4 ms·
> The expected lifetime value of any article in Nature Neuroscience for the authors is well above $11,390 This. Authors are the customers of the journals; the
by lultimouomo 5y ago
> The expected lifetime value of any article in Nature Neuroscience for the authors is well above $11,390
This. Authors are the customers of the journals; the service they are buying is a push towards tenure and more funding. This has been true for a long time; open access only makes it more explicit.
When readers are the ones paying, you can argue that they are paying the journal so that it makes sure that they are reading serious, properly reviewed articles.
When authors are the ones paying, how do incentives align?
I think journals are now in a situation similar to the one of rating agencies and accounting firms. I don't think it will work out very well.
- cheonic8492 5y ago> I think journals are now in a situation similar to the one of rating agencies and accounting firms. I don't think it will work out very well. Students aren’t paying for college, the government is. The researchers aren’t paying Nature, the government is.
- dash2 5y agoThis is absolutely true in many cases. If I had myself to pay £2000 for journal submission, no way. But it comes out of research funds. And that in turn comes from whoever funds the University – government, or student fees.
- matthewdgreen 5y agoUniversities often limit what you can spend on OA, and even if there isn’t a hard limit, that money comes at the expense of other research items like student salaries and equipment. Funding agencies don’t write a blank check for publication costs.
- ta988 5y agoNot sure why you are downvoted, most colleges, at least in US, have more money coming from research, industrial partners and clinics than tuition.
- xuhu 5y ago> I think journals are now in a situation similar to the one of app stores [only without the costs, and with all the benefits].