Authorial and institutional stratification in open access publishing: the case of global health research.

Kyle Siler,Elise Smith,Stefanie Haustein,Juan Pablo Alperin,Vincent Larivière

doi:10.7717/peerj.4269

Kyle Siler, Elise Smith + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4269

Copy DOI

Abstract

Using a database of recent articles published in the field of Global Health research, we examine institutional sources of stratification in publishing access outcomes. Traditionally, the focus on inequality in scientific publishing has focused on prestige hierarchies in established print journals. This project examines stratification in contemporary publishing with a particular focus on subscription vs. various Open Access (OA) publishing options. Findings show that authors working at lower-ranked universities are more likely to publish in closed/paywalled outlets, and less likely to choose outlets that involve some sort of Article Processing Charge (APCs; gold or hybrid OA). We also analyze institutional differences and stratification in the APC costs paid in various journals. Authors affiliated with higher-ranked institutions, as well as hospitals and non-profit organizations pay relatively higher APCs for gold and hybrid OA publications. Results suggest that authors affiliated with high-ranked universities and well-funded institutions tend to have more resources to choose pay options with publishing. Our research suggests new professional hierarchies developing in contemporary publishing, where various OA publishing options are becoming increasingly prominent. Just as there is stratification in institutional representation between different types of publishing access, there is also inequality within access types.

Highlights

Publication in peer-reviewed journals legitimates and propagates academic research, while underpinning professional and scientific reward structures for authors
Since all green Open Access (OA) papers were published in toll access journals, this means that 69.2% of publications in our dataset were published in journals where the final, typeset version of the paper is paywalled
Our results show that the current publishing landscape is a complex environment comprised of many types of dissemination and access options, as well as institutional stratification within and between those various access types

Summary

Introduction

Publication in peer-reviewed journals legitimates and propagates academic research, while underpinning professional and scientific reward structures for authors. How to cite this article Siler et al (2018), Authorial and institutional stratification in open access publishing: the case of global health research. Scientific research is primarily disseminated online, even when published in traditional paywalled/subscription journals. The low cost and ease of information dissemination online has called the necessity of traditional publishing models into question. The traditional business model of for-profit scientific publishing funded via university subscriptions has proven remarkably resilient and profitable in the Internet age (Cookson, 2015), Open Access (OA) publishing options have emerged, offering benefits of improved public access and potentially lower publishing costs. Various forms of OA publishing challenge and/or complement traditional subscriptionbased business models of academic publishing. OA publishing has been—and has potential to continue to be—a disruptive innovation (Christensen, 1997), altering the markets and social hierarchies of the prevailing scientific publishing system

Methods

Results

Conclusion