|
|
|
|
|
by refurb
2347 days ago
|
|
Are you planning to publish all of your own papers in open access journals? That would be putting your money where your mouth is. I’ve seen plenty of researchers say “information should be free” and then later publish everything in closed journals because the open access ones have low impact factor. Seems hypocritical to me. |
|
If so, why is the prestigious curation of the journal that leads academics to reading your paper and taking it seriously inextricably tied to whether or not it's behind a paywall at all?
What's stopping someone from building an alternative curation pipeline on top of open access journals that gives academics equal or better signal/noise to the journals they read, and a similar socially accepted prestige for getting into that curation pipeline?
I get that there's not a clear path to monetization, but maybe it's possible, particularly if you could execute more targeted curation for academic subfields that are too small to have their own journals, that you could find some donors and lean on academics supporting the curation process themselves out of their seeming discontent with publishing to drive down costs.