Market Trends in Open Access Publishing

Define Open Access (OA) publishing?

Open access is a scholarly communication publishing strategy that makes research articles freely available to readers, as opposed to the traditional subscription model, which requires readers to pay a fee to access academic information. This is a concept adopted by researchers, scholars, and libraries.

 What is Article Processing Charge (APC)?

An article-processing charge (APC), sometimes known as a publication fee, is a price levied to writers to make their work open access in either open access or hybrid journal. The author, the author’s institution, or the author’s research funder may be responsible for this cost.

APC includes providing editors and authors with online tools, article production and hosting, coordinating with abstracting and indexing services, and providing customer service.

Papers should be published as rapidly as possible, subject to proper quality controls, and broadly disseminated, regardless of the publishing model chosen by the author.

The following criteria are used to determine APC rates for open access articles only:

  • Journal quality
  • The journal’s editorial and technical processes
  • Competitive considerations
  • Market conditions
  • Other revenue streams associated with the journal

Researchers and scientists of scholarly articles operate as consumers in the market for article processing charges (APC).

What are the current trends in the Open Access Market?

 OA faces significant competition as Researchers continue to aspire to publish in top-tier academic journals owing to their high impact factors and reputation for publishing high-quality research papers. The major publishers continue to dominate the marketplace, and successful ventures into the open-access market are uncommon. The peer-review process has been criticized in the OA market due to the obvious conflict to publish as many papers as possible to generate revenue that gives priority over quality control. Although growth is decreasing, it is still in double digits and much ahead of the underlying journal market. Articles in fully open access journals are showing signals of long-term growth, whilst hybrid journals appear to be flattening. This could be attributable in part to the way revenue is distributed in mixed-model arrangements. According to current trends, the open-access industry will continue to grow at a faster rate than the underlying market for scholarly journals. Hybrid revenue per paper published is higher than revenue per paper published in fully open access journals. The growth curves in both volume and value of OA appear to be flattening out to a stable state. Open access is becoming a far more widely understood and accepted model of publishing in general. The views of open access journals are improving, and they are becoming more recognized as a standard model. This is good for open access journals’ long-term viability, particularly if they maintain high-quality standards.

Conclusion

The majority of research papers are written to influence other scholars, either in the same field or in a different field. Scientists have more investigation outlets such as Open Access, which increases their chances of providing original and up-to-date work. Although the proportion of money spent on open access remains below that of output, it is improving. It is generally driven by higher output levels, while price tactics may help some businesses generate income. Open Access to Science is critical in low-income countries. Institutions, academics, scientists, and healthcare providers lack the financial resources to access academic literature. Providing Open Access to high-quality research papers ensures their intellectual equality among their peers in high-income countries.

How to Overcome Journal Rejection?

Publishing Papers after rejection could be a long time-taking process that holds the ability to share our work with the Public. If you don’t succeed at first, revise and resubmit.

A Paper rejected doesn’t mean the research is always bad.

 Reasons for Rejection of Academic Papers from Journals

These mistakes are consistently made by different people. These mistakes are non-fatal which creates a bad impression about the paper Many non-fatal mistakes can lead to rejection of the Paper.

The submission of Paper takes almost 1 to 1.5 years, so avoid making these deadly mistakes.

  • Formatting Issues
  • Choosing the wrong Journal
  • Grammatical Errors
  • References (Many or Few)
  • Revealing the Author’s Identity
  • Missing Tables & Figures
  • Missing Abstract
  • Writing Style

In some cases, the Paper may be rejected even after major revisions. Most researchers believe that the data and assumptions will be accepted with minor revisions, but when they get a negative response, they become low.

What are the things that you should not do after Paper Rejection?

  • Complaining to the Editor
  • Posting the Reviews Online
  • Writing a letter with Anger
  • Discarding the Reviews
  • Giving up

 

Researchers Perspective after Rejection

  • Upset about the outcome – Give yourself time and go back to the feedback. Read the letter when the anger stage is off.
  • Look for Valuable Feedback – Review the Feedback in detail. The feedback can be helpful with a lot of clues as to how to improve the paper. Some feedback seems to be unhelpful but when looking it deeper, there will be a different perspective which turns out to be good.
  • Resubmit the same Journal – Some Journals reject the Paper but invite you to resubmit it later. If you do decide to submit on that Journal, you can choose this option.
  • Make Changes & Submit to a New Journal – The most common Chosen option is considering the comments, improving the manuscript, and submitting it to a New Journal. Must ensure the details of the Cover Letter, Reference Format. Deciding what to Change – Address all the comments. Minor comments are also needed to be addressed.
  • Make No Changes & Submit to Another Journal – This is an easy option but is not at all effective. Reviewers may identify the same feedback that you received earlier.
  • File the Manuscript & Never resubmit – Choosing a new paper for Advanced research so deciding not to submit the paper in any journal. Instead of posting it in a scientific community where your Research data might be useful to others. Making it as a Blog or Workshop for Practitioners. The outcomes might be surprisingly good. Have multiple projects, when something is messing up, you have another in hand which can lift you.

 

Conclusion

Rejection is a natural part of Academic life. Persistence and Willingness are the keys to Success in Paper Publication. Rejection as Redirection by looking at it as an opportunity redirected to something more suitable. Rejection makes us improve and strengthen our work before submitting it to another set of Audiences.

What are the barriers to post-publication peer review?

Post-publication peer review – doing peer review after the publication of the manuscript. When a paper is published. Everyone in the community starts to read it and comment on it either in conferences or Journal Clubs. It is an informal way of doing Peer Review.

F1000, OpenReview, PubMed Commons, TrueReview, Pubpeer are some of the Post-publication Peer Review Platforms.

 Challenges of Post-publication peer review

Lack of Motivation towards Scientific Researches

Editorial control will always be a vital feature of every open peer review method, including PPPR, as we’ve previously reported. Editors are expected to seek peer feedback promptly (and often submit several reminder emails), as well as provide a sense of “prestige” for being asked to review an article, as a clear acknowledgment of your expertise in that area.

Too many choices – Many platforms and alternative methods of use in communicating reviews. It’s likely that various comments appear on different pages but not on others when multiple copies of a paper exist across multiple platforms. It’s also likely that researchers would experience plagiarism. This mode of communication is possibly more suitable when significant theoretical or methodological shortcomings in published studies have been discovered.

Plagiarism

Allows unqualified referees to smear the Researcher’s original work with unfounded accusations, claims, and lies in the name of free speech.

Risk of non-constructive criticism

Some people may use PPPR to be intentionally confrontational in public, talking down to or intimidating their junior peers. As a result, any alternative or complementary system must mitigate or minimize this negative dynamic, ensure that an accountability process is built into and maintained, and ensure that marginalized groups are encouraged to participate.

 Solutions to Post-publication peer review

  • Offers Opportunities for Corrections Authors receive more Feedback from peers by posting papers online. This should lessen the agony of revise and re-submit.
  • Increases engagement of the Scientific Community for more recognition & career development.
  • Ensures openness by making the analysis publicly accessible to those involved in the study.
  • The technology has made it possible for Scientific Research Papers to be accessible always.
  • After reading the Research Paper, review comments can be posted immediately and shared on social media platforms.
  • Strength & Weakness of Scientific Papers is done real-time globally.

 

Conclusion

Peer review was established to ensure that research papers are well-documented and meet the scientific community’s general standards. However, another aim of peer review has always been to stimulate scientific debate. Post-Publication Peer review allows the broader community to discuss the article in greater depth, providing the open forum that peer review is designed to provide. Using this method would undoubtedly result in a conflict of interest. Peer review often prohibits discussion of a mainstream theory against a competing mainstream theory, and theoretical scientists are often denied the opportunity to do so. PPPR aims to make aspects of the daily research process more accessible to the public. It’s about bringing meaning to published research papers by using the evaluations and criticisms that researchers and others conduct.

Elsevier authorize the Researchers to access its pay walled journals

The conflict between Elsevier, the world’s biggest publisher of scientific journals, and Germany’s entire university system has dragged on since 2015. However, recently Elsevier has approved continuous access to its paywalled journals for researchers at around 200 German universities and other research institutes that had refused earlier to renew their individual subscriptions. The nationwide deal sought by scientists includes an open-access option, under which all corresponding authors affiliated with German institutions would be allowed to make their papers open to read and share by anyone in the world. This would be a signpost for global efforts to make the results of publicly funded research immediately and freely available to scientists.

Research Writer’s Block: What is it and how to overcome?

It is very common in the research fraternity to hear discussions going on about the inability to put down their ideas and thoughts on paper. After the completion of their research work when researchers plan to put down their findings in pen and paper they realize that their hands are paralyzed and thoughts do not come to their mind. Most researchers do not know that such a condition is common and is known as writer’s block.

Writer’s Block

Writer’s block is more of a mental block that the writers experience. There are also some psychological researches that suggest that there is no such thing. But the fact that almost all researchers experience this cannot be denied. One of the main causes of writer’s block is anxiety and this problem can be aggravated if the researcher is not familiar with English, as this is the language that is generally used the world over.

Overcoming Writer’s Block

There are some common strategies followed by experienced researchers to overcome this mental block and complete their research writing within time.

Social Writing: It is a very good idea to join a support or writing group to stay motivated till the end. Social writing reduces the root cause of writer’s block – anxiety, which in turn stimulates writing. Writing while sitting in a group, discussing about the progress, sharing writing goals and achievements helps to understand writing better and increase the flow of creativity. Social writing generates realistic goal-setting and dedicated writing time. With social writing, the need for help or instruction may not be required.

Block Some Time of the Day Exclusively for Writing: Reserve some time of the day for writing, so that you write everyday and avoid the writer’s block setting in again. Morning is considered the best part of the day for writing, the mind is fresh and at its creative best. So, try to write in the morning before checking your email or surf the net to avoid any kind of distraction. The key idea is to write daily, even if it is for 15 minutes then gradually increase the time of writing.

Draft: First write down anything that comes to your mind, without worrying about the grammar and correctness of the sentence. First, jot down your ideas and the content that you want to include in your research paper and then refine it to convert it into your final copy.

So, we can say that the writer’s block is only the creation of the mind, which can be avoided by keeping calm, focused and consistent. All other things will fall into place if the brain is tricked to believe that the writing will be over within time and it will be up to the mark, without any data being missed.