RE: Open Access to Research Is Inevitable, Libraries Are Told

[<jean.claude.guedon@umontreal.ca>]

I love the word significant" associated to costs; incredibly 
vague, yet intimidating in intent.

Figures, gentlemen, figures. That is what counts.

As for rejection rates influencing costs, everyone knows this. 
However, few people seem to consider that SSH journals tend to 
have much higher rejection rates than STM journals; yet their 
prices to be much lower. What gives?

Jean-Claude Guedon

Nawin Gupta wrote:

> Yes, peer reviewers are rarely paid, but there are significant
> costs involved in facilitating and managing the peer review
> process, and addressing/incorporating comments of reviewers
> during revision cycles (these costs are higher for journals with
> a double-blind peer-review).  Also, lower the acceptance rate,
> higher the cost per accepted paper as each rejected paper has a
> cost associated with it.  For a journal with acceptance rate of
> 10%, $100 per submitted article review cost becomes $1,000 per
> published article.

> Nawin Gupta
> INFORMED PUBLISHING SOLUTIONS, INC.
> Phone +1 773-623-9199 or +1 773-685-2007
> nawin@nawingupta.com