2/ On the one hand, when #OA journals charge #APCs, they should be transparent about how they spend the money. So kudos for that.

On the other, spending the money on "fellowships, meetings, & travel grants to attend conferences or to do pro-bono work in low-income countries" is not the bragging point this journal thinks it is. It shows that the journal is charging more than needed to cover its production costs (& even a modest surplus for growth). It's excluding more authors than necessary.

Update. @pensoft just released a strong endorsement of the #EuropeanCouncil proposal for no-fee #OpenAccess.
https://blog.pensoft.net/2023/08/21/pensofts-statement-on-the-european-unions-conclusions-on-oa-scholarly-publishing/

"Hereby, we wish to express our full agreement with the Council of the European Union’s conclusion, that 'it is essential to avoid situations where researchers are limited in their choice of publication channels due to financial capacities rather than quality criteria'."

#APCs #DiamondOA #Pensoft

@strypey @DrPlanktonguy
1. Fed-funded authors can publish in high-impact subscription (non-OA) journals and pay no #APCs. Their work will still be #OpenAccess through the funder's designated repository.
2. Some no-fee OA journals (#DiamondOA) are already high-impact and the number grows steadily.
3. Some high-impact journals will charge no APCs and still allow #unembargoed #GreenOA (as required by the #OSTP policies). An important example is @ScienceMagazine.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ade8028

@strypey @DrPlanktonguy
Under the #OSTP guidelines, covered works must be deposited in designated repositories (#GreenOA). This is compatible with publishing in OA journals (#GoldOA). But gold OA (with or without #APCs) is not necessary & not sufficient.

Compliance with the #OpenAccess policies is free of charge. If a journal charges an APC to pub an author’s fed-funded research, the fee is to pub in that particular journal, not to comply with the policy. Authors always have no-fee options.

La transition de l'édition scientifique vers le Gold #openacces avec des #APCs élevés a un impact sur les carrières et l'équité de la recherche
Surprise.. ou pas.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jbi.14697

JMIR Publications acquires the Online Journal of Public Health Informatics, broadening its prestigious open access portfolio https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/996017

Looked at a JMIR journal recently. Minimum cost was in the thousands for OA fees. Wonder if this acquisition will create new barriers.

#OpenAccess #APCs

New study: "While the [APC-based] gold regime seems the most natural way to achieve #OpenAccess…a massive move towards the gold regime would generate an explosion in the amount of APC unless there are controls to limit market power…[It may also] create conflicts of interest for pubs [b/c] their income comes from authors & may alter the quality of publications.The green regime… seems an efficient way to reduce market power while expanding access."
https://www.jstor.org/stable/48731467

#APCs #GoldOA, #GreenOA

📖 #MondayMusings with @PeerCommunityIn 📖

"The relationship between impact metrics and #APCs evidences that publishers fix fees 𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐮𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐞𝐝 to journals by peers"
#ScholarlyCommunication

#Science is funded by public money.

We need new #ScholarlyCommunication models like PCI or diamond #OpenAccess journals to give money back to research and promote #ResearchIntegrity #OpenEdu #OpenScience #AcademicTwitter

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/leap.1558#leap1558-bib-0106

@johannes_lehmann
Agreed on societies.

The average across all fields is that only ≈ 30% of OA journals charge #APCs.
https://fediscience.org/@petersuber/109344076065105780

If you ignore brand (not the same as ignoring quality) and search @DOAJ for journals in your field, you'll find the no-APC (#DiamondOA) journals.

But note that even #DOAJ is incomplete.
https://fediscience.org/@petersuber/109513747735792962

Don't pay an #APC in hopes that it will bring you higher citation impact.

New study: "Bibliometric studies concur that journals that charge #APCs have a similar citation impact to journals that rely on other income sources [#DiamondOA]."
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/leap.1558

Update. Also from the public letter of resignation:

"Occasional subsidies [to pay #APCs] do not constitute a viable solution to the much deeper issues of inequity embedded within the profit orientation."

I support the #strike or #WorkStoppage by these #Wiley journal editors.
https://journalofbiogeographynews.org/2023/06/29/associateeditors-workstoppage-jbiogeography/

However, they need to write more precisely. They object to #APCs, but write that they object to the "full #OpenAccess model." There are many business models for full OA journals, and charging APCs is just one. In fact, it's a minority model.

I'm still surprised to see articles on #OpenAccess journals that decry the problem of #APCs, acknowledge the existence of no-APC OA journals (#DiamondOA), but recommend wider adoption of APC #waivers rather than wider support for no-APC journals.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772529423000383

This article advocating the abolition of #APCs would be more interesting if it fixed a few problems.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096522992300047X

It says w/o evidence that "most" APC-based journals are #predatory.

It says incorrectly that US #copyright law bars scholars at some public universities from transferring copyrights to publishers. (Close: work by govt employees is uncopyrightable.)

It's aware of APC waivers but not no-APC OA journals (#DiamondOA), their numbers, and the many initiatives to foster them.

Worth a read: An interview on #OpenAccess, #APCs and the reform of #researchassessment with Alain Schuhl (CNRS):
https://www.cnrs.fr/fr/cnrsinfo/frais-de-publication-nous-sommes-au-bord-du-gouffre

Die Editoren-Teams zweier neurologischer Journals schmeißen hin. Nach deren Meinung sind die vom Verlag #Elsevier verlangten Artikelgebühren (#APCs) unethisch hoch angesetzt …

— Henrik Müller hat für unser aktuelles Heft auf beiden Seiten nachgefragt: 👉https://www.laborjournal.de/rubric/hintergrund/hg/hg_23_06_02.php

Update. Another piece made it through peer review leaving the false impression that all #OpenAccess journals charge #APCs.
https://annalsofglobalhealth.org/articles/10.5334/aogh.3904

It aims to compare methods for accessing medical research in the global #south. It covers subscription journals, APC-based OA journals, hybrid journals, green OA, and even Research4Life. But it doesn't cover #DiamondOA journals and doesn't even mention their existence.

Unser neues Heft 6/2023 ist raus!

Titelthema:
Fluoreszenz-#Mikroskopie nach dem #Nobelpreis

Außerdem:
- #Reproduktionsforschung;
- Publikationsgebühren (#APCs);
- #KünstlicheIntelligenz;
- #Epigenetik
- Echoortung
- u.v.a.m.

Das ganze Heft online: 👉 https://www.laborjournal.de/rubric/aktuell/index.php

Update. Another piece made it through peer review with the false claim that #OpenAccess journal articles "require a fee from authors." https://www.arthroplastyjournal.org/article/S0883-5403(23)00627-7/fulltext

One problem here is overlooking or denying the existence of #DiamondOA (no-APC) journals, which are more numerous than APC-based OA journals. Another is assuming that when journals do charge APCs, authors always or even usually pay them out of pocket.
https://suber.pubpub.org/pub/j1jk6hu9/release/11

#APCs

Two Swedish librarians: "We have noticed a shift in researchers’ questions from ‘which journal is the best for my article to get published in’ to ‘where could I publish my article without having to pay an APC?’."
https://insights.uksg.org/articles/10.1629/uksg.612

In context: This is not about researchers looking for no-APC (#diamond) OA journals. It's about researchers looking for journals covered by an existing "transformative" or #ReadAndPublish agreement.

#APCs, #Sweden