petersuber, to worldwithoutus
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Props to the African Journal of Herpetology for criticizing its publisher, , for setting an exorbitantly high .
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21564574.2024.2325359

"Indeed, African Journal of Herpetology APC is set by its publisher, Taylor & Francis, and is beyond the control of the Herpetological Association of Africa. The APC makes this the most expensive herpetology subject journal globally, resulting in potential authors seeking other venues for their work."

mcp, to random
@mcp@poliversity.it avatar

Pagare per scrivere. Uno studio stima che fra il 2015 e il 2018 i cinque oligopolisti dell'editoria commerciale ((Elsevier, Sage, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, and Wiley) abbiano ricevuto 1,06 miliardi di dollari. https://english.elpais.com/science-tech/2023-11-21/scientists-paid-large-publishers-over-1-billion-in-four-years-to-have-their-studies-published-with-open-access.html

jonny, to random
@jonny@neuromatch.social avatar

For / and other massive industrial publishers, increase in paper volume in -driven open access is the main source of growth that is presented to investors. More papers needed to stay afloat in always-increasing proprietary bibliometric sea, bigger profits. On the other end of the business, surveillance backed analytics tools to insurance companies and law enforcement is the biggest growth driver.

These are the companies we have paid billions in public money to over a generation. Another 13% hike in profits, now £3 billion annually. When will we find the courage to say enough is enough?

https://www.relx.com/~/media/Files/R/RELX-Group/documents/investors/transcripts/results-2023-transcript.pdf

petersuber, to random
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Kudos to (a journal of science and religion) for flipping to .
https://www.openlibhums.org/news/671/

"The journal was previously pub'd by -Blackwell under a subscription…model…1989-2023. As of Jan 2024, the journal & its entire back catalogue will be pub'd by the Open Library of Humanities…Thanks to the ’s model (funded by an international network of more than 340 supporting ), Zygon is now free to read and does not charge authors publication fees."

petersuber, (edited )
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Update. Extra kudos to for flipping from subscription-based non-OA to . Based on the cases I've seen (i.e. anecdotally), I'd say that most subscription journals that flip to OA flip to -based OA. They do that either because it's the only OA model they know about (depressingly common) or because it seems to be more lucrative and less risky.

Has anyone seen data on this? What % of subscription journals flipping to OA flip to APC-based OA and what % to diamond OA?

petersuber, to random
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

From @glynmoody: "The fact that [ journals] can publish rebuttals quickly and without demanding a payment to do so is yet another reason they are the best form of available."
https://www.techdirt.com/2023/12/27/another-reason-why-diamond-access-makes-sense-no-economic-barriers-to-publishing-rebuttals/

Background: An APC-based OA journal (Ecosphere from ) refused to publish a rebuttal article unless the rebuttal authors paid an . Kudos to Web Ecology for publishing the rebuttal without an APC. Also see the Web Ecology editorial on this case.
https://we.copernicus.org/articles/23/131/2023/

petersuber,
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Update. From the Web Ecology editorial mentioned above:
https://we.copernicus.org/articles/23/131/2023/

"Clearly, charging authors for brief, well-founded criticism of published articles creates a highly problematic disincentive to fruitful scientific discussion. This uncontroversial stance should enjoy universal support, but it currently does not…It is time to consider the damaging effects of charging authors for critical comments in [-based] journals."

cdarwin,
@cdarwin@c.im avatar

@petersuber
= ?

Can you recommend a good overview of ?
And is there any hope of replacing the opaque terminology?

amadeus, to random
@amadeus@mstdn.social avatar

The manual for my 1000VA BV1000I-MST from advises to connect devices directly to the unit. However, I have only connected my two PS-8RE III (s) to it, meaning that the devices themselves are connected to the power conditioners and not to the UPS. I can't think of any reason why this could be a problem. Am I missing something?

itnewsbot, to random
@itnewsbot@schleuss.online avatar

Lessons in Mass Production from an Atari Punk Console - Sometimes the most interesting part of a project isn’t the widget itself, but what... - https://hackaday.com/2023/11/16/lessons-in-mass-production-from-an-atari-punk-console/ -up

OpenSci_Pasteur, to random French
petersuber, to Gold
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

New study from : "2022’s market grew by a little over 24% from 2021. This is around 2/3 of the growth we saw in 2021…Growth in OA remains significantly above…the underlying…journals market. Just over 49% of all scholarly articles were published as paid-for OA in 2022, accounting for just under 20% of the total journal publishing market value."
https://deltathink.com/news-views-market-sizing-update-2023/

PS: Note that for DeltaThink "OA" means -based OA & doesn't include or .

mcp, to random
@mcp@poliversity.it avatar

Massari e Maltese () raccontano la storia di un gruppo molto attivo per la scienza aperta, che spesso si scontra con l'insensibilità locale. Quanto spendiamo per gli (pagare per scrivere): Unitn propone di fare un lavoro insieme per condividere i dati relativi con un formato concordato, in modo che siano collettivamente leggibili.

petersuber, to india
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

New study: "Indian researchers paid an estimated 17 million USD as in 2020. Furthermore, the study's findings reveal that 81% of the APC goes to commercial publishers, viz. , , , and Media."
https://www.currentscience.ac.in/data/forthcoming/765.pdf

PS: As far as I can tell, the authors didn't distinguish paid by authors out of pocket from APCs paid by their employers or funders. The $17m is the total from all sources. I'd love to see a breakdown.
https://suber.pubpub.org/pub/j1jk6hu9

petersuber, to China
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

If you've heard that Chinese research reforms "restrict" publications, don't draw the wrong conclusion. The restrictions are merely "a prohibition to use research funding to pay for article processing charges (), except for high-quality publications, and the blacklisting of journals."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1134/S1019331623020107

PS: Both are reasonable. Both are compatible with a strong preference for OA (tho this article doesn't discuss that).

petersuber, to random
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

I've seen 3 common explanations for why authors publish in journals: (1) they're deceived; (2) they're padding their resumes; (3) their work is weak.

This letter proposes a 4th, money.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02911-z
()

"Many scientists from …are rewarded with bonuses & promotions by their institutions [when they publish]…Many are likely to consider it worth paying an author publication charge [] of $50 to secure a $300 research bonus for a guaranteed publication."

petersuber, to Futurology
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

1/ is a -based journal from . Here it explains how it spends its APC income.
https://academic.oup.com/braincomms/article/5/5/fcad220/7256007

🧵

petersuber, (edited ) to random
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Don't be misled by the title:

"Can Open Access be Made More Affordable?"
https://deltathink.com/news-views-can-open-access-be-made-more-affordable/

In this article, means -based OA. The authors don't mention or consider green or diamond OA, which charge no APCs.

It's good to explore ways to make APCs more affordable. But it's myopic to do that without comparing them to well-established ways to deliver no-APC OA.

Please help correct those who assume that all OA is APC-based OA.

jasonnab, to random

Found out the used UPS I bought is missing a part that wires the batteries up properly... Sigh. Gonna ask the guy for a refund since he said he would if I couldn't find the batteries at the local place... Which I can't technically, not without that adapter. And after this, I really need to reconsider buying used for stuff like this, again. I just need gear that works at this point so I can get my projects done ...

Example of the battery harness wiring inside. Multiple wires sit on the inside, and feed out towards the main connector end. This example is for a triple prong end connector, but the theory is the same; two or more batteries in, into one plug in the UPS.

jasonnab,

Unless someone has a recommendation on where to find a battery harness like that, thst takes two batteries into one connector, because I've had zero success.

petersuber, to random
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Don't pay an on the theory that it will bring you higher citation impact.

New study: "Bibliometric studies concur that journals that charge have a similar citation impact to journals that rely on other income sources []."
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/leap.1558

petersuber, to random
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

All 47 editors of ' Critical Public Health just resigned to protest the journal's high and launch a new, more affordable journal.
https://cphn.net/breaking-news/

T&F required an APC of £2700, "an unsustainable cost for…funders and…libraries in high income countries and an impossible cost for many in less advantaged countries."

See the list of similar journal Declarations of Independence.
https://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Journal_declarations_of_independence

🧵

petersuber, (edited ) to random
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Welcome to the Academic Research Community (ARC) Alliance, "a community of like-minded scholars supportive of a , altruistic, high-quality scholarly publishing alternative to standard publishing models. ARC Alliance utilizes a Open Access model in which no article processing charge [] is paid by Alliance member authors, publications are , and is retained by authors."
https://arc-alliance.unc.edu/

petersuber, to random
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Another article made it through peer review (at ) with the false claim that all journals charge .
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00381-023-05969-2

Reminder: Only a minority (≈ 31%) of OA journals charge APCs, even if a majority of articles pub'd in OA journals are in the APC-based variety.
https://fediscience.org/@petersuber/109344076065105780

petersuber,
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Update. Here's another piece asserting that "Under …the cost of publication is shifted from journal subscribers to research authors. On acceptance, an author pays…an article processing charge []."
https://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/fulltext/2024/01000/the_changing_winds_of_academic_publishing_and_o_g.1.aspx

As in so many other cases, there are two errors here: (1) the false assumption that all or most OA journals charge , and (2) the false assumption that all paid APCs are paid by authors.

It's an editorial and didn't go through peer review.

petersuber,
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Update. Here's another piece asserting that "In the model, the individual researcher pays an article process charge ()."
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08465371231219666

Note the two common errors: (1) the false assumption that all or most OA journals charge and (2) the false assumption that all paid APCs are paid by authors.

Like so many similar pieces, it's an editorial that did not undergo .

petersuber, (edited )
@petersuber@fediscience.org avatar

Update. Here's another article that repeatedly refers to "OA publishing" when it means "-based OA publishing". The trend it documents does not arise from no-APC OA () publishing.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-023-04876-2

"OA publishing allows publishers to generate revenue during the production process…Large commercial publishing houses have gained increasing control over the OA publishing market, which is moving towards an oligopoly market."

eliocamp, to academicchatter
@eliocamp@mastodon.social avatar

Project idea: a website that aggregates Article Processing Charges from a bunch of journals and compares them to each country's median salary and/or median PhD income and/or per capita science and technology budget and/or any other relevant metric.

As Voltaire could've said, if this doesn't exist, it needs to be created.

@academicchatter

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • megavids
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • InstantRegret
  • GTA5RPClips
  • Youngstown
  • everett
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • osvaldo12
  • mdbf
  • ngwrru68w68
  • JUstTest
  • cubers
  • modclub
  • normalnudes
  • tester
  • khanakhh
  • Durango
  • ethstaker
  • tacticalgear
  • Leos
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • cisconetworking
  • lostlight
  • All magazines