Notices

View Poll Results: Open Access vs. Payment

Voters
6. You may not vote on this poll
  • I support the "open access" policy of peer-reviewed articles.

    1 16.67%
  • I support the notion that articles should be open access after a certain period of time.

    5 83.33%
  • I do not want to change the current regulations between authors and the publishers.

    0 0%
  • I propose another regulation (please elucidate).

    0 0%
  • No opinion.

    0 0%
Results 1 to 5 of 5
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Nisslbody

Thread: Open Access versus Payment.

  1. #1 Open Access versus Payment. 
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    A stroll through the scientific literature in databases seems to indicate that the majority of the papers can only be consulted if you purchase them or if you are subscribed to the journal. Few journals (e.g. PLOS ONE, PNAS) seem to offer their peer-reviewed articles for free.

    Do you think that more journals should offer their articles for free (whether or not after a certain period)?
    Or would that be detrimental for the researchers and/or publishers?


    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    The journals are not charities, whenever I've published open access it is considerably more expensive for the authors, money which comes out of a research grant that could be spent on more research. I think personally that open access is a good thing but the costs have to be covered somehow and not all authors/institutes are willing to pay more knowing most academics will have institutional subscriptions anyway so people working in the field will have access and they don't see paying extra for open access to be worthwhile.

    What is "considerably more expensive"?


    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Sophomore Nisslbody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    102
    Have you seen this yet? Open access reaches tipping point in sciences Study - University World News

    The big positive about open-access journals is that research is only meaningful if you can share it, and making it more widely available, in theory, means that more people to whom it is relevant will see and benefit from it.
    Cogito Ergo Sum likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Nisslbody View Post
    Have you seen this yet? Open access reaches tipping point in sciences – Study - University World News

    The big positive about open-access journals is that research is only meaningful if you can share it, and making it more widely available, in theory, means that more people to whom it is relevant will see and benefit from it.

    Yes, I have read a similar article in the News section of Nature.
    However, researches from related academic fields mostly have an institutional subscription (as member PhDemon pointed out), thus are they not shared already under peers?

    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    IIRC for my last paper we paid an extra ~1000 to make it open access, this seems to be fairly representative...

    Selective List of Open Access Fees - Scholarly Communication - Library Collections - UC Berkeley

    Thank you for the link.
    Some of the prices are quite high (e.g. Cell). I never knew that one must pay so much for OA articles.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Sophomore Nisslbody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Nisslbody View Post
    Have you seen this yet? Open access reaches tipping point in sciences – Study - University World News

    The big positive about open-access journals is that research is only meaningful if you can share it, and making it more widely available, in theory, means that more people to whom it is relevant will see and benefit from it.

    Yes, I have read a similar article in the News section of Nature.
    However, researches from related academic fields mostly have an institutional subscription (as member PhDemon pointed out), thus are they not shared already under peers?
    Not necessarily; universities generally have to pick and choose what they want to pay for, to stay within budget, which can both be frustrating (when you know a relevant article exists and you can see the abstract, but you can't get the full text) and create kind of an echo-chamber effect (because all the major universities subscribe to the same journals). Also, there are fairly frequently articles which cross over discipline lines in relevance, so "related academic fields" are often a matter of perspective.

    I mean, there are issues of quality, as well. For example, in the recent discussion about bad neuroscience, someone posted a couple of articles which were essentially nonsensical, which is a definite hazard of the pay-to-play model. There's ample evidence to indicate that as long as the submitter is willing to pay, some editors appear to not read submitted work at all, let alone send it out for peer review.

    Yet, as you mentioned, publishing isn't free, and the money has to come from somewhere. I don't have any pat answers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. What resources of open access do you use?
    By mikedin in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 21st, 2010, 02:13 PM
  2. Open Access Therapeutic Drug Targets Database
    By skar in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 13th, 2010, 06:09 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: January 15th, 2010, 01:08 PM
  4. BioResearch Bulletin (An online open access journal)
    By sammed in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 15th, 2010, 12:32 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: October 31st, 2009, 10:51 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •