[***SPAM***] Re: [SIGMETRICS] PLOS ONE Output Falls Following Impact Factor Decline

[Bosman, J.M. (Jeroen)]

Albert,

Although as a librarian I would like to support your statement and claim more money from my institution I think the unsustainability of the subscription model is more fundamental and not a consequence of discrete policy or actions of stakeholders. It is caused by the unique value of each and every publication combined with ever growing publication volumes. Consider a tiny but broad research institution. To carry out top research they would need access to all journals, which is simply impossible to afford under the subscription model of access provision, thus preventing optimal research. The problem is becoming more apparent because of price increases that are at least partly due to increasing publication volumes. Any lasting solution should make it possible for anyone to access all published research. That means either a pay-per-view system or open access. The pay-per-view approach is not ideal because determining whether something is relevant requires full text access. That leaves open access as the only long term sustainable solution. Giving more money to libraries, and thus sticking with the subscription model, is not a long term solution.

Jeroen Bosman
Utrecht University Library

Op 3 jul. 2014 om 16:05 heeft "Al Henderson" <chessnic at COMPUSERVE.COM<mailto:chessnic at COMPUSERVE.COM>> het volgende geschreven:

y not financially feasible anymore," it is because universities chose to decimate library spending. Beginning around 1970, they began to shift the financial burden of what Vennevar Bush called "conserving the knowledge" from universities to individual readers. Open Access has shifted it further -- to authors.

The decision to promote financial inputs for research, which creates journal articles, while demoting support for the output may have enhanced university profitability. But it fails to serve the basic goals of research.

The drop in PLOS ONE impact factor ratings probably has many causes, but it seems to me authors seeking readers may have found better results from being published in more specialized, well-targeted media. I wonder how many PLOS ONE articles were first rejected by editors elsewhere.

Best wishes,

Albert Henderson
former editor, Publishing Research Quarterly


-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen J Bensman <notsjb at LSU.EDU<mailto:notsjb at LSU.EDU>>
To: SIGMETRICS <SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>>
Sent: Thu, Jul 3, 2014 8:59 am
Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] PLOS ONE Output Falls Following Impact Factor Decline



I understand that it costs $3500 to have an article published in PLOS ONE.
Times have been tough economically in the world, and this may have something to
do with the drop in submissions and publication.  You can post on arXiv for
nothing, and Google will get you there.  Google Scholar metrics show high
retrieval rates  from certain subject categories in arXiv.  This is the time not
of the open access journal but the open access institutional repository.  The
scientific journal system is probably not financially feasible anymore, given
high cancellation rates by academic libraries, and the open access institutional
repository will probably replace it..


Stephen J Bensman, Ph.D.
LSU Libraries
Lousiana State University
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
USA


-----Original Message-----
From: ASIS&T Special Interest Group on Metrics [mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU?>]
On Behalf Of Paul Colin Gloster
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 4:51 AM
To: SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU<mailto:SIGMETRICS at LISTSERV.UTK.EDU>
Subject: Re: [SIGMETRICS] PLOS ONE Output Falls Following Impact Factor Decline



Philip Davis sent:
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"Can the recent drop in February PLOS ONE publication figures be explained by|
|a decline in their Impact Factor last June?                                  |
|                                                                             |
|see:                                                                         |
|PLOS ONE Output Falls Following Impact Factor Decline                        |
| http://wp.me/pcvbl-9sV"                                                     |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Hari M. Gupta, José R. Campanha, and Rosana A. G. Pesce, "Power-Law
Distributions for the Citation Index of Scientific Publications and Scientists",
"Brazilian Journal of Physics", vol. 35, no. 4A, December, 2005
claimed:
"[. . .]
Table I: Citations of the 20 most cited physicists from January 1981 to June
1997 [. . .] Table II: Citations of the 20 most cited chemists from January 1981
to June 1997 [. . .] [. . .] It is interesting to note that only two of them
(P.W. Anderson, and K. A. Muller, at the 13th and 17th places, respectively),
out of the 20 most cited physicists, and six (J. A. Pople, R. R. Ernst, J. M.
Lehn, R. E. Smalley, E.
J. Corey, and K. Tanaka, at the 2nd, 4th, 10th, 12th, 16th, and 20th places,
respectively), out of the 20 most cited chemists, are Nobel laureates.
[. . .]"

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmetrics/attachments/20140703/ed64d60e/attachment.html>