Some people like their name published,some need to be published to keep their job. Why do people pay to listen to music, while they are giving all their energy and inspiration to the music. Everything can change.

There are few different ways.

The white side:

- The author pays just for an open access to his article for everyone. If he doesn't, the article will be even published, but it will be impossible to download it from the journal's site without a payment;

- The author pays for colored pictures in the paper and high quality of printing;

- The author pays for a correction of English;

The dark side: 

There are a lot of "garbage" journals and  "parasites" in the science. It is sad, but it is the real world. Sometimes people don't have the original scientific results, but they want to have some publication for grant reports, dissertation, career promotion, etc. It is just a business "you pay and we print everything", an important task for indexing system is the banning such journals and authors. 

Best regards,

Denis 

Dear Rita,

I talk about the author who, for publishing in a journal, must pay and give his own work freely. A musician has income for saling his partitures or for interpreting them.

Dear Eraldo,

Yes, the quality of the product is necessary, but why can the moral quality be absent in the journals? In much journals quality is not sufficient, but the author's payment.

Lots of well reputed with high IF journals don't ask for payment to publish accepted  articles except possibly for reproducing color pictures. However, predatory journals ask for money, these are fake journal and only interested your money not the result of your research.

Its all business everywhere, for example Publication in Megajournals save money - Megajournals also often cheaper to publish in, due to economies of scale. Which means that while the Journal of Physical Therapy requires you to pay $4030 for an article, PLOS ONE can get you 29x the article influence for a third of the price.PeerJ claims that their even cheaper prices–$299 flat rate for as many articles as you want to publish, ever–have saved academia over $1 million to date.

http://blog.impactstory.org/the-3-dangers-of-publishing-in-megajournals-and-how-you-can-avoid-them/

It seems to me that for some authors, publishing in "trash" journals is an act of desperation: if their universities do not have access to expensive databases containing top "normal" journals, then for them, it is very hard to publish in such journals as they cannot cite all the necessary literature due to not having the opportunity to read it. On the other hand, "trash" journals will accept almost everything because this is their business model.

Yes, it can be told a bribery if any author pays to publish his works.

Morality may be intact when an author publishes without receiving any payment. But when an author spends to promote his works, then it is more likely that he is not believing in spread of his works.

High impact journal these days tend to charge a fee for publication and apparently, the reject rate is high too. At the same time, peer reviewed journals commercialize mass publications by accepting low quality papers. Therefore, the onus is on us academics to ensure a check and balance when it comes to publishing with credible journals.

very good statements and different aspects. I agree: Quality has to be dominant.

Pobabely I had been lucky not to be forced by circumstances to pay for a publication.

In one case  we published a Magazin by ourselves and we needed a lot of money. We were successful in acquireing the costs.

Peter

Well someone has to pay publication costs, which are not negligible even in the case of electronic journals. Either the reader or the writer has to pay. Or it will be without peer reviewing. (I do not mean that referees are being paid, just the process itself includes costs - editorial work etc.). Anyone can put his/her results on the net for free. The question is who will read and cite it. Science is not a cheap business - not even publication.

initially I was enthusiast of "open" telematics Journals. Authoritative Journals had lost the choice of science the choice of orienting research and knowledge. 15 years ago, the NEJM refused two papers of mine by writing: We do not enter the merit of these investigations. Their content does not interest our readers.

Authoritative Journals (Am J Clin Nutr, Gastroenterology...) do not protect readers from poorly reliable researches but from those that are outside their own project of Medicine. An example are the efforts of NEJM to sustain drug research against diabetes 2. A valuable search?

Yes, but I recently submitted: "Recovery of Hunger Sensations associated with Low Preprandial Blood Glucose: an easy Exit from Diabetes?"

Authoritative Journals with great readerships never will publish my paper. Limitation of publication risks limitation of information instead of promoting reliability Risk an horrible diversion of knowledge.

Yet the payment for publishing (in telematics Journals) creates a conflict of interests. The Journal and the authors coincide in promoting publication. This trend is unbearable. Unfortunately, Scientific Journals must rely on Institutional support. Universities have to pay and support telematics Journals. A number of new Journals has gained authority and may suffice in the disruption of the aristocratic dominance by old Journals.

Discussion among Scientific Journals would be an instrument of dissemination of science. Too often solutions are neither black nor white and a discussion between readers and Journals might clarify!

This discussion does not exhaust the prolems. I hope in further answers!

There are costs which should be covered. Excess exist, but at times people pay for the costs and  for the credibility which is transferred by the paper.

Paying for publishing is not ethical!

Quality papers must be published with no cost to author.

Standard Journals are not charging money for publishing.

Dear Meena,

That is a very timely question. Quality is very critical as well as reputation. Therefore, in our quest to publish in peer review journals, we should beware of predatory journals.

The link below is the current list of Predatory Journals to avoid in our quest to publish in peer reviewed journals.

https://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/

Any investigation requires a cost, time and sometimes also sacrifice. I think that nobody should not pay for publishing a paper. Furthermore, the journal that requires the pay loss credibility. I don't submit my papers to these types of journal. It is a business, where they are winning money with the work of the authors.

Among the scientists and the politicians responsible for higher education and science in some countries there is a belief that this is the way for the internationalization of research results and raise the scientific position of this country / scientist in the world. This is definitely one of the important reasons for paying for the publication of articles.

Thank you for the invitation. In my opinion, some journal do require extra fee in order to publish author's products, especially for some Journal that allow open access to public. In order to maintain their system, they need extra fee, which cause them to charge the authors. Of course, there are also some journal that make it as a business or an opportunity to earn extra income, which is not ethical.  

When choosing a journal for manuscript submission, the array of pre- and post-acceptance fees should not be an immediate deterrent, especially if the journal’s scope and content are a good fit for your work, because of both potential fee assistance and added value. You should thus focus on asking yourself a more personalized question beyond what, who, when, and why: Is the journal truly the right fit for my specific research and my own publication goals?

https://www.aje.com/en/author-resources/articles/understanding-submission-and-publication-fees

Why do authors pay to journals for publishing?

1) time constraints (urge and need to publish ASAP)

2) low quality of results 

3) higher visibility (for reputed journals of major publishers)

Time constraints and low quality of articles  are the reasons that authors pay to publish in low quality jourbals.

Higher visibility is the motive to pay the open access option charges .

High quality journals who charge authors to opt for open access option. In this case, visibility is the main motive. In fact, Major publishers such as Elsevier charge as much as 3000$. A luxury which does not suit the researchers of developing countries.

Sometimes, the prestige of having your name in a top journal is worth paying for, especially if you are on tenure-track.

Many thanks,

Debra

The rationale, is that traditionally the costs of producing a journal were covered by payment of subscriptions by university libraries, (highly motivated) researchers and industry subscribers. Now the world expects free open-access to articles - somebody has to pay for it. the down side is the large number of for-profit, low quality publishing destinations that have sprung up on the back of this.

Here are some answers to this question:

If you are a researcher, what is your take on pay-to-publish academic journals?

https://www.researchgate.net/post/If_you_are_a_researcher_what_is_your_take_on_pay-to-publish_academic_journals

If we have enough time, Perfect results, Innovation in work, then we can go for free journal.

Having the above said quality still some journal collect money to publish we should refuse to select to those journals.

Mostly, we got nothing when published our research in journals.  So why some researchers going to publish their work in open access journals that asking for money? If your work is good enough, try to select a good quality journal without any payment. Publishers should pay a money to researchers; not the opposite.         

Many years ago I published my first peer-reviewed paper, I was incredibly happy and proud of it and go and tell it to my father (he was a lawyer) and he told me' Well done Alessandro ! How much did they pay for your article ?' I was very upset for what seemed to me a complete misunderstanding and I told my daddy 'Come on daddy, no scientist is paid for his articles, on the conrary we had to pay for being published !', my father answered ' Then why you are so proud ? Anyone can publish anything on any journal if he pays, it is called an 'advertisement''.....This is perfectly logic in any situation and human organization WITH THE ONLY EXCEPTION OF SCIENCE...the crazy ones were us scientists, not my father (and all the non-scientists person in the world, approx. the 99.9% of mankind). My father was perfectly right and gave me the correct explanation 'We pay for our articles to be published because they are advertisements, we promote ourselves by our articles for a myriad of aims going from getting a grant to increase our prestige and so forth...'

Thanks God many years later I met a glorious counterfactual evidence to this simple (even if a little bit kinic) rule: the American Chemical Society prestigious journal CHEMICAL REVIEWS (Impact Factor around 40) . In that case the journal PAYS THE AUTHORS (and not the other way around). I had the honour of having three papers published on Chemical Reviews, the last one was in 2013 and they paid cumulatively  800 euros .. we used the entire sum for a gorgeous dinner of all the authors together with our wifes/husbands in a gorgeous restaurant with a terrace on the Forum of Traianus in Roma.

With the only exception of chemists (that are an old, respected, and very traditional community) recognizing the 'value' of an article, all the others consider the articles as scientists self-promotion (and probably they are, at least in part, right)

Probably it is just the impact factor industry. otherwise RG for example fits perfectly with the 'promotion rule'.

But, nobody will take you seriously if you present only RG publications. so you have to be published also at 'regular journals'.

Then, if you can afford the 'fees', you can select an open access journal and be published.

Personally I am not a fan of such a tactic, but if somebody wants to spend his/her money by such a way, why to forbid it?

Plástics are a versátile tupé of materials with innumerable

Aplicacions hence very important in Science and Technology

I agree with everyone's comments but I will like to state here that there are free journals with good index.the payment is cover the cost incured in review and publication

Thanks for the invitation Dear Mariano. As you pointed also, in this case, I am mainly concerned with the possible use of public money. When trade barbarian of interests or bad politics governs in all fields of society, it looks that everything is possible. Public money that come from the taxes of all citizens may be sometimes used for paying many research projects of doubtful quality and slave work of young researchers, and for paying the publishing of a giant number of resulting works, normally of mediocre quality, with the purpose to obtain pseudo notoriety personal of the “authors” “responsible” of such stunt, with enormous metrics, and to gain advantage in rapid promotions and obtain tremendous careers and positions of top in the public institutions?

In my case, I try always to produce scientific papers of the highest quality possible. I never paid for publishing any paper (at least until now), but naturally that I respect other options.

Dear Mariano,

Everybody knows that there is an almost or definitely institutionalised need for publishing even if there is nothing to say.  Publishing as it is, became not only an innate requirement of scientific activity abut also the explicit prerequisite of pseudo-science. As science approaches business or/and vice versa, nominal publishing plays the role of an apparent scientific attribute.

not always, but sometime they do cause you don't have any choice, rather than paying for the publication, either the research doesn't have something new to present or it may not include some innovative ideas

I think big and famous journals should not ask for money to publish because they have other incomes to manintain the jornal. perhaps small and unknown journals really require this money to manintain the journal costs.

Not all journals charge for publishing but with others is just business in this globalized and neoliberal world and scientists are obliged to publish. Here in Mexico we must publish in journals incorporated into Thomson Reuters ISI impact factor, and the higher the impact the "better" the journal.

Another method of charging is the online publication which is very expensive.

I think, we are living in a wrong world because any fiction author is paid for its publication but scientists are charged, from this point of view it is better to be a fiction author.

Please keep an eye on: The publishing of scientific journals and the dance of millions of dollars: a reflection (in Spanish): http://web.ecologia.unam.mx/oikos3.0/index.php/oikos-historico/nueva-serie on 2015 pages 24-25.

A good article from nature: Open access: The true cost of science publishing

Michael Eisen doesn't hold back when invited to vent. “It's still ludicrous how much it costs to publish research — let alone what we pay,” he declares. The biggest travesty, he says, is that the scientific community carries out peer review — a major part of scholarly publishing — for free, yet subscription-journal publishers charge billions of dollars per year, all told, for scientists to read the final product. “It's a ridiculous transaction,” he says.

Eisen, a molecular biologist at the University of California, Berkeley, argues that scientists can get much better value by publishing in open-access journals, which make articles free for everyone to read and which recoup their costs by charging authors or funders. Among the best-known examples are journals published by the Public Library of Science (PLoS), which Eisen co-founded in 2000. “The costs of research publishing can be much lower than people think,” agrees Peter Binfield, co-founder of one of the newest open-access journals, PeerJ, and formerly a publisher at PLoS.

Most open-access publishers charge fees that are much lower than the industry's average revenue, although there is a wide scatter between journalsHigher charges tend to be found in 'hybrid' journals, in which publishers offer to make individual articles free in a publication that is otherwise paywalled (see 'Price of prestige' , attached figure).

http://www.nature.com/news/open-access-the-true-cost-of-science-publishing-1.12676

Publication of Journals various requirement & also need of reader they receive publicity & also a words of appreciation from readers .It is in the same line the journal should be viewed.

Journal receive writing from authors accordingly to their requirement & their writing . Journal which have establish their own reputation ,merits ,they can certainly on their payment from their annual subscription of journal .

Besides the most important part for their earning is for the advertisement they receive for the promotion for the advertise of their requirements. It is in this line journal  for publishing the article should not demand payment from the author in case if the publication is  not in the line of their requirement they should reject the article but should not ask for the payment from the author .

It is my friendly suggestion to author that they should not be eager for their publication they should select the various journal of their line & should send the copy of the publication of such journal of their liking & requirement they should judge for their response which may help them to carry out their own introspection for their publication.

This is my personal opinion 

Dear Tiia,

Other act of desperation can be the exhaustive control of few countries in controlling the IF journals, whose yes and whose no belongs to the exclusive club. The club controls the language, the decisions, the money, and the authors are clients to be exploited in their ideas and in their money.

In my country and my area of research, there are two journals in English which have been accepted by the club, but other very good journals in Spanish are not accepted. I think this is an injustice by segregation of the language.

The extra income of the journals are justified for the independence of politic powers if this is the unique imput source. But in other cases, the income comes from subventions, subscriptions, associations, authors, adds, publicity, etc. and this would be lucrative and unethical as others have said.

Articles/papers publishing is a business, directly or indirectly. Payment made by authors for publishing their work may be due to;

no choice

Impact factor'

speedy publication

support a journal/staff

propaganda

.open access etc.,

In past I remember that few journals were making payments to authors.

Only in special cases are we asked to publish in open access journals - namely when our research has been sponsored by a governmental research foundation - and then we normally have a part of the grant devoted to the purpose of being able to pay that fee. 

I second the opinion, however, that the open access option is ridiculously expensive. It's frustrating that not only do we pay to publish - our university's main library then subscribes to these journals - in some cases both the paper and the online version - so in effect the articles we publish in those journals are paid for more than once. 

My ideal solution is to be able to publish wherever I wish, of course, open access or not. Nowadays the journals I do want to publish in have both options, so that makes it easy. (I still have not found a very good open-access-only journal; have you?)

As Rita says, some people need to publish their work and others have the money to pay in order to get more visibility. I'm not sure how sustainable this practice is, since it is questionable if those journals actually add value and platforms to publish manuscripts continue to multiply.

Interesting question but rather questionable, because it is bordering compliance or violation of ethical and moral principles that should govern the publications to disseminate relevant scientific results with accuracy and quality.

Results ultimately will derive in technology in general or particular drugs (case of Medicine) to persons or patients who need them is used, and which of them depends the survival or quality of life.

Pay the Journal or publishing group for publishing a work understand as a need of the author to have greater visibility and higher qualification (scientific productivity) in a Research System that encourages academic levels, financing of projects or jobs, but if Journal meets quality criteria, then the question arises why pay me the Journal to publish my work if it meets quality criteria?

On the other hand, I understand that a Journal has expenses, editors and reviewers need any encouragement or salary for the technical review work, but I think it should seek funding from any institution or organization to take the Journal in question, so that to be its official organ of publication and dissemination have the latter, the deserved payment to the financial support provided.

regards

Sincerely

Dr. Jose Luis

I upvoted Arthur Braun's post as he has a point. Nevertheless, the issue is not without problem, as Arthur says.

It is only right that publishing houses get profit (from EITHER readers OR authors). The problem is the amount and the level of corporate profit.

1. It may vary from journal to journal, but the amount to make an article 'open access' is  sizable. I do not think that researchers and colleagues from developing countries can always afford it. This may lead to widening North-South gap in academia;

2. How much is to become greedy? This is a difficult question. The profit figures of publishing corporations are sometimes mind-bending. If some of us are free-market advocates, it would be plausible BUT, if we are not, we might suspect how much of these  'cash barriers' are hindering the wide-spreading of research and knowledge transfer to community/society.    This, I find not without problem.

It is very unfair, authors pay to publish, and then those publishers use these published articles to make more money by selling them in database form to universities and research institutes, it is simply outrageous!

The general practice is to take publication charges from authors and allow the papers to be openly available across the research community.

In my view, this is wrong and unkind!. Open access should be made free, free publication and free access. Then only knowledge will be deciphered across research community in a seamless way!!!

In India, University Grants Commission (UGC) has made some rules for selection and promotion of teaching staffs in a college and university. Due to such requirements, people are writing more despite the quality of publications. If research papers will be authored for getting some scores, quality of the publication is managed and sometimes decreased.

sincere efforts should be made in publishing in non paid reputed journals.

thanks to every ones contribution in generating good points.

Even some reputed journals ask for payment to maintain the cost involved in publishing. Who will bear the cost, if there is no other funding sources with the publisher.

Authors willing to pay to journals for publishing for various reasons: 1) time constraints (urge and need to publish ASAP), 2) higher visibility (for reputed journals of major publishers), 3) they can afford it  , 4) institutions mandating their employees to make their works available in an OA repository.

The following taken from attached link provides insight about APCs.

With the expansion of a governmental mandate requiring public access to federally funded research, an increase in the number of institutions mandating their employees to make their works available in an OA repository, and the evidence that the number of articles being published in OA journals charging APCs is growing.

Authors will increasingly be faced with the dilemma of how to cover the cost of publishing their work in OA journals that charge APCs. APCs range from $200 to $5,000, with $904 reported as the average in the United States.

Senior researchers and faculty may be able to cover this cost by writing the fees into their grants. However, APCs can be overwhelming for graduate students or junior faculty without grant funding. To respond to this need, many institutions have established OA publishing funds as a means of covering some or all of the APC cost incurred by their faculty, staff, and students.

Another possible source for institutional OA funds is the institution’s research division. As the division charged with tracking and managing grant funding, it has a vested interest in helping researchers and faculty not only meet public access requirements but also ensure coverage of publishing research in OA journals. At some campuses, individual colleges or departments also contribute monies to institutional OA funds. Finally, monies occasionally come from a central institutional account or operating budget that is administered by a provost or another senior administrator.

http://m.crln.acrl.org/content/75/5/240

Thank you Behrouz Ahmadi-Nedushan for the informative response.

We can not say as paid journals are bad. Paying for journals to publish in it is compulsory in different journals. Many unpaid journals are not good and many of them are not SCOPUS indexed. Unpaid journals mostly takes lot of time to give decision. Many unpaid journals gives decision as "Not to the scope of the journals". Taking decision to pay for publishing in journals are depends on 'Time' and 'Publishing charges' . some times bad journals takes less time less amount, care take to taken before deciding to pay for it or not.  

No, it is not bribery, unless you pay for a predatory journal. However, this case is special, as you will get no honour after publication.

Problem is, when there are no unpaid high-ranked (by IF) journals available. I call this not "publish or perish", but "pay or not publish" case.

Dear Mariano,

I understand that there is a cost for publishing. The journals have staff that has to be paid.

The increasing number of journals that we have to pay is due to the fact that few people are paying to see publications because we have ways to get them as researchgate.

I do not mind to pay but in Brazil you need to publish ib journals with impact factors over 1.5. In general these journals have higher quality manuscripts.

I will never pay to publish in journals where you are buying a printing space instead of really publishing a manuscript. 

Hei Jose,

what rewards are tied to IF>1,5? Your salary?

Dear Limas,

No, unfortunatelly the salary has no correspondence to impact factors over 1,5.

What happens is that CAPES (our government agency that gives scholarship to graduate students) ranks graduate course oorm 1 to 7. The impact ffactor of the  publications is very important for this ranking.

As higher, your graduate program ranks you get more sholraship and more graaduated studentes in your course. 

.

Thats a very good question . Why should we pay to journals for publication of our own results which have come out after working for so many years. I do not believe in this philosophy to pay to to journal for publishing your own research work. Lets choose those journals who do not demand any processing/publishing fee. 

There are two aspects:

1. Referred journals (Like elsevier, springer) have two options for publishing. One is free of cost and second  is Open access in which you have to pay. First one is subscribed and there is no fee for publishing paper; If anyone want to look paper with this type of access, you have to pay. In second case of open access, you have to pay if you want to publish but any one can download the paper without paying. these referred journals are have impact factor indexed by Thomson Reuters.

(Thomson Reuters is only organization in this world which accredits for impact factor all referred journals, no one else. It publishes list of impact factor every year of all field journals)

2. Poor Quality Journals: No indexing (SCI index etc.) or impact factor by Thomson Reuters

These journals have only ISSN number and they charge for publishing. It is about these journals about which discussion is going on. So never publish with such journals. It is just killing your research work.

If your field does not have impact factor journals, then send to SCI index journals. Even SCI index journals do not charge.

3. However, there are a few journals which have impact factor but they charge for publishing and your published paper is still subscribed. This is bad. But you can send your work to journals mentioned in point 1.

Thanks and Regards

Thanks for good question, Dr, Mariano Ruiz Espejo 

So , we can ask Is it ethical to pay a journal substantially to publish a paper?

Regardes

Recently I heard a professor telling that a fee of 600 $ was necessary for submitting a paper and it sound very normal to the audience...

So, if you can afford the fee, then your career is being promoted, otherwise you have to wait some years in order to be published under the non paid way...

Sad...

open access journals do not sale articles so they may provide expenses by authors payment other journals may be need a change in their economy against authors payment.

The numeric revolution of the early 2000 has changed the ethic rules all over the world. Today, you can find a good scientific paper in both  free journal and in payable journal. You must consider many parameters when you decide to publish your work : time allowed by your institution to publish, the adequacy between your research and the scope of the journal, the aimed impact factor,etc ...

Dear Mariano,

Of course, there is an explicit not willingly discriminative policy preferring language, form, often compulsory methodology and controlling what can be published in peer reviewed journals. The connexions are too sophisticated but it is palpable that the access for publishing is provided only those who accept the rules of the club. Often these rules deny or hamper novum and imagination.   

Its really surprise and back draw of our educational system where published research paper is much more giving importance than knowledge. Well developed institutions such as ICAR, New Delhi, UGC New Delhi, CSIR and ICFRE institution for recruitment of Assitant Professor or Scientist post for the minimum qualification MSc (55%); NET and TWO PAPER (

ha ha ha - first try on RG?

The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences · JOMENAS Press

I am pretty sure, that this journal has NO impact factor

There is no argument against the payment for the delivery of quality.

If scientists pay for publication they pay for a regular exchange of interests, which is nothing but a legal advertisement for their research results. Researchers could take other media too and proclaim their findings, TV Spots, Youtube or Researchgate for example.

All researchers like to get attention on their findings. This is clear and is to be accepted by every member of the community. If all researchers (guests) try to publish (speak) all the time to all others there will be no time left to do own research. 

Nowadays we can see tons of publications (not only scientific ones) many of them not worth to take note of. This is a true waste of resources, human life time which could be utilized better. The human societies developed only two control mechanisms to guide their individuals and to boost their efficiency:

The idea of a self-regulating scientific communities is idealistic. In science to succeed it is the same as anywhere else: You have to know the right people which is equivalent to have good luck (Imagine Your mother would have been a member of the supervisory board of IBM in the 70s).

The greater the community (e.g. the aLIGO collaboration, the Max-Planck-Society) the more attractive for the young scientists. If for scientists (e.g. the cosmologists) there is no other employer than the one and only (public) authority this implies the maximal risk of mismanagement.

If the communiity would follow the 'advertised' publications only this would imply a severe risk of erroneous trends. But this risk seems not as huge as if 1000 publically paid scientists publicize congruently the same which implies that no member of the group was left behind to publish something different.

Si la calidad es tener que aprender el idioma del editor, después escribirle en su idioma, después esperar a ver si entiende lo que se le escribe, después tener que pagar para que lo revise, pagar para que lo publique, etc. y al final tenerlo escrito en un idioma que no es el tuyo.

Pero si la calidad se consigue como hace este portal, que deteriora con el paso del tiempo distintos archivos de publicaciones cuando se han subido sin defectos, pero que se van deteriorando con el paso del tiempo en el portal: no es juego limpio, no es trabajo honrado conseguir "calidad relativa" dañando el producto del competidor.

Very interesting answers

As others have said, the quality should be the unique parameter for publishing. For this, to put the frontier of a payment to consider an article seems selective for economic interest but not for quality. There is a market which plays with the illusions and interests of the authors firstly in detriment of them and secondly with a possible return of notoriety after publishing.

@Jomenas press

you have NO impact factor, and please get off with your advertisements

Thanks for the invitation.

I strongly agree with Prof. Kundu, Prof. Ahmadi-Nedushan and Prof. Srivastava with regard to the question of a fair price, reasons which are taken into account and choice of Journals, for publication, respectively.

I also agree with Prof. Ruiz Espejo with regard to the existence of a market which is in direct link with authors, especially with their ambitions and their pockets.

Authors may pay for publishing, but their reputation, many times, is inversely proportional to the amount of money they spend.

Dear all, and especially to LINAS:

I took action in informing last weekend (7th May) RG -Community Support  about the non-conform posts of JOMENAS PRESS (impingement on RG-terms of use) and some of their anonymous (because no physical person name ) replies to RG-users in (an)other RG-thread(s).

One of those threads was:  'Free Publication - without fees?  cf:' https://www.researchgate.net/post/Free_Publication-without_fees? (this thread is unavailable now):   and I got the following reply today morning (and that's why all posts of Iomenas.org have status: "DELETED""

Von/from: ResearchGate Community Support [mailto:[email protected]]

Gesendet/Sent: Mon/Montag, 09. Mai 2016 08:22

An/TO: Wolfgang H. Muss

Betreff/CONC: Re from RG-Community Support [572e0102f7b67e731915c376] Response to your inquiry

Dear Wolfgang,

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. The post has been deleted, and the user responsible warned.

Kind regards,

Thomas

RG Community Support

All best wishes and regards,

Wolfgang

 ============My information to RG-Community Support==========

Dear all: I most recently wrote the following to RG @:

https://www.researchgate.net/contact

Concern: LEGAL ISSUES and DATA PROTECTION

sent from: [email protected]

May I ask for your Opinion with a Thread where a "Journal of MENASCiences" anonymously offers "free publication to RG-Members with RGS higher than 30"

Dear Sir, I would like to honestly inform you of the following:

I am in a group of RG-members pointing to so called "predatory" publishers and congress organisations. Today I found the following posting: "https://www.researchgate.net/post/Free_Publication-without_fees" from an RG-"Member" the profile of which ONLY displays

"The Journal of Middle East and North Africa Sciences · JOMENAS Press" , "represented" only by a NAME (allegedly a "MANAGING DIRECTOR OF the Journal, which (according to my Google Search, find parameters and results in my Reply No 09) needs clarification about the "real person(s) behind". in at least 2 postings the personal identity of the poster was asked to be displayed: No reaction, instead unhonest wording in the replies. If I am reading TERMS of RG correctly, https://www.researchgate.net/application.TermsAndConditions.html

Article 5: Misuse of the Service

1. Users must not misuse the Service. Misuse of the Service includes, without limitation:

1. insults to other Users;

2. automated or massive manual retrieval of other Users' profile data ("data harvesting");

3. advertising for commercial products or services of all kinds;

4. unsolicited job offers and business proposals;

5. all kinds of technical attacks on the servers.

2. All aforementioned behaviors in this article are strictly forbidden, unless the User has obtained prior written permission by the Provider.

at least point 3 applies to call into question and consider investigation of the case.

Why I am doing this? Not only, because I promised in the thread to do so, but also, as a consequence: this offer IMHO violates equal opportunity (e.g.: there is no official and open advertisement - saying/offering the same - on their official website as far as I have been able to look into), and finally - when "famous RG-members" perhaps have published free of costs will attract other (PAYING) authors to publish perhaps in a predatory journal. I greatly should appreciate to see your helping hand in this case or at least an official statement about the policy RG would like to adhere in SUCH case(s)...

NB: ==> Plural.... because if you allow once and for this one "Journal of...." you will see there are waiting "hundreds" of other Journals doing the same! Would you, would RG love/like to allow so? ) Very best regards and greetings, thanking in advance, with my compliments, Wolfgang MUSS, SALZBURG, AUSTRIA

I think it is very dangerous that some scientists in developing countries can have to pay for example $1000 for an article's publication, and near them there exists poverty in children. This could be an index of abusive economy. This exists also in developed countries.

A Mariano, I fully support you. What publication price is 3000 USD (and this is NOT the limit) - that is, 3-6 months of scientist salary in EU country, we also feel as being in poverty!

I think it should be just reverse. Researcher used to do a lots of hard work to come out with something new idea and analysis. To the research reachable to the whole research community publishers used to charge them. 

Making a work reachable to all is not so though than producing a new idea for social welfare. So, I think researcher should get reward for their hard work rather than paying just for publication.

Science will stop any progress if Universities do not take on again the duty of publishing.

Mariano, Mohamed and ohers are right!

Dear all

Twenty years ago, for a medical science journal the purpose is to report the newest and most advanced science and tech in a special scope. And it also publishes some special complicated cases. So the knowledge is every scientist in the domain has to read. Because the journals' editors choose best articles and pay to the authors, the authors always offer the best work. The readers are its treasure.

But now we are in a commercial era. Everything can be sold. There is need, there is trade. An author need readers, the journals' editors sell him/her the readers, so the author has to pay for the readers. About how much water is there in the article? A reader must be cautious.  

The payment of authors and readers is a part of a trade in which the only economically benefitted is the editorial. The authors pay their possible acknowledgement, and the readers pay for reading scientific information. The editors make a service to the scientific community and charge a price. But, if authors and readers make other possibly better service to the society, why do they not charge their labour equally for their writing and reading activities? Because all of them contribute to the advancement of science and the improvement of our societies.

The act of paying for publishing by an author could be considered as a bribery with the purpose of gaining an acknowledgement. This is a consequence of doing a editorial market the world of scientific communication of knowledges. Moreover, the editors are in much cases of less scientific level than some authors, and this could be consequence of economic and other interests which do not help to the good development of science.

For money traitors have had.

Why do authors pay to journals' editors for publishing?

Up to 2006 I was used that my findings were rejected. Open journals on line began to publish my manuscripts. Apparently, open journals on line have accomplished the goal of breaking the monopoly of old English and US paper Journals. Every day, I receive an invitation to publish from old and new on line Journals. Do these Journals have a readership? Some Journals sent me thanks for having increased the number of their readers. I wonder how much I did spread my findings by these Journals. The open nature of on line Journals is surely positive to increase objective knowledge in the world. For a civil progress, the openness ought to survive. The number of online journals seems already large and I do not see any feedback mechanism to stop their proliferation. The current feedback mechanism is positive, the author and the online publisher collude in a conflict of interest for the publication even against the Scientific value. Payment for publication was considered an act of bribery. An obvious solution would be that Universities would be accountable for the survival of online Journals, for starting new Scientific Journals, for the selection of Manuscripts and attribution of value and authority. Personally, I published online without any knowledge of the impact factor of the publishing Journal. In the assessment of the value of publishing, the number of readers might be a simple and useful indication. Authority is necessary in the current world although any Scientific authority, including the ASN, may incur in the error of the Bellarmino process to Galileo [Ciampolini Mario. New Findings on Energy Balance and Established Wisdom. International Journal of Nutrition and Food Sciences. Vol. 3, No. 4, 2014, pp. 300-306. doi: 10.11648/j.ijnfs.20140304.20]. My personal conclusion is that I informed so much patients, Journals and Nutrition Associations that exhausting my small resources would only anticipate the spreading of my findings by few years. Thus, I deliberated a cessation in the payment to get my writings published.

Certainly, no all researcher is a good economist to do transactions for his publications. When the resources are not coming, it is better do not make payments with unknown expectatives.

Buy a publication has not got scientific merit. For this, payments for publishing do not require knowledge or science for part of the authors.

Since the Institutions have made it mandatory to publish the articles in indexed journals and to fulfil the requirement teachers become the author, though their scientific contribution is questionable. 

Where does this mandatory come from?

Is it mandatory for authors to pay to these editors? Why is it not said but it works?

@Mariano - you was asking, why some researchers get funds from the budget of their institution to pay their publication, while others are not?

Simple answer - this is completely the same as happens in our society. 

In our society there are professors with very few merits of research, but they have won money by sales of their books. The science is not in relation with the money that supports its diffusion.

I think irrefutably that we, who are dedicated to publishing scientific findings, NOT pay to publish. Look for those journals that do not charge and publish there. I think we all have the duty to stop this neoliberal business practice that it is detrimental to us.

Editorial processes have a cost. But I ask the reason of why do much editors whom publish journals not say clearly its price? It leaves as a game with the authors and these can lose money in these operations as in a game of bets. But it is not the random what decides but editor decisions which can be biased.

The main reason of authors to pay to editors is to adquire importance. But this is doubtious since the importance in acknowledgement as professor must be made mainly for professors of his/her institution and not for foreign editors.

For this reason, it is very ephemeral to make payments to foreign editors if your institutions do not appreciate your work after.