首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
The article processing charge (APC) is currently the primary method of funding professionally published open access (OA) peer‐reviewed journals. The pricing principles of 77 OA publishers publishing over 1,000 journals using APCs were studied and classified. The most commonly used pricing method is a single fixed fee, which can either be the same for all of a publisher's journals or individually determined for each journal. Fees are usually only levied for publication of accepted papers, but there are some journals that also charge submission fees. Instead of fixed prices, many publishers charge by the page or have multi‐tiered fees depending on the length of articles. The country of origin of the author can also influence the pricing, in order to facilitate publishing for authors from developing countries.  相似文献   

2.
This paper examines the characteristics of 462 open access (OA) journals being published in India under the green, gold and hybrid models. The sample of journals was selected from DOAJ, IndianJournal.com and Open J‐Gate. Journal characteristics were measured in terms of growth, subjects, publishers, and citations under each model. While characteristics such as growth, subject, and publisher have been identified by exploring the journal's website only, the citation count of these journals has been calculated by using Google Scholar and the Indian Citation Index. The gold road is now the most popular form of OA publishing in the subcontinent. There is a great variation in the size of OA journals and in their publishers. One publisher has more than 77 journals, but 264 publishers publish a single journal only. Overall, the OA journal landscape is greatly influenced by a few key publishers and journals. While 43% of journals charge publication fees and the fees vary from as low as US$10 to as high as US$400, the highest impact factor of the gold OA journals has been noted as 0.58. The data presented here suggest that publication fees are not a major barrier to authorship within the fields of computer science, pharmacy, and medicine.  相似文献   

3.
There is a significantly growing interest in publishing in international scholarly journals in Vietnam. On the one hand, Vietnamese researchers can be potential authors of interesting articles that provide new insights into the emerging economic context. On the other hand, they can be target consumers and subscribers of journals in their quest for academic and practical knowledge. This paper aims to propose marketing initiatives for publishers and editors who seek to promote their journals to researchers in emerging countries, particularly Vietnam. These marketing solutions build upon an understanding of barriers for researchers in international publications.  相似文献   

4.
An important current challenge for research information providers is ensuring the automated discovery of Open Access (OA) content in hybrid journals. We found no evidence of discovery services that are able to systematically identify the crucially important free full-text availability of OA articles regardless of where and how such articles have been published (i.e., in fully OA journals or in hybrid journals). A solution is important because hybrid journals are proliferating and consequently the chances of missing OA articles is real and is happening. Nearly all of the major publishers now provide such journals in order to take advantage of recent changes in research funder requirements, and to be competitive in the new OA business model. By working with a group of scholarly publisher partners and by using standard metadata elements that publishers are already familiar with, we show a systematic and standardized manner to identify OA at the article level. Our proposal is to embed OA-related elements in the metadata freely exposed by publishers for aggregators and discovery services. For example, in the Table of Content (TOC) Really Simple Syndication feeds the publishers use to announce new journal issues and content. Based on the initial results obtained, we discuss the capabilities of our solution, and evaluate the impact produced by our application in the systematic discoverability of OA content from the participating hybrid journals, using an implementation done with the freely available journal current awareness service—JournalTOCs.  相似文献   

5.
国外学术期刊OA出版论文处理费(APC)调查   总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1  
程维红  任胜利 《编辑学报》2017,29(2):192-195
调查了国际知名出版商Elsevier、Springer、Taylor & Francis、Wiley-Blackwell、NPG和国际知名OA期刊社BMC、PLoS、Hindawi、MDPI等OA期刊的论文处理费(APC)的收费标准.2015年度主要商业性出版社完全OA期刊的APC主要分布在1 000 ~5 000美元之间,混合型OA期刊的APC相对高些,分布较窄,基本在3 000美元左右.以瑞士MDPI公司为案例,分析该公司OA期刊的创办、期刊载文量、期刊经营、APC收取策略等.还简要讨论APC和OA出版机制,以期为我国的科研管理部门和期刊管理部门提供参考.  相似文献   

6.
This study examines the extent of concentration in the journal publishing industry. A number of aspects are considered: publishers, journal impacts, countries, and languages. For journals indexed in JCR from 1997 to 2009, just 0.2% of publishers produce 50% of journals and articles, and 0.3% of publishers account for the top 50% of citations, impact factors and immediacy indices. More than a half of publishers in JCR are from four countries: USA, UK, Germany and Japan. In addition, more than a half of journals come from the USA and UK. Examining the publishers' interactions in terms of buying and selling journals shows the extent of change by acquisition, and the acquisition links between publishers. The findings confirm that the international market of journal publishing is essentially dominated by a few publishers.  相似文献   

7.
版权问题一直是制约开放获取(OA)的瓶颈之一,为了更有效地了解和推动OA期刊版权研究,对国外期刊著作权让渡的6种模式按照从作者权利最大化到出版者权利最大化依次变化的顺序进行详细分析。选取Reed Elsevier、Thomson Reuters、Springer Science+Business Media、John Wiley&Sons、ACS世界5大科技医药期刊出版商,从其官网和SHERPA/RoMEO数据库观察它们的OA出版政策,并从期刊的声望和质量、版面费、作品使用、职业发展四方面对影响作者选择出版者的主要因素进行分析。最后,从"长尾"格局和利益相关者的较量两方面对国外期刊版权模式现状进行总结。  相似文献   

8.
This study examines the role of learned societies as publishers in Finland based on bibliographic information from two Finnish databases. We studied the share of learned societies' peer‐reviewed publication channels (serials with ISSNs and book publishers with distinct ISBN roots) and outputs (journal articles, conference articles, book articles, and monographs) in Finland. We also studied the share of learned societies' open access (OA) publications. In 2018, there were 402 peer‐reviewed publication channels in Finland. In 2011–2017, the number of peer‐reviewed publications from scholars working in Finnish universities and published in Finland was 17,724. Learned societies publish around 70% of these channels and publications, mostly in the fields of humanities and social sciences. Learned societies in Finland focus on journal publishing, whereas university presses and commercial publishers focus on book publishing. In 2016–2017, 38.4% of the learned societies' outputs were OA. This study concludes that Finnish learned societies play an integral part in national scholarly publishing. They play an especially important role in journal publishing, as commercial publishers produce only 2.6% of Finnish journals and book series, and only 1.4% of the journal articles from scholars working in Finnish universities.  相似文献   

9.
江霞  颜志森 《编辑学报》2015,27(2):172-174
科技期刊出版业由传统的出版与经营管理转变为数字化出版,利用电子商务平台进行数字化、网络化营销已成为科技期刊的发展方向.认为:可开展基于科技期刊自建网站的电子商务营销;通过专业的电子商务平台开通科技期刊的旗舰营销店,实现科技期刊的多元化、多渠道的电子商务营销;通过手机付费平台进行科技期刊的网络化营销.科技期刊利用电子商务平台营销过程中需重视多方合作并加强管理,加强电子商务平台的内容建设及服务营销,加大培养电子商务专业化营销与管理人才的力度,不断扩大科技期刊的社会效益与经济效益.  相似文献   

10.
科技论文发表费收取的合理性及其规范   总被引:22,自引:12,他引:10  
赵大良  颜帅  陈浩元 《编辑学报》2006,18(4):249-251
从学术研究和论文出版的公益性、国际惯例和科研经费转移支付的角度,论述学术期刊收取论文发表费的合理性,提出了发表费收取的录用与收费分离、科研经费支付、用途特定和稿费不抵等4条原则.认为问题的关键不在于发表费的存废,而在于国家、社会、学术期刊和科研单位是否承担起各自的社会义务,建立起比较完善的学术期刊出版保障体系.  相似文献   

11.
掠夺性科技期刊与科技期刊中掠夺性现象的特征研究   总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1  
张俊 《编辑学报》2020,32(4):376-379
近年来,由于开放存取(OA)出版模式的兴起,掠夺性科技期刊的出现也引起国内外学者的关注。国内科技期刊中也存在着类似的管理和学术信誉差、商业利益至上的现象,并对正常的科研成果和出版资源形成了干扰和掠夺。本文将这些存在于国内外科技期刊中的掠夺现象一并回顾和总结,认为一方面国内科技期刊从业者,应重视和适应新兴OA期刊的发展趋势,另一方面相关科研管理部门也应逐步建立措施,完善掠夺性期刊预警制度。  相似文献   

12.
Jeffrey Beall, a US librarian, coined the term “predatory publishing” specifically to describe a movement or phenomenon of open access (OA) journals and publishers that he and others believed displayed exploitative and unscholarly principles. Using a blog to transmit those ideas, and profiling specific cases using blacklists, one of the most polemic aspects of Beall's blog was its tendency to attract and incite academic radicalism. Beall targeted both publishers and standalone journals, but how he precisely determined that an OA journal or a publisher was predatory was in many cases an ambiguity. Beall's deficient and highly subjective criteria, as well as those blacklists' incapacity to clearly distinguish low quality OA publishers from predatory ones, may have negatively impacted the operations of several Beall-blacklisted OA journals and publishers. Freedom of speech that embraces prejudice, via Beall's blog, and the establishment of “predatory” blacklists, are enhanced discriminatory ideologies that continue to be carried downstream from Beall to and by other like-minded individuals and groups who proliferate academic divisiveness and may also be formalizing and institutionalizing a culture of discriminative philosophies by cloning Beall's blacklists and encouraging their continued use.  相似文献   

13.
Progress to open access (OA) has stalled, with perhaps 20% of new papers ‘born‐free’, and half of all versions of record pay‐walled; why? In this paper, I review the last 12 months: librarians showing muscle in negotiations, publishers’ Read and Publish deals, and funders determined to force change with initiatives like Plan S. I conclude that these efforts will not work. For example, flipping to supply‐side business models, such as article processing charges, simply flips the pay‐wall to a ‘play‐wall’ to the disadvantage of authors without financial support. I argue that the focus on OA makes us miss the bigger problem: today’s scholarly communications is unaffordable with today’s budgets. OA is not the problem, the publishing process is the problem. To solve it, I propose using the principles of digital transformation to reinvent publishing as a two‐step process where articles are published first as preprints, and then, journal editors invite authors to submit only papers that ‘succeed’ to peer review. This would reduce costs significantly, opening a sustainable pathway for scholarly publishing and OA. The catalyst for this change is for the reputation economy to accept preprints as it does articles in minor journals today.  相似文献   

14.
欧美出版社开放存取期刊论文处理费研究   总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1  
余敏 《出版科学》2016,24(5):106-110
论文处理费伴随着开放存取期刊的出现而进入公众视野。20世纪末,开放存取期刊由于没有成熟的商业盈利模式,国际上知名的出版社均对这种新型数字出版方式表示过疑虑。而现今,传统出版集团相继发行各自的开放存取平台,这主要得益于论文处理费的推行。本文介绍欧美各大知名出版社旗下开放存取期刊论文处理费的相关收费情况,分析论文处理费收取的完整体系,以期为国内学术期刊开放存取平台的发展提供策略建议。  相似文献   

15.
16.
17.
传统出版社正大规模参与开放出版,这是各方博弈的必然。为把握传统出版社参与开放出版的模式与政策,指出传统出版社初步的多维度分析框架,并通过实例分析传统出版社全开放出版模式和复合出版模式,提出传统出版社在如何推进开放出版、如何调整权益关系、如何处理论文处理费等方面所面对的挑战。  相似文献   

18.
Having found a business opportunity in exploiting the open access publishing model, predatory journals and publishers have been spamming authors with emails, inviting them to submit articles for publication. Authors may be misled by the names of prestigious authors and editors that predatory journals and publishers use to advertise their publishing services, either by claims that those scientists serve on the editorial boards or by sending invitations in their names. Given the fact that detailed knowledge of a journal is required to make an informed decision of whether the inviting journal is predatory or not, junior scientists are not likely to possess the knowledge or skill to make such decisions. In addition, analysis of the details of new suspicious journals and publishers can be a lengthy process or even a waste of time. Therefore, in this paper, we provide an analysis of a likely scenario that many authors are facing nowadays when they take on the difficult task of studying the details of suspicious journals as possible venues for the publication of their research findings. The analysis takes the form of an analysis of the Kenkyu Publishing Group, which is listed on Jeffrey Beall’s list of “predatory” open access publishers.  相似文献   

19.
20.
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号