A Provisional System to Evaluate Journal Publishers Based on Partnership Practices and Values Shared with Academic Institutions and Libraries

Rachel Caldwell

doi:10.3390/publications8030039

Abstract

Background: Journals with high impact factors (IFs) are the “coin of the realm” in many review, tenure, and promotion decisions, ipso facto, IFs influence academic authors’ views of journals and publishers. However, IFs do not evaluate how publishers interact with libraries or academic institutions. Goal: This provisional system introduces an evaluation of publishers exclusive of IF, measuring how well a publisher’s practices align with the values of libraries and public institutions of higher education (HE). Identifying publishers with similar values may help libraries and institutions make strategic decisions about resource allocation. Methods: Democratization of knowledge, information exchange, and the sustainability of scholarship were values identified to define partnership practices and develop a scoring system evaluating publishers. Then, four publishers were evaluated. A high score indicates alignment with the values of libraries and academic institutions and a strong partnership with HE. Results: Highest scores were earned by a learned society publishing two journals and a library publisher supporting over 80 open-access journals. Conclusions: Publishers, especially nonprofit publishers, could use the criteria to guide practices that align with mission-driven institutions. Institutions and libraries could use the system to identify publishers acting in good faith towards public institutions of HE.

Highlights

Citation metrics, including journal-level impact factors, are the predominant means of evaluating scholarly journals and their publishers
As faculty across the disciplines express discontent with the state of scholarly journal publishing, and as an increasing number of institutions of higher education (HE) and their libraries look closely at the subscription fees and open-access article processing charges they pay to publishers, a system to compare journal publishers exclusive of citation metrics may be of value
With these definitions in mind, this paper presents a new system for evaluating publishers that centers public institutions of HE, the profession of librarianship, and learned societies as partners in scholarship

Summary

Introduction

Citation metrics, including journal-level impact factors, are the predominant means of evaluating scholarly journals and their publishers. This paper outlines a scoring system that awards points to publishers that act as partners with HE through practices that align with the origin, values, and missions of institutions of HE (using the values of land-grant institutions in the United States as a basis), the profession of librarianship, and some learned society publishers. If it were to be used, the scoring system would require vetting, as well as resources for implementation, coordination, and sustainability.

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion