Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 58 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#31

Post by cwhittle »

clp16 wrote: post #14
mbreese wrote: post #11

What you're looking for are called "Open Access" journals. There are a few lists on the web, such as http://www.doaj.org/ . There has been a big push recently for Open Access to scientific data, especially NIH funded studies. I don't know how this is for NSF funded work though. PLoS is the poster child of this movement, but others have been around for longer, such as the BioMed Central (BMC) family of journals. There…

If these costs are forced over to the submitter, the stereotypical "money-ignoring" researcher, those costs will begin the weigh heavily on their shoulders. Without support from their hosting institutions, which means a change in how business is done, those articles might find themselves with small, yet significant price tags. Look at textbooks.

At least for the NIH, they now allow publication costs to be funded in grant applications. Also, many institutions have now set up funds to help offset the open access publication charges.

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#32

Post by forkandwait »

clp16 wrote: post #26
forkandwait wrote: post #23

In physics and math, a lot of the the intellectual/ academic "action" (a combination of the sharing of results + acclamation by peers (for tenure and promotion)) has moved to preprint servers, specifically http://arxiv.org . Instead of the closed peer review process, what happens is that your scientific peers either start citing you publically or they rip you to shreds publically -- just as good for judging a result…

Suggesting that the cost of organizing, judging, critiquing, and hosting those papers is basically free is not supported. http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/11/the-economic-cas... This nice article by ars does quick job of pulling together those costs. Also, just slapping a search engine on a whole bunch of articles exists in Google Scholar, but that hasn't revolutionized anything. It is nice that one can see w…

I guess I was assuming that the product wouldn't be the same as old school publishing, just free; rather I was assuming more like the articles published on arxiv. In this latter case, the layout editing etc is absorbed with the producer and their administrative staff at the university, with the hopes that their article will have a big impact.

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#33

Post by tzs »

forkandwait wrote: post #25
mbreese wrote: post #11

What you're looking for are called "Open Access" journals. There are a few lists on the web, such as http://www.doaj.org/ . There has been a big push recently for Open Access to scientific data, especially NIH funded studies. I don't know how this is for NSF funded work though. PLoS is the poster child of this movement, but others have been around for longer, such as the BioMed Central (BMC) family of journals. There…

Let's look at these costs a little bit, and whether they still apply with the internet -- Printing: No need to have printed journals at all ever again. If a library wants an archive they can do it on their local hp and bind it. Free. Reviewing: Done by volunteers. Free. Editing: Done in the reviewing process, plus journals don't "work with" authors helping them to craft their paragraphs. There is an editor who might…

> Reviewing: Done by volunteers. Free

Hmmm...work on one's own research in order to generate a paper that can get citations and advance one's career, or take time away from that to review other people's papers for free.

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#34

Post by cwhittle »

TheEzEzz wrote: post #21

The internet allows for a much more powerful system than the current journal system, much more powerful than even an open journal system. Some things I'd like to see in a unified online open system: * Hyperlinking between papers * Discussion threads for papers * Collaborative mark ups of papers, so that difficult papers can be communally dissected and fleshed out, or so that students can work through a paper and prov…

Many of these suggestions are being attempted in journals like PLoS One (plosone.org) or through groups like Faculty of 1000 (http://f1000.com/) for commenting/discussion. Many journals now have comment fields on their articles, and you'll notice that most of them go empty. All the discussion happens behind closed doors before publication in anonymous peer review. Nobody wants to stake their reputation on something not polished.

edit: I partially take-back my suggestion of Faculty of 1000. Apparently, they are not open to unaffiliated and require a subscription. I like what they're doing, but it shouldn't be so ivory-toweresque.

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#35

Post by pbh »

clp16 wrote: post #19
pbh wrote: post #16

A fairly detailed (if opinionated) answer to your question is here: http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2008/02/06/openacc... The summary is: (1) academics have historically given away their research and reviewing work for free to (revenue seeking) journals and professional associations to get distribution and prestige, (2) this no longer makes sense with the Internet, and (3) academia, journals, and profession…

Google Scholar isn't an answer to the free publications question.

Admittedly, the OP is not very clear. There could be at least three questions, based on the headline, the body text question, and the example URLs cited:

(1) "Why are journals not open access?"

(2) "Where can I get free copies of academic articles?"

(3) "What open access journals/preprint servers exist?"

My response attempted to answer (1) and (2) with "most journals/conferences are ultimately not interested in dissemination of research results to the general public" and "Google Scholar, which generally has un-paywalled PDFs from academic web pages," respectively. Other people answer (3) elsewhere in this discussion, with answers like arXiv and PLoS.

If your point is that it is not yet clear economically how academic publishing will work in the future, then, I agree.

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#36

Post by mhluongo »

forkandwait wrote: post #32
clp16 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suggesting that the cost of organizing, judging, critiquing, and hosting those papers is basically free is not supported. http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/11/the-economic-cas... This nice article by ars does quick job of pulling together those costs. Also, just slapping a search engine on a whole bunch of articles exists in Google Scholar, but that hasn't revolutionized anything. It is nice that one can see w…

I guess I was assuming that the product wouldn't be the same as old school publishing, just free; rather I was assuming more like the articles published on arxiv. In this latter case, the layout editing etc is absorbed with the producer and their administrative staff at the university, with the hopes that their article will have a big impact.

The problem is that arxiv-style publishing cannot replace peer-reviewed work in academia. Peer review isn't just something the big publishers are pushing- it's an integral part of academia. Without reputation, a journal doesn't get read- and reputation in academia necessitates peer review.

OTOH, layout is pretty replaceable. Publishers guard their layout guides pretty seriously (lol!), but I'm not sure typesetting services are so important now that most universities- even liberal arts unis- have at least one resident LaTeX guru.

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#37

Post by notahacker »

tzs wrote: post #33
forkandwait wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's look at these costs a little bit, and whether they still apply with the internet -- Printing: No need to have printed journals at all ever again. If a library wants an archive they can do it on their local hp and bind it. Free. Reviewing: Done by volunteers. Free. Editing: Done in the reviewing process, plus journals don't "work with" authors helping them to craft their paragraphs. There is an editor who might…

> Reviewing: Done by volunteers. Free Hmmm...work on one's own research in order to generate a paper that can get citations and advance one's career, or take time away from that to review other people's papers for free.

In most academic disciplines reading and critically analysing current research on a particular topic is a fundamental part of generating research papers.

Even startup founders competing in the fast-moving world of business seem to find time to read and give feedback on things that interest them. I don't think a shortage of people willing to review papers is going to be a problem, and if it is, it's a problem that could easily be solved by the prestigious open access journals requiring those submitting papers to set aside time to participate in the peer review process of others' papers

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#38

Post by bugsy »

mbreese wrote: post #12
bugsy wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure that is true. If it is true, then they are committing tax fraud since nearly every journal is published by a non-profit foundation or organization.

Non-profit doesn't mean free. Any money made from journals helps support their core missions.

I did not say that non-profit means free.

Please note that my comment regarding non-profit status is a response to the claim that the purpose of scientific journals "is to make money". If this claim is true, that their purpose is in fact to make money, then they are fraudulently representing themselves to tax authorities when they claim to be non-profit organizations.

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#39

Post by forkandwait »

mhluongo wrote: post #36
forkandwait wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess I was assuming that the product wouldn't be the same as old school publishing, just free; rather I was assuming more like the articles published on arxiv. In this latter case, the layout editing etc is absorbed with the producer and their administrative staff at the university, with the hopes that their article will have a big impact.

The problem is that arxiv-style publishing cannot replace peer-reviewed work in academia. Peer review isn't just something the big publishers are pushing- it's an integral part of academia. Without reputation, a journal doesn't get read- and reputation in academia necessitates peer review. OTOH, layout is pretty replaceable. Publishers guard their layout guides pretty seriously (lol!), but I'm not sure typesetting se…

I disagree (respectfully).

I actually think traditional peer review (2-4 anonymous editors, generally old-boys in their field) is really, really broken. Arxiv and the like functions just fine without it because you get peer reviewed in the open by everyone; if you matter, people subscribe to your papers and try to poke holes in them or start citing them. Also, if you have a new theory that challenges the old guard it won't make it into the journals; with open discussion, if you can back up your crackpot theories with data and theorems they get accepted. (Remember that the "ether" was an obvious truth in the late 1800's in physics; this is a worse problem in the non-hard "sciences" like sociology.)

I think the "peer review" offered by traditional academic publishing process sucks, and the sooner we get away from it the better. The old style peer review USED to work in that it kept complete garbage out of the printed journals that got sent around.

Re: Ask HN: Why aren't scientific journals free on the web?

#40

Post by forkandwait »

tzs wrote: post #33
forkandwait wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's look at these costs a little bit, and whether they still apply with the internet -- Printing: No need to have printed journals at all ever again. If a library wants an archive they can do it on their local hp and bind it. Free. Reviewing: Done by volunteers. Free. Editing: Done in the reviewing process, plus journals don't "work with" authors helping them to craft their paragraphs. There is an editor who might…

> Reviewing: Done by volunteers. Free Hmmm...work on one's own research in order to generate a paper that can get citations and advance one's career, or take time away from that to review other people's papers for free.

What I mean is that making reviews happen is not a cost borne by publishers, thus is not a cost that should be recovered by publishers in the form of subscription fees.

Finding reviewers is hard: Good academics don't like to do it, because it doesn't contribute to promotion; bad academics are happy to do it because for them it does (at XYZ state), but they are at XYZ state for a reason, which means they aren't the best reviewers.

Post reply on HN