[科学期刊的不同模式]。

Medecine tropicale et sante internationale Pub Date : 2023-12-08 eCollection Date: 2023-12-31 DOI:10.48327/mtsi.v3i4.2023.454
Jean-Philippe Chippaux
{"title":"[科学期刊的不同模式]。","authors":"Jean-Philippe Chippaux","doi":"10.48327/mtsi.v3i4.2023.454","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Scientific journals are the main source of scientific data, ensuring their registration, validation, distribution and archiving. With over 2.6 million scientific articles published each year, the turnover of scientific journals exceeds $25 billion annually. Five publishers share nearly half of this lucrative market. Scientists are the key players in the process, but other stakeholders have gradually been introduced, building various business models whose similarities and differences are described here.</p><p><strong>Concepts underlying scientific publication: </strong>Open access to scientific papers dates back to the scientific and technical revolution of the 17<sup>th</sup> century. However, its evolution has been considerably boosted by the development of the Internet and the recognition of science as \"commons\".Scientific integrity is under the control of research institutions to ensure the prevention of fraud and misconduct in the course of scientific production. Usually, the scientific integrity is questioned during the manuscript reviewing process which may result in identification of flaws.</p><p><strong>Models of scientific publications: </strong>In the historical model, readers pay for access to the document. Authors are not remunerated and renounce copyright on their articles to the publisher. The limits of the historical model became clear in the 90s, facing the cost of publishing, reduction in the number of subscribers, development of the Internet and willingness to improve manuscript evaluation.With the development of the Internet and the paradigm of open access, publishers proposed a new model in the 2000s, replacing the cost of access to articles for the reader with the payment of Article Processing Charges (APCs) paid by the author or its institution (\"author pays\" model). In this model, the content of the article can be freely reproduced and used, provided that the original author is credited. In addition to the evaluation of the manuscript which remains a critical factor, the cost of publication appears inequitable. However, all or part of the APCs may be waived, particularly for authors from low- and middle-income countries.For the past 15 years or so, publishers, learned societies and academic or research institutions (including libraries) have been seeking to publish reliable, open access manuscripts that respect scientific integrity while being affordable for the author.Predatory journals emerged in the late 2000s, taking advantage of the success of the authorpays model to capture APCs. Lacking a proper evaluation process resulting in poor-quality publications, these journals are rejected by most scientific institutions. On the other hand, they are particularly attractive in low- and middle-income countries because of their aggressive commercial practices (insistent invitation to submit a manuscript, low rejection rate, rapid publication, reduced APC, etc.).The purpose of each journal is to secure its economic model. This goes through ensuring its visibility, which is determined by the number of citations (online and social media citations) rather than the quality of the articles published.</p><p><strong>Peer review: </strong>This very old concept has not been widely used until the 20<sup>th</sup> century. In the historical model, manuscript evaluation is generally carried out by members of the learned society that publishes the journal. Evaluation can be either unblinded, single-blinded (referee is anonymous) or double-blinded (author and referee are anonymous). Several studies have shown that blind procedures do not alter the quality of the evaluation. Since the early 90s, post-publication evaluation has emerged, of which there are several variants. The aim is to shorten times to publication and open up the evaluation process more widely in order to limit the bias. Apart from the fact that this system does not guarantee a better evaluation of the manuscript, its main disadvantage is that the article is accessible without validation of the data collection and analysis throughout the entire process, which can be lengthy.</p><p><strong>Cost and funding of scientific journals: </strong>The cost of an article depends on charges that vary according to the conditions and places of production. Reviewers are volunteers. On the other hand, manuscript management, editing and distribution are carried out by professionals, which entail financial charges. Some of these costs are lower in low- and medium-resource countries, where economies of scale and higher benefits are possible.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The limits of the historical model have led to the development of several business models of scientific journals, that are in constant evolution, especially the author pays model which promises open access to publications but impacts scientific production. However, the evaluation of scientific production is heterogeneous due to a limited pool of reviewers inadequately selected. Scientific publishing is looking for solutions to find a virtuous model that respects open science, open access to data and scientific integrity. The \"Diamond open access\" model, free of charge for both readers and authors with the guarantee of an irrevocable license to reproduce the content of the article provided that the original source is cited, perfectly fits.</p>","PeriodicalId":101416,"journal":{"name":"Medecine tropicale et sante internationale","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10879888/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[The different models of scientific journals].\",\"authors\":\"Jean-Philippe Chippaux\",\"doi\":\"10.48327/mtsi.v3i4.2023.454\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Scientific journals are the main source of scientific data, ensuring their registration, validation, distribution and archiving. With over 2.6 million scientific articles published each year, the turnover of scientific journals exceeds $25 billion annually. Five publishers share nearly half of this lucrative market. Scientists are the key players in the process, but other stakeholders have gradually been introduced, building various business models whose similarities and differences are described here.</p><p><strong>Concepts underlying scientific publication: </strong>Open access to scientific papers dates back to the scientific and technical revolution of the 17<sup>th</sup> century. However, its evolution has been considerably boosted by the development of the Internet and the recognition of science as \\\"commons\\\".Scientific integrity is under the control of research institutions to ensure the prevention of fraud and misconduct in the course of scientific production. Usually, the scientific integrity is questioned during the manuscript reviewing process which may result in identification of flaws.</p><p><strong>Models of scientific publications: </strong>In the historical model, readers pay for access to the document. Authors are not remunerated and renounce copyright on their articles to the publisher. The limits of the historical model became clear in the 90s, facing the cost of publishing, reduction in the number of subscribers, development of the Internet and willingness to improve manuscript evaluation.With the development of the Internet and the paradigm of open access, publishers proposed a new model in the 2000s, replacing the cost of access to articles for the reader with the payment of Article Processing Charges (APCs) paid by the author or its institution (\\\"author pays\\\" model). In this model, the content of the article can be freely reproduced and used, provided that the original author is credited. In addition to the evaluation of the manuscript which remains a critical factor, the cost of publication appears inequitable. However, all or part of the APCs may be waived, particularly for authors from low- and middle-income countries.For the past 15 years or so, publishers, learned societies and academic or research institutions (including libraries) have been seeking to publish reliable, open access manuscripts that respect scientific integrity while being affordable for the author.Predatory journals emerged in the late 2000s, taking advantage of the success of the authorpays model to capture APCs. Lacking a proper evaluation process resulting in poor-quality publications, these journals are rejected by most scientific institutions. On the other hand, they are particularly attractive in low- and middle-income countries because of their aggressive commercial practices (insistent invitation to submit a manuscript, low rejection rate, rapid publication, reduced APC, etc.).The purpose of each journal is to secure its economic model. This goes through ensuring its visibility, which is determined by the number of citations (online and social media citations) rather than the quality of the articles published.</p><p><strong>Peer review: </strong>This very old concept has not been widely used until the 20<sup>th</sup> century. In the historical model, manuscript evaluation is generally carried out by members of the learned society that publishes the journal. Evaluation can be either unblinded, single-blinded (referee is anonymous) or double-blinded (author and referee are anonymous). Several studies have shown that blind procedures do not alter the quality of the evaluation. Since the early 90s, post-publication evaluation has emerged, of which there are several variants. The aim is to shorten times to publication and open up the evaluation process more widely in order to limit the bias. Apart from the fact that this system does not guarantee a better evaluation of the manuscript, its main disadvantage is that the article is accessible without validation of the data collection and analysis throughout the entire process, which can be lengthy.</p><p><strong>Cost and funding of scientific journals: </strong>The cost of an article depends on charges that vary according to the conditions and places of production. Reviewers are volunteers. On the other hand, manuscript management, editing and distribution are carried out by professionals, which entail financial charges. Some of these costs are lower in low- and medium-resource countries, where economies of scale and higher benefits are possible.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The limits of the historical model have led to the development of several business models of scientific journals, that are in constant evolution, especially the author pays model which promises open access to publications but impacts scientific production. However, the evaluation of scientific production is heterogeneous due to a limited pool of reviewers inadequately selected. Scientific publishing is looking for solutions to find a virtuous model that respects open science, open access to data and scientific integrity. The \\\"Diamond open access\\\" model, free of charge for both readers and authors with the guarantee of an irrevocable license to reproduce the content of the article provided that the original source is cited, perfectly fits.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101416,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medecine tropicale et sante internationale\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10879888/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medecine tropicale et sante internationale\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.48327/mtsi.v3i4.2023.454\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medecine tropicale et sante internationale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48327/mtsi.v3i4.2023.454","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:科学期刊是科学数据的主要来源,确保数据的登记、验证、分发和存档。每年发表的科学文章超过 260 万篇,科学期刊的年营业额超过 250 亿美元。在这个利润丰厚的市场中,五家出版商占据了近一半的份额。科学家是这一过程的主要参与者,但也逐渐引入了其他利益相关者,建立了各种商业模式,本文将介绍这些模式的异同:科学论文的开放获取可以追溯到 17 世纪的科技革命。然而,互联网的发展和科学被视为 "公共资源 "的认识极大地推动了它的发展。科学诚信受研究机构的控制,以确保防止科学生产过程中的欺诈和不当行为。通常,在审稿过程中,科学诚信会受到质疑,这可能会导致发现缺陷:在历史模式中,读者付费获取文献。科学出版物的模式:在历史模式中,读者付费获取文件,作者不领取报酬,并向出版商放弃其文章的版权。随着互联网的发展和开放存取模式的出现,出版商在 2000 年代提出了一种新的模式,即由作者或其机构支付文章处理费(APCs)来取代读者获取文章的费用("作者付费 "模式)。在这种模式下,文章内容可以自由复制和使用,但必须注明原作者。除了稿件评价仍是关键因素外,出版费用似乎也不公平。在过去 15 年左右的时间里,出版商、学术团体和学术或研究机构(包括图书馆)一直在寻求出版可靠的、开放存取的稿件,既尊重科学诚信,又能让作者负担得起。2000 年代后期出现了掠夺性期刊,它们利用作者付费模式的成功来攫取学术成果的使用费。这些期刊缺乏适当的评估程序,导致出版物质量低劣,因此被大多数科研机构拒之门外。另一方面,由于其积极的商业行为(坚持邀请投稿、低退稿率、快速出版、降低 APC 等),这些期刊在中低收入国家尤其具有吸引力。这就需要确保期刊的知名度,而知名度是由引用次数(在线引用和社交媒体引用)而不是所发表文章的质量决定的:同行评审:这一古老的概念直到 20 世纪才被广泛使用。在历史模式中,稿件评审一般由出版期刊的学术团体成员进行。评审可以是非盲评、单盲评(评审人匿名)或双盲评(作者和评审人匿名)。一些研究表明,盲评程序不会改变评价质量。自 90 年代初以来,出现了发表后评价,其中有几种变体。其目的是缩短出版时间,更广泛地开放评价过程,以限制偏差。这种制度除了不能保证对稿件进行更好的评价外,其主要缺点是文章在整个过程中的数据收集和分析未经验证就可查阅,而这一过程可能是漫长的:文章的成本取决于收费标准,收费标准因出版条件和出版地而异。审稿人都是志愿者。另一方面,稿件管理、编辑和发行由专业人士负责,这就需要支付一定的费用。在中低资源国家,其中一些费用较低,因为在这些国家可以实现规模经济并获得更高的收益:历史模式的局限性导致了科学期刊多种商业模式的发展,这些模式在不断演变,特别是作者付费模式,这种模式承诺开放出版物,但影响了科学生产。然而,由于审稿人数量有限且选择不当,对科学成果的评价也不尽相同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[The different models of scientific journals].

Introduction: Scientific journals are the main source of scientific data, ensuring their registration, validation, distribution and archiving. With over 2.6 million scientific articles published each year, the turnover of scientific journals exceeds $25 billion annually. Five publishers share nearly half of this lucrative market. Scientists are the key players in the process, but other stakeholders have gradually been introduced, building various business models whose similarities and differences are described here.

Concepts underlying scientific publication: Open access to scientific papers dates back to the scientific and technical revolution of the 17th century. However, its evolution has been considerably boosted by the development of the Internet and the recognition of science as "commons".Scientific integrity is under the control of research institutions to ensure the prevention of fraud and misconduct in the course of scientific production. Usually, the scientific integrity is questioned during the manuscript reviewing process which may result in identification of flaws.

Models of scientific publications: In the historical model, readers pay for access to the document. Authors are not remunerated and renounce copyright on their articles to the publisher. The limits of the historical model became clear in the 90s, facing the cost of publishing, reduction in the number of subscribers, development of the Internet and willingness to improve manuscript evaluation.With the development of the Internet and the paradigm of open access, publishers proposed a new model in the 2000s, replacing the cost of access to articles for the reader with the payment of Article Processing Charges (APCs) paid by the author or its institution ("author pays" model). In this model, the content of the article can be freely reproduced and used, provided that the original author is credited. In addition to the evaluation of the manuscript which remains a critical factor, the cost of publication appears inequitable. However, all or part of the APCs may be waived, particularly for authors from low- and middle-income countries.For the past 15 years or so, publishers, learned societies and academic or research institutions (including libraries) have been seeking to publish reliable, open access manuscripts that respect scientific integrity while being affordable for the author.Predatory journals emerged in the late 2000s, taking advantage of the success of the authorpays model to capture APCs. Lacking a proper evaluation process resulting in poor-quality publications, these journals are rejected by most scientific institutions. On the other hand, they are particularly attractive in low- and middle-income countries because of their aggressive commercial practices (insistent invitation to submit a manuscript, low rejection rate, rapid publication, reduced APC, etc.).The purpose of each journal is to secure its economic model. This goes through ensuring its visibility, which is determined by the number of citations (online and social media citations) rather than the quality of the articles published.

Peer review: This very old concept has not been widely used until the 20th century. In the historical model, manuscript evaluation is generally carried out by members of the learned society that publishes the journal. Evaluation can be either unblinded, single-blinded (referee is anonymous) or double-blinded (author and referee are anonymous). Several studies have shown that blind procedures do not alter the quality of the evaluation. Since the early 90s, post-publication evaluation has emerged, of which there are several variants. The aim is to shorten times to publication and open up the evaluation process more widely in order to limit the bias. Apart from the fact that this system does not guarantee a better evaluation of the manuscript, its main disadvantage is that the article is accessible without validation of the data collection and analysis throughout the entire process, which can be lengthy.

Cost and funding of scientific journals: The cost of an article depends on charges that vary according to the conditions and places of production. Reviewers are volunteers. On the other hand, manuscript management, editing and distribution are carried out by professionals, which entail financial charges. Some of these costs are lower in low- and medium-resource countries, where economies of scale and higher benefits are possible.

Conclusion: The limits of the historical model have led to the development of several business models of scientific journals, that are in constant evolution, especially the author pays model which promises open access to publications but impacts scientific production. However, the evaluation of scientific production is heterogeneous due to a limited pool of reviewers inadequately selected. Scientific publishing is looking for solutions to find a virtuous model that respects open science, open access to data and scientific integrity. The "Diamond open access" model, free of charge for both readers and authors with the guarantee of an irrevocable license to reproduce the content of the article provided that the original source is cited, perfectly fits.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
[2nd Mayotte en Santé conference - Disadvantaged territories - September 18-20, 2023 - Mayotte]. [Auricular and periauricular pathologies in the ENT department of Sylvanus Olympio Teaching Hospital in Lome (Togo)]. [SFMTSI Congress - Health in the Mediterranean Pathologies - Migrations - Environment 22-24 May 2024 Saint-Raphaël, France]. [Evaluation of molecular diagnosis of tuberculosis and resistance to rifampicin with GeneXpert® MTB/RIF in Algeria]. [XXVIIIth Actualités du Pharo. Health at work, between family and company: what are the issues for Southern countries? 4-6 October 2023 Marseille, France].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1