Large language model (LLM) chatbots, as a widely used form of generative artificial intelligence, have reduced the marginal cost of producing publication-style manuscripts and have expanded feasible routes for manipulating citation metrics within the publishing ecosystem. Citation-based indicators (e.g., the h-index, the i10-index, and total citation counts) remain embedded in research evaluation and are sensitive to indexing practices of bibliographic databases, with Google Scholar providing broad coverage combined with comparatively limited curation. In this study, a systematic literature review is conducted to synthesize reported mechanisms of citation-metric manipulation and to examine limitations of citation-metric use, including evidence reported in civil engineering. A Google Scholar proof-of-concept case study examines whether the indexing of LLM-assisted, non-peer-reviewed documents with concentrated references to a target author is associated with changes in author-level citation metrics under platform-specific conditions. After indexing, a stepwise increase in author-level metrics is observed, demonstrating the feasibility of citation-metric manipulation under the platform-specific conditions. Finally, this paper discusses the implications for research integrity and citation manipulation in the era of generative artificial intelligence. It also presents recommendations for researchers, academic institutions and evaluation committees, publishers and editors, bibliographic database providers, and funding institutions and policymakers.

As scholarly publishing navigates the rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI), encompassing generative AI, natural language processing (NLP), large language models (LLMs), and autonomous agents, the editorial ecosystem must adapt to maintain its core integrity. This editorial evaluates the operational advantages of AI, such as enhanced efficiency and automated integrity checks, against systemic risks, including hallucination, bias, and confidentiality breaches. Drawing on recent empirical validations and policy frameworks from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and major publishers, we outline a comprehensive editorial policy for the Journal of Metaverse. This policy emphasizes human oversight, transparency, and domain-specific rigor. We also introduce practical implementation mechanisms, including an AI-use disclosure template, auditing protocols, and specific reporting requirements for metaverse research. Furthermore, this editorial explores the strategic use of generative AI for post-publication science communication, demonstrating how automated infographics and multimedia summaries can significantly enhance research visibility and broad accessibility. This document serves as both a functional policy framework and a contribution to the discourse on responsible AI integration in academic publishing.

Over the past few decades, scientific publishing has undergone significant transformations evolving from a print-based system to a digitised and globally accessible ecosystem. While this shift has facilitated faster dissemination and broader access to knowledge, it has also exposed systemic weaknesses, including the profiteering by major commercial publishers and persistent inequities in the publishing landscape. This opinion article aims to educate researchers in rehabilitation sciences and the broader health sciences who are unfamiliar with scholarly publishing models and practices, with the goal of fostering more accessible, equitable, and sustainable knowledge production and dissemination. We critically examine the limitations of traditional subscription models, as well as pay-to-publish open access (gold with article processing fees) and hybrid models, highlighting their financial and systemic barriers. In contrast, we advocate for more equitable alternatives: the free-to-readers and free-to-authors model (diamond open access), which typically involves publishing costs covered by academic institutions or public funders, and self-archiving (green open access). We also discuss the increasing importance of preprints and peer-reviewed preprints (peer-print articles) in decoupling knowledge dissemination from conventional journal publication. We argue for greater recognition of these latter models in academic evaluation and for institutional support of open infrastructures. We recommend broader reforms, including replacing authorship with contributorship, shifting the focus from novelty to reproducibility and transparency, and eliminating the journal impact factor as a criterion for evaluation. Collectively, these recommendations aim to reinforce a scholarly publishing ecosystem that prioritises equity, rigour, and the collective advancement of science.

The bioRxiv and medRxiv preprint servers brought preprinting to the life sciences and played a critical role in disseminating COVID research during the pandemic. Here, I reflect on the birth of bioRxiv and medRxiv and the crucial role so many members of the community played, our experience during the pandemic, and the launch of the new non-profit organization set up to oversee the servers. The pandemic was a stress test for bioRxiv and medRxiv that demonstrated their value and robustness. Under the umbrella of openRxiv, they are now poised to become long-term infrastructure underpinning a new publishing ecosystem.

ABSTRACT Despite the dominance of English‐language journals in international databases, the global scholarly publishing ecosystem is far more multilingual. This study presents the first comprehensive analysis of Iran's journal publishing landscape, uncovering a complex ecosystem of 3250 active and 639 discontinued journals published in English, Persian and Arabic. Drawing on multiple national databases and journal websites, we examine language, subject area, ownership, publishing platforms, open access models and indexation status. Our findings reveal distinct patterns: Persian‐language journals dominate in social sciences and humanities, while English‐language journals are concentrated in medical and STEM fields. All journals are locally owned and use domestically developed journal platforms with right‐to‐left language support. The vast majority (99.2%) are open access. Sanctions have limited access to international infrastructure, prompting local innovations such as the Digital Object Recognizer (DOR), a national alternative to DOI. In contrast to mainstream practice, most Iranian journals pay peer reviewers and use a two‐part article processing charge (APC): a non‐refundable fee at submission to cover peer review and a second payment upon acceptance. This study shows the scale and specificity of scholarly publishing in a non‐Western context and challenges the database‐centric view of global publishing by foregrounding local responses to structural constraints.

The rapid development of Artificial Intelligence-Generated Content (AIGC) technology is profoundly transforming the publishing ecosystem of scientific journals. Based on the Diffusion of Innovations theory, this paper systematically explores the application models and innovative pathways of AIGC technology in the integration process of scientific journals and new media. The study finds that AIGC not only reconstructs the content production workflow of scientific journals but also drives fundamental changes in communication models. By analyzing typical domestic and international cases, this paper proposes a three-stage practical framework of "technology adaptation–process reengineering–ecosystem reconstruction," providing actionable implementation plans for the digital transformation of scientific journals. The research also highlights that in advancing AIGC applications, special attention must be paid to ethical norms, quality control, and talent development as critical issues.

Abstract This article assesses Malaysia’s scholarly publishing ecosystem by analysing five models: university-based journals (UBJs), society journals, independent academic-led publishing initiatives, commercial partnership agreement, and ministry/government-sponsored journals. Drawing on over two decades of experience and the authors’ roles in national journal assessment, it examines the structural, ethical, and financial challenges shaping these models, particularly the tensions between Diamond and Gold Open Access frameworks. The findings indicate a system at a pivotal point, where commercial sustainability often conflicts with the principles of equitable knowledge dissemination. The authors argue that publishing models should be explicitly included as evaluation criteria in national frameworks, such as MyCite, to align with international practices. Recognising publisher credibility, governance, and financial transparency as core indicators of quality would help address existing legitimacy gaps. The article concludes with policy-oriented recommendations to reinforce community-controlled publishing, including the establishment of a National Council of Journal Editors. Such initiatives are vital to preserving Malaysia’s scholarly voice, values, and intellectual heritage within a balanced and globally connected knowledge infrastructure.

Background: The international publishing landscape of physics journals is undergoing a significant transformation that is driven by the rapid growth of open access (OA) models, increasing interdisciplinary integration, and the trend toward cluster-based development. This shift reflects evolving modes of scholarly communication and responses to the growing need for multidisciplinary collaboration in addressing frontier scientific challenges. Methods: This study utilized bibliometric data from Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports (JCR) between 2022 and 2024, complemented by case analyses of major international publishers and initiatives such as the Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics (SCOAP3). Comparative and trend analyses were used to examine the development of OA journals, interdisciplinary integration, and publisher clustering in physics. Results: The number of gold OA physics journals indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) increased by 23% from 2022 to 2024, significantly surpassing the overall growth rate of physics journals. Interdisciplinary journals constitute 94.6% of the physics group and generally exhibit higher impact factors than traditional single-discipline journals. Publisher clustering is prominent, with the top five publishing groups accounting for nearly 46% of physics journals by 2024. Initiatives like SCOAP3 have further advanced global OA cooperation. Conclusion: The physics journal publishing ecosystem is evolving toward enhanced openness, interdisciplinarity, and concentration. Although these trends enhance the efficiency and reach of scientific communication, they pose challenges related to financial sustainability, editorial fairness, and market diversity. Strategic efforts in OA adoption, interdisciplinary capacity building, and cluster development are essential for advancing physics publishing, particularly in the context of developing world-class journals with Chinese characteristics.

ABSTRACT Major publishing companies, often called ‘blue publishers,’ dominate Indonesia’s publishing ecosystem, including Yogyakarta. This article examines the resistance strategies of Yogyakartan indie publishers from 2000 to 2022. The 1998 reformation marked the turning point of such resistance, which gained momentum between 2015 and 2020 with the Kampung Buku Jogja Festival, continuing until the Covid-19 pandemic (2020–2022). Indie publishers disrupted the hegemonic distribution chain by adopting social media, e-commerce and e-business, carving out alternative networks outside mainstream control. The study documents and analyzes these strategies through selected references, interviews and focus group discussions with publishing stakeholders in Yogyakarta, conducted over 4 months (May to August 2022). Using a qualitative-descriptive method and a cultural studies approach, the research explores the factors, reasons, forms and strategies behind indie publishers’ resistance. Findings reveal that Yogyakartan indie publishing has successfully occupied spaces neglected by major publishers, creating a dynamic ecosystem of cultural resistance within Indonesia’s book industry.

The academic publishing ecosystem is being reshaped by open science, platformization, and the growing expectation that research should be transparent, reusable, and timely. Protocol papers—peer-reviewed descriptions of planned methods published before results—are increasingly used to move scrutiny upstream, reduce selective reporting, and provide citable “method objects” that can be linked to data, code, and later outcome papers. Drawing on an integrative synthesis of publishing practices and policies, and using bibliometric signals reported for protocol papers indexed in Web of Science (2014–2023), this article analyzes how protocol-oriented publishing functions both as a dissemination mechanism and as a driver of innovation. The bibliometric evidence indicates large-scale uptake (119,461 protocol papers over 2014–2023), rapid growth in open access availability (from 60% in 2014 to 82% in 2023) , and diversification of dissemination pathways, including protocol-related preprints across multiple servers in 2023. We discuss innovations such as dual-platform publishing (repository + journal certification), open and post-publication peer review, and emerging automated checks based on reporting standards. We also examine tensions around quality assurance, inequitable access, and incentive structures that still prioritize “positive” results over robust processes. Finally, we propose a policy and practical roadmap for funders, institutions, publishers, and infrastructure providers aimed at building a sustainable, community-centered protocol publishing ecosystem.

ABSTRACT This study investigates the operational and strategic challenges faced by Australian journal editors. Interviews with 27 editors reveal a complex publishing ecosystem shaped by tensions around editorial independence, financial viability, and scholarly impact. Operational challenges include securing qualified peer reviewers and attracting quality submissions; the latter is considerably influenced by journal ranking, indexation, and reputation. Many editors seek stronger support from publishers, emphasising a need for shared goals, mutual trust, and editorial independence. Successful relationships with publishers often require editors to be proactive and assertive. Strategic challenges include balancing international recognition and local relevance, which leads some journals to remove ‘Australian’ from their titles and diversify editorial boards to attract global submissions. Publishing models vary, with some journals transitioning to commercial publishers for financial and technical support, while others prioritise independence despite operational challenges. Open Access (OA) remains a contested issue, particularly regarding the role of commercial publishers, though many journals have reached a degree of stability in their OA policies. This study also examines the role of editorial boards, the use of journal management systems, relationships with parent bodies, and the strategies editors adopt to navigate these challenges.

This study analyzes 528 literary publications from the Japanese colonial period by collecting bibliographic information from covers and colophons and examining it through a bibliometric approach. In the process of data compilation, a classification framework was established to categorize literary works by genre, subgenre, and mode of publication, enabling a systematic comparison of the structural characteristics of colonial-period literary publishing. The analysis reveals a multilayered publishing ecosystem in which novels and poetry formed the core, while diverse subgenres — such as full-length novels, new novels, poetry collections, sijo collections, and translated works — coexisted. Literary publishing also exhibited notable shifts according to changing political and social conditions, and these patterns were shaped not only by structural constraints but also by the choices made by authors and publishers, including serialization, self-publication, and overseas publication. Variations in subgenre output further highlight the internal dynamics of the period’s literary publishing practices. By reconstructing these patterns through empirical data, this study provides a foundational resource for future research on modern Korean literary history and print culture.

The rapid advancement of generative AI is reshaping the publishing industry, enhancing efficiency while triggering a severe responsibility and ethics crisis. It disrupts the traditional linear responsibility chain among authors, editors, and publishers, creating a "responsibility vacuum" and "responsibility gap" .This study employs actor-network theory and distributed responsibility theory to analyze publishing as a heterogeneous network of human and non-human actors. It reveals how responsibility is dynamically "translated" and "distributed" within this network, identifying three mechanisms behind the "responsibility maze": asymmetric human-AI dependence, responsibility shirking among actors, and AI's unexpected autonomy. A multi-layered governance path is proposed, centered on forward-looking, proportional, and traceable responsibility, advocating for standards across micro, meso, and macro levels to foster a trustworthy human-machine collaborative publishing ecosystem.

BackgroundAfrica’s research publishing sector is growing but remains largely fragmented and under-resourced, posing major barriers to the visibility, accessibility, and global integration of African research.MethodsThis paper presents a continent-wide mapping of Africa’s research publishing ecosystem, drawing on five integrated datasets covering 1,169 publishers and 1,790 journals to assess the scale, thematic content, linguistic diversity, and the degree of openness characterising the African publishing landscape.ResultsThe analysis reveals that the majority of journals are published by single-journal entities embedded within universities, learned societies, and research institutes. While this decentralised model allows for locally driven publishing and alignment with national research priorities, it is often constrained by limited infrastructure, inconsistent metadata practices, and lack of professional publishing support. Geographically, publishing activity is concentrated in a few countries, most notably Egypt, Nigeria, and South Africa – reflecting disparities in research investment and infrastructure across the continent. Disciplinary patterns reveal a strong emphasis on the social sciences and humanities, shaped by post-independence academic development and limited commercial interest in these fields. The predominance of English in journal publishing enhances global visibility but risks marginalising non-Anglophone scholarship. The study also explores the increasing role of commercial publishers in improving visibility and editorial standards, while raising concerns about data control, sustainability, and long-term ownership of African research outputs.ConclusionThe paper concludes by highlighting the urgent need for coordinated, African-led investments in shared infrastructure, multilingual publishing strategies, and national indexing systems. These efforts are essential to enhance research equity, reduce dependency on external platforms, and ensure African knowledge systems are robust, inclusive, and visible in a rapidly evolving global publishing environment.

The shift from traditional subscription-based publishing to Open Access (OA) has transformed scholarly communication by providing unrestricted access to research outputs, fostering global knowledge exchange. However, the rise of Article Processing Charges (APCs) levied by publishers to cover operational costs in the OA model poses significant challenges, particularly for researchers from lower-middle-income countries like India. This study investigates the interplay between OA and APCs, focusing on the Indian academic and research landscape. It evaluates the effectiveness of mechanisms such as fee waivers, discounts, and transformative agreements in alleviating the financial burden of APCs and enabling equitable access to OA publishing. This research aims to examine current trends in OA adoption in India, identify barriers to participation in APC-based publishing, and propose solutions for Indian researchers to increase access to OA. This study incorporates an approach which is a combination of exhaustive literature review, global and national OA policies analysis, and case studies from Indian institutions that have successfully negotiated agreements with publishers. Key findings highlight the disparities in APC costs across disciplines and publishers, with fees ranging from $8 to USD 5,000. While fee waivers and discounts are available, their effectiveness is limited by cumbersome application processes and a lack of awareness among eligible researchers. Transformative agreements, wherein institutions negotiate lump-sum payments to cover subscription and OA publishing costs, emerge as a promising solution but remain in their infancy in India. The study also underscores the role of government and institutional policies in promoting OA publishing. Initiatives like the "One Nation One Subscription" (ONOS) policy and developing a national Green OA repository represent positive steps. However, significant gaps remain in addressing funding challenges and ensuring the widespread adoption of OA practices. Case studies of Indian institutions, such as the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) and the Institute of Plasma Research (IPR), demonstrate the potential of negotiated agreements to reduce APC costs and increase OA publications. However, these agreements often have limited scope and require greater coordination between institutions, publishers, and policymakers. The study concludes that while OA presents significant opportunities for democratizing access to knowledge, the financial burden of APCs remains a critical barrier for Indian researchers. A multifaceted approach is essential to address these challenges, including developing a comprehensive national OA policy, increased institutional support for APC funding, wider adoption of transformative agreements, and enhanced awareness of alternative OA models such as Diamond and Platinum OA. By implementing these strategies, India can strengthen its position in the global OA landscape, ensuring its researchers have equitable access to publish and disseminate their work. This research contributes to the on-going discourse on OA publishing, offering actionable insights for policymakers, institutions, and researchers striving to create a more inclusive and sustainable academic publishing ecosystem.

Abstract The manipulation of the Impact Factor (IF) through editorial decisions inflating self-citations is a growing concern in academic publishing. This work introduces an agent-based model simulating journals as rational agents competing for IF ranking positions in a zero-sum game, generating synthetic citation networks that reproduce key patterns such as the Matthew Effect and the specialization of manipulation strategies across interconnected disciplines. By comparing IF calculation policies with and without self-citations, statistical analysis of simulation results demonstrates that excluding self-citations significantly reduces incentives for manipulative tactics, offering computational evidence for developing policies that promote scientific integrity within the academic publishing ecosystem.

Purpose We are witnessing rapid and unprecedented developments in artificial intelligence (AI), exposing the vulnerabilities of the current scientific publishing ecosystem. This system – comprising, among others, commercial and non-profit publishers, scholarly journals, editors and reviewers – struggles to keep pace with the speed of AI research. The paper calls for urgent reform among the key actors shaping how manuscripts are handled: publishers, journal editors, editorial boards and reviewers. Design/methodology/approach The article examines the ecosystem’s role in shaping research dissemination. It contrasts the pace of the AI industry – especially companies like OpenAI and Google – with the slower, peer-reviewed publishing process in academia. Special attention is given to peer review and emerging publishing models such as Publish–Review–Curate (PRC). PRC addresses several shortcomings of the traditional peer review system and may provide a foundation for future adaptations aimed at accelerating scholarly publishing. Findings Given the rapid progress in both methodological and applied AI research, scientific publishing must adapt by accelerating its processes while preserving its core functions, particularly quality control. Originality/value Failing to keep pace with industry, academia risks becoming a second-tier player in AI development, trailing far behind industry research. This lag might seriously affect the direction and integrity of future science across all scientific fields and disciplines. Scholarly publishers may be sidelined – unless they adapt. Drawing on parallels with accelerated publishing during the COVID-19 pandemic, the paper calls on all stakeholders to act to ensure scholarly publishing remains vital in the AI age.

The Global South has emerged as a beacon of innovation in scholarly publishing, championing equitable and community-driven models of knowledge dissemination. Here we explore various initiatives originating from Latin America, Africa, and Asia, highlighting platforms that are free for both readers and authors. These initiatives also promote multilingualism, public funding, and non-profit, scholarly-led governance structures. We argue that the Global South’s approach offers a blueprint for a fairer, more inclusive, and more just academic publishing ecosystem.

This study investigates the perceptions of scientific journal editors in the Republic of Moldova regarding challenges and reforms in the national publishing system amidst global transformations in scholarly communication. Drawing on a national survey involving 57 editorial actors, including editors-in-chief and board members, the research explores the alignment of Moldovan journals with international standards, the formalization of editorial policies, and obstacles to indexing and internationalization. The findings reveal a publishing ecosystem in transition: editors report substantial improvements in article structure, peer review practices, and citation standardization, largely driven by national regulations. However, despite high rates of indexing in the national bibliometric platform and adoption of open access, international visibility remains limited – only 12.28% of journals are indexed in Scopus and 3.51% in Web of Science. Structural barriers such as limited funding, insufficient digital infrastructure, and a lack of skilled personnel hinder compliance with international indexing criteria. Editors also highlight the absence of coherent national policies and support mechanisms. Despite these constraints, the editorial community demonstrates strong engagement and strategic orientation. Most journals implement DOIs, ORCID identifiers, and English abstracts, reflecting efforts toward internationalization. Respondents propose policy revisions including funding schemes, infrastructure modernization, and professionalization of editorial work. The study concludes that meaningful integration into the global scientific landscape requires not only regulatory compliance but also systemic support tailored to local needs.

In the shifting terrain of scholarly communication, Romania’s academic publishing ecosystem stands at a critical juncture. This issue of the Romanian Journal of Library and Information Science offers a panoramic view of the challenges and aspirations shaping the digital society and scientific publishing in Eastern Europe. What emerges is a portrait of a system striving to modernize, yet constrained by structural inertia and uneven digital integration.