Why, in this day and age, is there still publicly funded research that is not open access? Also I could rant for hours on the need to make your data available for any peer reviewed publication.
Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
11–20 of 34 posts
Re: Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
#12Why, in this day and age, is there still publicly funded research that is not open access? Also I could rant for hours on the need to make your data available for any peer reviewed publication.
My professor argued that keeping even publicly funded research and data behind paywalls will keep at least some of the people who have no idea about the scientific method from doing dangerous nonsense with it. I don't share this opinion.
Re: Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
#13Why, in this day and age, is there still publicly funded research that is not open access? Also I could rant for hours on the need to make your data available for any peer reviewed publication.
Because academic journals are products of inelastic demand. Researchers need to publish to keep their jobs[1]. Thus there is absolutely no incentive for the channels through which this publishing occurs to offer free access.
[1]By the way, being able to publish is especially necessary to receive public funding in the first place.
Re: Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
#14Why, in this day and age, is there still publicly funded research that is not open access? Also I could rant for hours on the need to make your data available for any peer reviewed publication.
Because academic journals are products of inelastic demand. Researchers need to publish to keep their jobs[1]. Thus there is absolutely no incentive for the channels through which this publishing occurs to offer free access. [1]By the way, being able to publish is especially necessary to receive public funding in the first place.
> By the way, being able to publish is especially necessary to receive public funding in the first place.
Being published in Nature gives you bonus points when it comes to funding. Which I don't quite understand, cause Nature is like the last journal where I'd look for newest information on my subject.
Re: Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because academic journals are products of inelastic demand. Researchers need to publish to keep their jobs[1]. Thus there is absolutely no incentive for the channels through which this publishing occurs to offer free access. [1]By the way, being able to publish is especially necessary to receive public funding in the first place.
> By the way, being able to publish is especially necessary to receive public funding in the first place. Being published in Nature gives you bonus points when it comes to funding. Which I don't quite understand, cause Nature is like the last journal where I'd look for newest information on my subject.
Publication in Nature is not so much for newest information on your specific and somewhat narrow subject, but for more or less breakthroughs of various degrees.
From guidelines[1]:
- report original scientific research (the main results and conclusions must not have been published or submitted elsewhere)
- are of outstanding scientific importance
- reach a conclusion of interest to an interdisciplinary readership.
Re: Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
#16"Upfront payments from libraries will fund the access." Great, so the Library still has to pay for it...
Re: Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
#17"Upfront payments from libraries will fund the access." Great, so the Library still has to pay for it...
Well, someone has to. The alternative is having the authors pay, and that creates the wrong kind of incentives.
Re: Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
#18"Upfront payments from libraries will fund the access." Great, so the Library still has to pay for it...
Well, someone has to. The alternative is having the authors pay, and that creates the wrong kind of incentives.
To clarify, the bad incentives would be that journal would publish lower quality papers to get additional revenue?
Re: Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
#19Almost all physics papers (not just particle physics papers) are posted on arXiv. Papers on arXiv are usually updated to the final published version, although the peer review process rarely produces significant changes.
It is unfortunate that university libraries will be continuing to send money to publishers who add almost no value to the scientific process.
Re: Entire field of particle physics is to switch to open-access publishing
#20Physical Review D, the journal that publishes most papers in the field, negotiated a fee of US$1,900 per article “on the principle that we should maintain our revenue”, says Joe Serene, treasurer and publisher at the American Physical Society, which owns the journal.
The "principle that we should maintain our revenue"? I like that principle. Which box do I check to have that apply to me as well?
I don't understand why SCOAP3 isn't driving a harder bargain. They are anticipating a $10MM budget --- wouldn't this be enough to hire some good editors and publish online?
If the whole field is behind this, worries about "impact factor" should disappear. Or is the problem that salary/tenure/promotion is tied to an outside assessment of "impact"?