Free access to scientific knowledge, information and data strengthens the basis for transfer (education), development (research) and valorization of knowledge

If there is no thesis that can be affirmed or rejected, then the answer is probably only a vague assumption, experience or fantasy.

Open access journal is the best means to publish. It makes article reach a wider audience and it is more beneficial to researchers.

if the purpose is to easily spread reliable data so why not especially that not all researchers can afford some papers costs

Open Access enhances visibility and impact of one's own work as Open Access articles are downloaded and cited more frequently than articles from non-Open Access journals.

it is good because it allow a a massive audience to get access to the journal on RG

Free access to scientific knowledge, information and data strengthens the basis for transfer (education), development (research) and valorization of knowledge

Developing countries and small or specialized research institutions and corporations have access to all Open Access articles.

Open Access articles are published sooner than articles in non-Open Access journals.

Open Access articles reach broader audiences than articles in non-Open Access journals

I have no objection to that. It depends on the business model. If open journals (a) work without advertising (b) without powerful authors, (c) without demanding money from the authors, then it is a miracle if they exist for a long time. The problem is that such journals exist if they violate certain principles of scientific ethics, e.g. demand money from authors. It is ethically correct that the journal may demand money from authors for the performance and time they invest. So I ask the questioner: Where should the money come from? How can such a magazine work economically without advertising, income from authors, without fraud?

High impact but expensive to published in.

It is incomprehensible to me that oa journals can work fraudulently and that the authors should be indifferent just because they are quoted more there (probably for a fee). The value of a scientific work does not depend on any fashion that prefers and quotes any tendencies. The value of a scientific research depends solely on the truth value, which has nothing to do with the opinion of any people. Where is the scientific ethos? I can't see it in this discussion.

Talking after people's mouths, just to be quoted as much as possible, may perhaps be the goal of journalists, the scientist should have another goal: to proclaim the truth - especially against the trend of the time and not with the primitive intention of adorning himself with many citations.

I ful agree with Dr Hein Retter

It us very good to publish paper to all researchers evry where in any time they need

I agree with the statement of "Hein Retter". Most of the time open access journsls violet the ethics due to their profit oriented mentality.

However, the benefit of the open access journal is that it has more chance to get more citations as everyone can downlod it easily and without any cost.

Thanks

Some are as reputed or more than regular paper journals. It depends whether they are well-indexed in Isi journal master list (Science or social science) or in the first two quartiles of scopus. Some open access can be included in the first decile!! Thus, indeed they must be taken into consideration.

Open access is good but it should be free from article processing charges (APC).

If the journal is not a predator journal then open access is a good decision, but expensive as the author is free to publish his article on the media.

There are good open journals as well as there are opportunistic journals (predator journals). I think open journals are excellent options to give visibility to scientific publications. On the other hand, open journals should be free from APC (article processing charges). They should raise money through advertising spaces, donations, marketing campaigns, government financing, etc ... For example, there are many periodicals maintained by scientific societies that are open journals and do not have APCs.

if nothing else is possible - that is always possible!

I'd like to talk a little about ethics. There are several journals from major publishers that charge 2000 US dollars (or more) of APC. I find this APC a little overdone. Are these journals predatory? There are journals that are not open (theoretically ethical from the discussion above), which refuse standard articles (case study, reproduction of results with different methodology, etc ...) with the argument that such journals only publish articles with high results impact. Try putting in this article the name of a "known" researcher or the name of another regular researcher of this journal. There are journals from reputable universities with a high index of endogeny, so that only a "chosen" group can have accepted articles. There are several other distortions found in our accepted system of scientific articles. The big publishers are commercial companies and do not want competition. There is the real world and the ideal world.

I forgot the arXiv platform. The arXiv platform is the best and largest Open Journal available. The arXiv is funded by Cornell University, the Simons Foundation and by the member institutions.

ArXiv has open access to 1,561,175 e-prints in the fields of physics, mathematics, computer science, quantitative biology, quantitative finance, statistics, electrical engineering and systems science, and economics.