Reviewing for Journals with Article Processing Charges

[Hibush]

Requests from MDPI disgust me. I have stopped responding to them completely.
A typical request is "here is this manuscript which our stupid algo figured is 4% related to your expertise. Please review it and send back comments in 7 days". If you don't respond, there is a follow-up NEXT day say "Hey, we sent you that thing...you gonna respond or what" ?

That is an excellent paraphrase of their requests.

[Stockmann]

The sciences are in the late stage of a full conversion to open access, so APCs are how publishing gets funded. It is--or soon will be--the universal form for thousands of science journals. This holds for those from scientific societies as well as those from commercial publishers.

I sincerely hope not. Things are already rigged enough in favor of entrenched PIs with tons of money. OA just rigs the game even more in their favor.
I wouldn'r review for a journal with processing fees (as distinct from OA publishing fees) unless I'm getting paid.

[Hibush]

The sciences are in the late stage of a full conversion to open access, so APCs are how publishing gets funded. It is--or soon will be--the universal form for thousands of science journals. This holds for those from scientific societies as well as those from commercial publishers.

I sincerely hope not. Things are already rigged enough in favor of entrenched PIs with tons of money. OA just rigs the game even more in their favor.
I wouldn'r review for a journal with processing fees (as distinct from OA publishing fees) unless I'm getting paid.

To be clear about the distinction, are you thinking of article-processing fees as applying to every submitted manuscript, whereas OS publishing fees are only on accepted manuscripts?

Journals are scrambling to figure out which revenue model is going to work. The up-front model is obviously more attractive to the scammers, but it is not exclusively for them. Some very legit outlets are trying it as well. Using the APC as a basis for deciding to review may be an imperfect approach, but you know the journals in your field.


What I am seeing is a complete collapse of the subscription model for funding academic publishing. It is hitting society journals even harder than commercial ones. I simply don't see any way that authors will be able to publish for free in the near future, because those journals will cease to exist. In fact, those that dawdle with the transition will see their readership drop so low that they will no longer serve the primary purpose of disseminating scholarship..

[Stockmann]

The sciences are in the late stage of a full conversion to open access, so APCs are how publishing gets funded. It is--or soon will be--the universal form for thousands of science journals. This holds for those from scientific societies as well as those from commercial publishers.

I sincerely hope not. Things are already rigged enough in favor of entrenched PIs with tons of money. OA just rigs the game even more in their favor.
I wouldn'r review for a journal with processing fees (as distinct from OA publishing fees) unless I'm getting paid.

To be clear about the distinction, are you thinking of article-processing fees as applying to every submitted manuscript, whereas OS publishing fees are only on accepted manuscripts?

Yes, by processing fees I mean fees you have to pay for submission rather than fees you have to pay for publication (i.e. only if the manuscript gets accepted).

Journals are scrambling to figure out which revenue model is going to work. The up-front model is obviously more attractive to the scammers, but it is not exclusively for them. Some very legit outlets are trying it as well. Using the APC as a basis for deciding to review may be an imperfect approach, but you know the journals in your field.


What I am seeing is a complete collapse of the subscription model for funding academic publishing. It is hitting society journals even harder than commercial ones. I simply don't see any way that authors will be able to publish for free in the near future, because those journals will cease to exist. In fact, those that dawdle with the transition will see their readership drop so low that they will no longer serve the primary purpose of disseminating scholarship..

Again, I hope that won't happen. Things are already rigged enough in favor of big name PIs with money to burn. It's not just that it's not good for me, I also think giving entrenched big shots even more advantages is no way to do innovation or to encourage out-of-the-box thinking. I'm also sceptical of publishers not being able to cover costs, given that for many journals the formatting is basically done by LaTex and authors and reviewers work for free.

[mleok]

I have published exactly one paper in a MDPI journal, because it was a special issue in information geometry that a collaborator of mine wanted the paper to appear in, and he paid for the APC charge, which I certainly would not have. The production editorial staff that handled the LaTeX submission were absolutely incompetent, incapable of following basic instructions, and maintaining version control, resulting in a neverending email exchange. All they had to do was to take my source file formatted using their style file, and flip a setting on the template, and they still managed to mess it all up. I will certainly never ever again publish a paper with a MDPI journal, or review a paper for any of these journals.

Even if it's not a scam, it's clear where their priorities lie, and it's not focused on the intellectual quality of the journals.

[Sun_Worshiper]

I got another request from an MDPI journal the other day. The editorial board is very respectable, so I thought about reviewing, but after glancing at the abstract (incoherent) and the request timeline (10 days, right in the midst of finals week), I thought better and declined. As I noted earlier in the thread, there are few good journals from this publisher in my area and no top journals, and I have other review requests to keep me busy, so I think I'll continue to decline requests from this publisher.

[Kron3007]

I have published exactly one paper in a MDPI journal, because it was a special issue in information geometry that a collaborator of mine wanted the paper to appear in, and he paid for the APC charge, which I certainly would not have. The production editorial staff that handled the LaTeX submission were absolutely incompetent, incapable of following basic instructions, and maintaining version control, resulting in a neverending email exchange. All they had to do was to take my source file formatted using their style file, and flip a setting on the template, and they still managed to mess it all up. I will certainly never ever again publish a paper with a MDPI journal, or review a paper for any of these journals.

Even if it's not a scam, it's clear where their priorities lie, and it's not focused on the intellectual quality of the journals.

I have also avoided MDPI as they were once listed as a predatory journal and I am still suspect.  That being said, I also felt the same about Nature Frontiers at first as they kept spamming me asking to do a special issue (also their MO) and they have become a respected journal.  Likewise, it seems some MDPI journals are establishing their reputations as well, mostly through getting guest editors to pull good articles together for them.

Personally, I dont see why OA journals charge as much as they do.  Many of them charge $1000-2000 when the editors are not paid, the writers are not paid (they pay), the reviewers are not paid, there are no printing charges, and most of it is done through an automated system.  If you look at PLoS one, they publish over 30 000 articles some years, meaning they are bringing in about $50 000 000.  They are a not for profit, but I have a hard time seeing where these funds go.  I would much rather see academic publishing move away from private industry (like MDPI, Springer, etc.).

Meanwhile, in my field there are a couple traditional journals that do not charge anything... 

[Faith786]

From what I can tell, MDPI open access appear to be a cut or two below PLOS or most of the BMC publications.  I reviewed for them once, but have declined further reviews. 

It's weird - the more reputable open access groups seem to charge ~$2000 to publish.  MDPI is in that ballpark.  The ones I truly don't trust are more likely to charge $100 or less and have misspellings on their webpages.

I'd rate them as legitimate, if not necessarily first tier.

+1
MDPI's IJERPH ranking is just below BMC PH.
MDPI's Sustainability ranking is just below J of Environmental Management.

p.s. I don't understand the ~$2,500 dollar fees to publish open access (APC)...it's ridiculously high and no rookie can afford it, unless one has institutional affiliation that covers some or all the fees.

[Faith786]

If you look at PLoS one, they publish over 30 000 articles some years, meaning they are bringing in about $50 000 000.  They are a not for profit, but I have a hard time seeing where these funds go.  I would much rather see academic publishing move away from private industry (like MDPI, Springer, etc.).

Holy smokes, $50,000,000 for NFP journals like PLoS...?!!
I wonder what the private ones are raking in...

[mamselle]

These are primarily in the sciences, though, yes?

So PI's with large grants can at least charge those fees to their grant budgets. That in itself probably drives prices and subvention structures up: they charge more because they can, knowing there are deeper pockets to dip into.

Meanwhile, it would be interesting to hear about the comparative scale of things in the humanities, since those of us who are independent scholars without grants also like seeing our work into the light of day, despite the tiny patch-pockets on the fronts of our jumpers....

M.

[Hibush]

+1
MDPI's IJERPH ranking is just below BMC PH.
MDPI's Sustainability ranking is just below J of Environmental Management.

What is a reasonable comparison, though? J Env Mgt is way narrower. Sustainability has an amazing hodgepodge of articles. They seem to have in common a need for authors to sustain a continuous publication record, not any aspect of environmental sustainability.

The most attractive feature may be that  "manuscripts are peer-reviewed and a first decision provided to authors approximately 14.5 days after submission; acceptance to publication is undertaken in 2.9 days".

If the APC is too much for those in need of another publication pronto, the need just respond to some of their innumerable requests for review. "Reviewers who provide timely, thorough peer-review reports receive vouchers entitling them to a discount on the APC of their next publication in any MDPI journal".

To switch angles a bit, what is the decision-making process for librarians on the pure OA journals? The subscription is free, but which ones are worth "cataloging"? and what is the nature of cataloging online materials that are actually hosted elsewhere?

[Vkw10]

To switch angles a bit, what is the decision-making process for librarians on the pure OA journals? The subscription is free, but which ones are worth "cataloging"? and what is the nature of cataloging online materials that are actually hosted elsewhere?

My library catalogs journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals www.doaj.org. They encouraged me to apply for DOAJ for an OA journal I helped establish. DOAJ provides metadata that libraries add to catalog so people can find an OA journal.

[Hibush]

To switch angles a bit, what is the decision-making process for librarians on the pure OA journals? The subscription is free, but which ones are worth "cataloging"? and what is the nature of cataloging online materials that are actually hosted elsewhere?

My library catalogs journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals www.doaj.org. They encouraged me to apply for DOAJ for an OA journal I helped establish. DOAJ provides metadata that libraries add to catalog so people can find an OA journal.

Thanks!

I checked the journals in my field, and the even those that switched to OA recently are listed. The big society and Nature journals don't have the DOAJ seal. The only ones to make the cut are from Frontiers, BMC and MDPI.

[mamselle]

Many libraries have overall database access to a variety of resources; I don't use these articles so have no idea if they'd show up or not, but between WorldCat and the libraries' dB links, I'd think they might not have to upload to their own online catalogues, there might be a simple ongoing migration that runs in the background once the dB's are first purchased.

I only have brief hands-on knowledge of the tech side of these systems so a real librarian could probably clarify bettter....but my understanding when I did work behind the desk at one place was that such options were then (1990s--barcoding was a New! Big deal! Thing...) upcoming.

And I've used other dB's linked from my public library and several local and not-so-local academic libraries, since, so I believe that's correct.

M.

[Vkw10]

Many libraries have overall database access to a variety of resources; I don't use these articles so have no idea if they'd show up or not, but between WorldCat and the libraries' dB links, I'd think they might not have to upload to their own online catalogues, there might be a simple ongoing migration that runs in the background once the dB's are first purchased.

I only have brief hands-on knowledge of the tech side of these systems so a real librarian could probably clarify bettter....but my understanding when I did work behind the desk at one place was that such options were then (1990s--barcoding was a New! Big deal! Thing...) upcoming.

And I've used other dB's linked from my public library and several local and not-so-local academic libraries, since, so I believe that's correct.

M.

I read the tenure file for a librarian who manages e-resources a couple of years ago. Part of her job was managing several hundred metadata feeds coming from different sources so the catalog and databases were automatically updated. It looked like a juggling act, since a company that changed something to improve their database often also broke the automatic updating. Apparently libraries also do a lot of sharing metadata, so one library catalogs and adds to WorldCat, then others download that metadata for their own catalogs. DOAJ is part of that shared work system that libraries use.