Current market rates for scholarly publishing services

Replacing academic journals

Replacing traditional journals with a more modern solution is not a new idea. Here, we propose ways to overcome the social dilemma underlying the decades of inaction. Any solution needs to not only resolve the current problems but also be capable of preventing takeover by corporations: it needs to replace traditional journals with a decentralized, resilient, evolvable network that is interconnected by open standards and open-source norms under the governance of the scholarly community. It needs to replace the monopolies connected to journals with a genuine, functioning and well-regulated market. In this new market, substitutable service providers compete and innovate according to the conditions of the scholarly community, avoiding sustained vendor lock-in. Therefore, a standards body needs to form under the governance of the scholarly community to allow the development of open scholarly infrastructures servicing the entire research workflow. We propose a redirection of money from legacy publishers to the new network by funding bodies broadening their minimal infrastructure requirements at recipient institutions to include modern infrastructure components replacing and complementing journal functionalities. Such updated eligibility criteria by funding agencies would help realign the financial incentives for recipient institutions with public and scholarly interest.

Overlay journals: A study of the current landscape

Overlay journals are characterised by their articles being published on open access repositories, often already starting in their initial preprint form as a prerequisite for submission to the journal prior to initiating the peer-review process. In this study we aimed to identify currently active overlay journals and examine their characteristics. We utilised an explorative web search and contacted key service providers for additional information. The final sample consisted of 34 overlay journals. While the results show that new overlay journals have been actively established within recent years, the current presence of overlay journals remains diminutive compared to the overall number of open access journals. Most overlay journals publish articles in natural sciences, mathematics or computer sciences, and are commonly published by groups of academics rather than formal organisations. They may also rank highly within the traditional journal citation metrics. None of the investigated journals required fees from authors, which is likely related to the cost-effective aspects of the overlay publishing model. Both the growth in adoption of open access preprint repositories and researchers’ willingness to publish in overlay journals will determine the model’s wider impact on scholarly publishing.

Rapid qualitative health research from the Global South: Reflections and learnings from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Mexico during the COVID-19 pandemic

The objective of this paper is to provide insights into our experiences undertaking qualitative rapid research in Latin American contexts based on fieldwork from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Mexico. We focus on the insights and learning processes that emerged from our research teamwork during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our research projects are part of an international collaboration led by the Rapid Research Evaluation and Appraisal Lab (RREAL) to explore the experiences of COVID-19 Frontline Healthcare Workers. The analyzed experiences not only rely on the local studies but also on our reflections as a group of Latin American researchers collaborating along with an international team. Qualitative research has an important and long-lasting tradition in Latin America. However, healthcare professionals are still reluctant to use these methods. We highlight tensions and dilemmas that have emerged from our own empirical experience: First, the time for research ethics committees to evaluate the protocols; second, the difficulties in accessing funding to undertake research due to the lack of financial opportunities; third, having to decide the language of our publications. That is just the tip of the iceberg that allows us to show inequalities in the conditions under which scientific knowledge is produced between the North and the Global South. Following these points, our text explores the tension between the urgency to conduct rapid research and the multiple difficulties when undertaking it during the pandemic. It is important to point out that the problems we faced already existed before the sanitary emergency, being magnified by the former. At last, our conclusions delve into the reflexive process we, as a team of female researchers, undertook to explore the differences and similarities of our experiences. This analysis allowed us to solve obstacles and dilemmas when doing research. The winding road we describe here serves as an example for other research teams when planning and undertaking rapid qualitative research during future pandemics.

Digital platform for open and equitable sharing of scholarly knowledge in India

The academic publishing model is very inequitable currently – most commercial publishers demand exorbitant prices for access to journal articles, either through subscription or article processing charges. In this digital era, when publishing costs are negligible, and the peer review process is voluntary, it is unreasonable to have such high access barriers. In this article, we have explored the idea of an accessible and equitable knowledge dissemination platform using next-generation technologies and emerging models in publication to challenge the commercial publishers’ oligopoly in knowledge dissemination. Some of the upcoming practices, open peer review systems, transparent research data practices, and finally leveraging the advancements in digital technologies in publishing can be effective in creating efficient, transparent and cost-effective publishing systems. Encouraged by these recent developments, we have explored the possibilities of launching a digital publishing platform in India. We have analysed the existing open-source technologies like Open Journal System (OJS) and compared them with proprietary models like Editorial Manager to understand the gaps in both and explored avenues to conceive a cost-effective digital publishing platform. We hope that the open-access digital publishing platform will help the Indian journals upgrade their publishing systems up to the international standard, if not better, and help researchers explore a non-commercial avenue to publish open access articles.

Requiem for impact factors and high publication charges

Journal impact factors, publication charges and assessment of quality and accuracy of scientific research are critical for researchers, managers, funders, policy makers, and society. Editors and publishers compete for impact factor rankings, to demonstrate how important their journals are, and researchers strive to publish in perceived top journals, despite high publication and access charges. This raises questions of how top journals are identified, whether assessments of impacts are accurate and whether high publication charges borne by the research community are justified, bearing in mind that they also collectively provide free peer-review to the publishers. Although traditional journals accelerated peer review and publication during the COVID-19 pandemic, preprint servers made a greater impact with over 30,000 open access articles becoming available and accelerating a trend already seen in other fields of research. We review and comment on the advantages and disadvantages of a range of assessment methods and the way in which they are used by researchers, managers, employers and publishers. We argue that new approaches to assessment are required to provide a realistic and comprehensive measure of the value of research and journals and we support open access publishing at a modest, affordable price to benefit research producers and consumers.