4 ms·
> Nature have open access publishing charges that seem outrageous, but they were justified by the editing services of full-time professionals Nature might bene
by Mediterraneo10 6y ago
> Nature have open access publishing charges that seem outrageous, but they were justified by the editing services of full-time professionals
Nature might benefit from full-time professional editors, but that has become a rarity in some fields. Some of the major for-profit academic publishers in linguistics, for example, expect the unpaid editors or the authors to do all the editing, proofreading and even typesetting themselves, and just give the publisher a camera-ready PDF.
A lot of respected journals that are a few decades old were originally published by non-profit learned societies. For-profit publishers convinced them to hand over their journals by claiming that the publisher could provide quality. Then, they gradually stopped providing that added quality.
- impendia 6y ago> they gradually stopped providing that added quality. I had a paper accepted in a well regarded mathematics journal, and the copyeditor proceeded to thoroughly mangle it. I had to explain that the meaning of a fraction changes when you move stuff between the top and the bottom. This journal charges $3,250 per year for a subscription. Although they are in fact a nonprofit, attached to a university. I really fail to understand the economics of this industry.
- type0 6y ago> I really fail to understand the economics of this industry. It's not meant to be understood, that way it continues to thrive from public money.
- zentiggr 6y ago> I had to explain that the meaning of a fraction changes when you move stuff between the top and the bottom. Sounds like it's time to communicate that to the entire editorial staff, request a refund, and never submit anything to them ever again. Nonprofit or not... If a university can't retain staff with even basic competence, they don't deserve to continue in their current state.