Nuthing But.Net: Clubs and cliques in STM publishing and the impact on Open Access (#openaccess)

abernard102@gmail.com 2012-10-13

Summary:

"I know that one the major reasons Open Access has had a hard time getting a foothold into the publishing world is because of the clubishness of science and scientists.  People often do not know about the social aspects of scientists and their work.  This is one of the reasons that associations, societies [like clubs] and conferences play such an important part of a scientist's career. Everybody wants to feel that they belong by being a member of a variety of social groups [clubs].  Scientists are no different, and there are differences from one club to the next... Some of these clubs are more prestigious than others...  Scientists generally try to join the clubs that are the most exclusive.  In other words, they want to be members of groups that exclude the most number of other people, so that they look good in comparison.  (Side note: Some science fields don't like whistleblowers, too.  They may not be seen as playing well with others within those clubs.)  So, what does this all have to do with Open Access?  ... Some scientists like the fact that only relevant subscribers can read their articles in toll-access journals.   If you work for a rich institution that can afford a subscription to a journal like Tetrahedron Letters ($16,773 list price for an annual subscription, or if you or your institution can afford to buy articles as needed), then you must be at a place deemed good enough to read it.  These scientists maynot even post green OA versions of their articles, even though the publisher allows it.  Administrators may use value judgments to say that if you published in a 4 star journal, then your work must be good because it is difficult to get articles accepted by that journal.  Hence, you may look good simply because you are a member of that particular club.  If you have great articles that are not published in four star journals, you may have a much harder time getting your work noticed by the administrators.  However, it has been shown that simply having an article in a prestigious journal (with a high impact factor) does not mean that any specific accepted article is any good. Some Open Access publishing sources are trying to break down this exclusivity mindset and thought process.  Journals like PLOS ONEhave a different standard of acceptance..."

Link:

http://www.nuthingbut.net/2012/10/clubs-and-cliques-in-stm-publishing-and.html

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » abernard102@gmail.com

Tags:

oa.new oa.business_models oa.publishers oa.comment oa.green oa.universities oa.societies oa.plos oa.impact oa.attitudes oa.quality oa.prestige oa.prices oa.jif oa.colleges oa.publishing oa.altmetrics oa.repositories oa.hei oa.metrics

Date tagged:

10/13/2012, 09:47

Date published:

10/13/2012, 05:47