Subject: Re: New channel of support for open-access publishing
Journals with 90% rejection rates, like Nature, Science and Cell have
considerably higher editorial costs (per published paper) than those
with
rejection rates of 40%-60%, which is an average value for
middle-of-the-road
biomedical journals
channel of support for open-access publishing
Stevan Harnad writes
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Thomas Krichel wrote:
$1500 per paper should be amply sufficient to fund the
publishing operation. I suggest that libraries support other
ventures with more moderate charges.
Thomas, did
There is another payoff to the practice of charging for all
submissions, that authors will less likely to breakdown their
articles into multiple smaller publications to add lines to their
resume. However, I would suggest a lower submission fee and a
larger publication fee once the article has
For immediate release
January 14, 2004
For more information, contact:
Helen Doyle, Public Library of Science, +1 415.624.1217, hdo...@plos.org or
see http://www.plos.org/support.
NEW CHANNEL OF SUPPORT FOR OPEN-ACCESS PUBLISHING
Public Library of Science Announces Launch of Institutional
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Thomas Krichel wrote:
$1500 per paper should be amply sufficient to fund the
publishing operation. I suggest that libraries support other
ventures with more moderate charges.
Thomas, did you mean $500 ? Otherwise your posting does not quite
make sense. (PLoS is
Stevan Harnad writes
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Thomas Krichel wrote:
$1500 per paper should be amply sufficient to fund the
publishing operation. I suggest that libraries support other
ventures with more moderate charges.
Thomas, did you mean $500 ? Otherwise your posting does not
Journals with 90% rejection rates, like Nature, Science and Cell have
considerably higher editorial costs (per published paper) than those with
rejection rates of 40%-60%, which is an average value for middle-of-the-road
biomedical journals. Nearly the same effort goes into peer reviewing a
