To Publish Scientific Journals: For Some, the Big Business of the Century

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0

Abstract

This brief commentary addresses the escalating issues within the scientific publishing industry. The author highlights the proliferation of predatory journals and the adoption of similar profit-driven models by established publishers. He points out the ethical dilemma posed by Gold Open Access (OA) journals, which charge significant Article Publishing Charges (APC) to authors while not compensating peer reviewers. The commentary underscores the resulting strain on the peer-review process, with a decline in the availability and quality of reviewers. The author observes a shift from the traditional reciprocal peer-review system to one burdened by challenges, including shortened review deadlines, reliance on less experienced reviewers, and instances of manuscripts being unreviewed. He advocates for compensating reviewers if authors are charged for publication, warning that the current system risks the integrity of peer-reviewed research. Finally, the commentary applauds initiatives like the resignation of editorial board members from Elsevier journals to start non-profit journals, urging scientific communities to regain control of scholarly publishing.
Full text 621 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
There is a newer version available for this {{ publicationType }}. View latest version {{ publication.field_name }} {{ publication.subfield_name }} Copyright: © {{ publicationYear }} {{ publication.presentation_authors[0].full_name + (publication.presentation_authors.length > 1 ? ' et al' : '') }}. This is an open access publication distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Check the {{ publicationType | capitalize }} Source for copyright and license information. Listen on

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2024) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-06-02T02:00:03.124865+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0