#3 Journal Articles: Who Pays?

Welcome back to the Mechanics of Research update.

I hope you’re enjoying it and finding it useful too. Let me know if there’s a particular topic or question you’d like me to investigate further…..

Journal Articles: Who Pays?

It's a contentious and persistent issue: who should pay for journal articles?

I was contacted by a well-known publisher to "guest edit" a journal. The proposed topic was interesting and could result in a worthwhile collection. However, they requested over $1000 USD per article processing charge—including for the editorial essay that would introduce the special edition and provide commentary on the articles. Since authors and editors would handle all peer review, editing, and layout, the publisher would receive around $12,000 purely for hosting PDFs. With 12 editions per year across hundreds of journals, it's clearly a lucrative business.

-Universities pay for most researcher time—and should therefore have access to the articles without having to pay.

-The public contributes to university costs through taxation and should have access to publicly funded research.

-Researchers need quick and easy access to articles to advance science and share discoveries.

-Researchers must publish extensively for success, promotion, and tenure.

Yet everyone must pay subscription fees to read material they've already funded. Publishers also retain copyright to this material.

Most journals use one of two models:

1. charging readers to view articles (traditionally through subscriptions or pay per view), or

2. charging authors a "processing charge" to make articles freely available to the reader. While the latter aligns with open access principles and reaches more readers, it creates barriers for scholars without funding or institutional support.

This system creates an unusual dynamic where authors become customers. Journals need a steady stream of papers to survive without subscription income - hence the stream of invites we receive to edit special issues. This raises concerns about maintaining quality standards when processing fees are at stake.

It's particularly strange that authors pay to publish their work rather than receiving payment for their intellectual property. Even if an article is downloaded millions of times, authors receive no additional compensation—only citation metrics.

Some journals are experimenting with giving editors and reviewers credits to reduce their publishing charges - there’s even discussion of a crypto-like currency to pay reviewers.

While there's no simple solution:

- I recommend avoiding processing charges when possible, and I’m not sure I want ‘payment’ in the form of credits or crypto either.

-Try to use institutional funding for open access fees, or publish in journals that allow distribution of author-approved proofs after an embargo period.

-Some journals are adopting "diamond open access" models, charging neither authors nor readers. Instead, learned societies and benefactors fund these journals—though not every field has well-funded societies to support this approach.

-Resist the urge to over-publish. A lengthy CV might look impressive, but unread and uncited articles have little value.

I’m convinced we're slowly shifting from "publish or perish" model towards "inform and impact."

Thanks for reading - I appreciate it!

Want more?

Back issues here: https://iain-jackson.beehiiv.com/ 

PhD resources here: https://iainjackson.gumroad.com/

And of course I’m posting on Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/iain-jackson/