Does vision science need a new open access journal (Pre-discussion for ECVP2015)
This years ECVP will host a discussion on 'open access' in vision science.
ECVP discussed the problems with our current publication system in 2012, but since then, publishers continue to make excessive profits from journal subscriptions, or 'gold open access' fees.
The potential promise of 'open access' seems to have turned largely into another funding route for established publishers to profit further from the publication process. Whilst the inefficient 'subscription' model seems to have continued unaffected.
The potential for open access to improve the way we do science still remains however. In fact the recent advances in openly available software to host open access journals is rapidly improving (http://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/). There are also new publishing companies that are offering much more reasonable publication fees. Journals like PeerJ charge just 99 dollars for a life time ability to publish with the journal, suggesting that the +2000/3000 dollar fees from traditional journals are a massive inflation of the actual costs.
Is it time to make use of these advances to consider setting up a new low cost open access 'Journal of Perception'?
Poll Created Thu 25 Jun 2015 5:21PM
We should seriously consider setting up a new low cost open access Journal of Perception Closed Sat 4 Jul 2015 5:07PM
The time is right to consider a new low cost open access Journal of Perception.
There are a range of open source packages for hosting and managing a journal such as http://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/. That mean that it could be run with little cost - so long as there are volunteers to run and maintain it (and of course, edit/submit/review!).
There are also much more efficient publishers such as PeerJ and Ubiquity Press that charge substantially less than traditional publishers.
The key to this move however surely depends on the enthusiasm within the vision science community to try and innovate with a new journal.
Hopefully this discussion will help us to find out if that enthusiasm exists...
|% of points
8 of 21 people have participated (38%)
Sat 4 Jul 2015 9:03AM
I agree, but only if this idea is supported by the main protagonists of vision research. No easier way to attain Machiavellistic opportunism than to divide and conquer. Since science is no politics we should be much more weary about that.