[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Submission Fees (was: RE: "Overlay Journals" Over Again...)
- To: "firstname.lastname@example.org" <email@example.com>
- Subject: RE: Submission Fees (was: RE: "Overlay Journals" Over Again...)
- From: Zac Rolnik <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 23:38:12 EDT
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
The use of submission fees for journals in the area of business and economics journal publishing is not unusual. As a matter of fact, I cannot think of any top ranked finance journals that do not charge a submission fee. Some of these fees can range between $250-500 and often they are charged for resubmission if the article is given a "revise and resubmit" decision. And the more prestigious the journal, the more price inelastic this submission fee becomes. I am not sure if you could create a sustainable business model on submission fees, but I never understood why open access journals would not implement them. It seems wholly unfair to charge only the papers that make it "successfully" through the review process to acceptance, while the majority of papers that are being rejected (I am assuming this, but it may be a big assumption) get a free ride through the process. Maybe the submission fee could be applied to the acceptance fee once the article is accepted -- this would be even fairer to the accepted authors. I do not think submission fees encourage journals to accept papers or increases the potential for abuse as some may have claimed. In a certain way, fees charged on acceptance only would create a greater incentive for abuse and "acceptance" decisions for less worthy papers. Finally, charging submission fees may make authors think twice before submitting a paper that may not be ready for prime time. As a publisher, I often see authors submit articles too early knowing that the chance of acceptance on the first submission is low and hoping the reviewer can provide some constructive feedback. In talking to some journal editors, they feel that submission fees is a rationing mechanism -- you are less likely to submit a paper if there is a fee unless you feel it is ready for the review process. Thanks, Zac Rolnik now publishers -----Original Message----- [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Ivy Anderson Sent: Thursday, July 02, 2009 11:08 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Submission Fees (was: RE: "Overlay Journals" Over Again...) The idea of submission fees is one that we at the California Digital Library have also repeatedly attempted to advance in recent years. Publishers frequently cite the steep rise in submissions as a factor affecting their cost structure. It makes no sense that this activity is entirely subsidized by other players in the publication chain. Some recent modeling that we have done at CDL - admittedly based on rough and preliminary figures from a variety of sources - suggests that even very modest submission fees, if implemented by publishes across the board, would come close to completely covering the systemic cost increases associated with the steady increase in publishing output overall (another factor to which annual price rises for journals are frequently attributed by some analysts). If anyone has studied this - i.e. the potential contribution that submission fees would make to the cost of the scholarly publishing system as a whole - with any rigor, I would be very interested to see those data. It's easy to understand how the current incentive system works against this: what publisher will voluntarily disadvantage itself in attracting submissions by imposing such fees if its competitors do not? Nonetheless, as library budgets continue to contract, the survival of scholarly publishing may just depend on finding ways to distribute costs across a wider base. Submission fees - even if modest ones - should be on the table. Ivy Anderson Director of Collections California Digital Library University of California, Office of the President email@example.com http://cdlib.org -----Original Message----- From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Jan Velterop Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2009 9:54 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: "Overlay Journals" Over Again... The situation is this: 1) researchers HAVE to publish and HAVE to have their publications peer-reviewed; 2) existing systems (OA-author-paid as well subscriptions) ONLY pay for PUBLISHED articles. So the real problem is this: in neither case is the organization of peer review per se paid for. Those who argue that it is, place the entire burden of cost exclusively on the PUBLISHED papers. What is needed is a system such as, say, your diving test. You pay for the test, whether you pass or not. Translated to publications, a fee at submission is what we need, for which peer-review is organized. And this fee should be non-refundable, whether the article is accepted for publication or not. Where is the courageous and/or visionary 'publisher' (just using a familiar term that should probably be changed into 'assessment organization' or pithier equivalent) who starts a system like that? Jan Velterop
- Prev by Date: RE: "Overlay Journals" Over Again...
- Next by Date: RE: "Overlay Journals" Over Again...
- Previous by thread: Submission Fees (was: RE: "Overlay Journals" Over Again...)
- Next by thread: Re: Submission Fees (was: RE: "Overlay Journals" Over Again...)