Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
F
IG
. 3. Percentage of paid e-journals.
tronic journals listed in the “Miner” at the Colorado Alliance of Research libraries
(
http://www.coalliance.org/
)
shows that even in 2005, a large percentage of pure
e-journals are free of charge (
Fig. 3
). The database lists over 6700 electronic journals.
Sixty two percent of the journals listed are free.
The open access movement suggests that e-journals cover their expenses by charg-
ing authors
[27]
. In this model, authors pay per page published or per article pub-
lished. Some scholars also recommend that e-journals should charge for reviewing
articles since the review process is costly. Charging authors runs the risk of creating
a vanity press and involves the following limitations.
Established, high-reputation journals in fields such as physics do require page
charges. However, these charges are often covered by federal and other research
grants. In other disciplines (such as business), research is rarely funded by
grants and therefore fewer sources of funds are available to pay for publica-
tions.
Scholars in less endowed universities, students, and researchers in countries
where the currency (compare to the US Dollar or the Euro) is weak are at a
great disadvantage. Such a “pay to play” system would create a disparity in
publishing and reduce scholarly communication.
It can hinder the knowledge base and sense of community of a discipline. Schol-
ars in disadvantaged countries can be expected to stop publishing or reading
journals that charge authors. These trends are counterproductive and curtail the
benefits gained by the introduction of e-journals (
Table I
).
Established authors do not have incentives to pay page charges unless pub-
lishing in the journal adds to their reputation. Emerging e-journals would have
difficulty attracting reputable authors.
Free access also involves negative implications for the reputation and prestige of the
journal. These issues are discussed in Section
6
.
