In our study with David Solomon we weighted the APCs of different journals with the number of articles they had published to arrive at the average APC of around 900 USD. For instance the impact of PloS One alone is bigger than all the 200+ journals of Bentham together. So although we didn't calculate any share for "Beall" journals their overall impact is not that big. More disturbing is the bad press they create by spamming.
Bo-Christer Quoting Richard Poynder <ri...@richardpoynder.co.uk>: > Hi Ross, > > > > Absolutely, I see no problem at all with a publisher being based in the > developing world and, as you point out, Hindawi is a good example of a > respected publisher based in a developing country. > > > > But that does not mean that one should avoid any criticism of publishers > because they are based in a certain geographical location. > > > > What I am saying is that if you put together the fact that the study > included quite a few publishers on Jeffrey Beall's list with the fact that > these publishers seem invariably to be based in the developing world (even > though some claim to be based in the US) then you might wonder whether the > average APC figure arrived at in the study could have been subject to some > bias. > > > > My point is less about the developing world than it is about predatory > publishers, and whether they ought to be included in a study aimed at > establishing the average cost of publishing in an OA journal. > > > > I do understand that Beall's list is a controversial one, but I have looked > at a number of these publishers myself and I have reached my own > conclusions. > > > > Richard > > > > > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf > Of Ross Mounce > Sent: 13 December 2012 09:59 > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Interview with Harvard's Stuart Shieber > > > > On 13 December 2012 09:32, Richard Poynder <ri...@richardpoynder.co.uk > <mailto:ri...@richardpoynder.co.uk> > wrote: > > I believe this latter study included a number of publishers based in the > developing world > > > > Hi Richard, > > > > > > I hope you see nothing wrong in a number of publishers being based in the > 'developing world' ? > > Hindawi are perhaps one such publisher, if one classes Egypt as a > 'developing world' country. You've even written yourself that there tends to > be perhaps an unjust bias against 'developing world' publishers > http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/the-oa-interviews-ahmed-hindawi-founde > r.html > > > > Can you please make clear what you mean by what you said? > > I don't want to encourage assessments of quality purely based upon > geographic location. > > > > Best, > > > > Ross > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
