoid paying high APCs. However, the move towards open access (OA) has been embraced by a number of journals. As a result, some journals do not charge article processing charges (APCs). OA journals do away with paywalls, but they need to make a profit elsewhere. With the onset of OA, the megajournals, a category of OA journals, have also come into being. These are peer-reviewed journals; however, they might have less-stringent publishing criteria. APCs for publishing in megajournals are usually lower than those of traditional journals...
https://www.enago.com/academy/q/27324/is-there-a-correlation-between-apc-and-journal-prestige/?utm_source=emailer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=news_291220
Yes, definitely.
Because of high APC, I couldn't publish my research works for the last 6 months.
And, also a delay time to announce reviewers' decisions either accept or reject.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Ethics