Ancestors

Written by Mikkel Roald-Arbøl on 2024-09-23 at 18:55

When academic societies keep their journals in the big publishing houses, what do they get in return? Cheap or free infrastructure? Or do they even still pay even for that?

I’m trying to wrap my head around what it would take for societies to transition their journals elsewhere (or have their own infrastructure). Can anyone pitch in with experience?

[#]ScholarlyPublishing

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from roaldarboel@neuromatch.social

Written by jonny (good kind) on 2024-09-24 at 02:19

@roaldarboel it's gotta be the infra, and i would bet they still pay , if not just as a cut of the APC.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from jonny@neuromatch.social

Written by jonny (good kind) on 2024-09-24 at 02:21

@roaldarboel hosting journals is genuinely hard. there are a decent amount of turnkey 'just runs' journal platform programs, but they keep getting abandoned or bought, though PKP just did the deal to become the platform for the EU and hcommons is doing stuff i love.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from jonny@neuromatch.social

Written by Lisa Schiff on 2024-09-24 at 02:53

@jonny @roaldarboel See my post above. Many of us at institutionally support libraries are doing it! https://librarypublishing.org/ https://escholarship.org

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lschiff@mastodon.sdf.org

Written by Jess F on 2024-09-24 at 02:58

@lschiff

@jonny @roaldarboel I ❤️ LPC!!

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from j_feral@digipres.club

Written by Björn Brembs on 2024-09-24 at 06:30

@j_feral @lschiff @jonny@neuromatch.social @roaldarboel

Yes, lot's of libraries run their own journals (our's does, too), so that's a good stop-gap.

However, I think the biggest problem isn't technical, but conceptual. Many societies are simply not "societies" any more, in the original meaning of the word:

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.230207

Remedy this and all else will follow.

See, e.g., hcommons that @jonny@social.coop also referenced. With a scholarly mindset, even today's societies can again become "societies".

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from brembs@mastodon.social

Written by Mikkel Roald-Arbøl on 2024-09-24 at 07:36

@brembs @j_feral @lschiff @jonny @jonny@social.coop It's crazy coming at this, still, a bit blue-eyed. When I think of societies, I'm thinking small-ish congregations of nerds (in the best possible sense of the word, proud nerd). So these mega-societies are a really strange size to me. SfN, AAAS, ACS, they all seem to operate much more like businesses (e.g. with large exec salaries).

Regarding their publications, they all have high-prestige journals. Do you think that the journals derive their prestige from being under the umbrella of a large, esteemed society; or is that mostly a marketing gimmick (unfolded over many years)? If e.g. SfN were to take Journal of Neuroscience to a PKP platform, would the authors follow? (in this hypothetical scenario we don't care about the vast amount of money they surely lose from such a deal).

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from roaldarboel@neuromatch.social

Written by jonny (good kind) on 2024-09-24 at 07:40

@roaldarboel @brembs @j_feral @lschiff @jonny@social.coop

prestige is a mutually beneficial relationship for all who abide by the terms of the game. "we gain exposure for our authors and induce more submissions as a function of being plugged into {the big journal recommendation system}."

there is no incentive in self-hosting for a large society, it's bad for the bottom line, bad for operational stability, bad for the prestige of their top authors. there is little appeal to the upper end of the hierarchy to do things ethically that i'm aware of

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from jonny@neuromatch.social

Toot

Written by Mikkel Roald-Arbøl on 2024-09-24 at 21:08

@jonny @brembs @j_feral @lschiff @jonny@social.coop Yeah, makes sense.

Does this in effect also leave us in a place where big societies=bad and small societies=good?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from roaldarboel@neuromatch.social

Descendants

Written by Ulrike Hahn on 2024-09-24 at 22:22

@roaldarboel @jonny@neuromatch.social @brembs @j_feral @lschiff @jonny@social.coop that’s just one dimension of variation, no? academic discipline matters too: medicine and technology adjacent fields seem a completely different proposition to the humanities.

I don’t think a model of science or academia where each discipline is viewed as an island that needs to be self sustaining is a viable model, and that’s a dimension I’m missing in this discussion.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from UlrikeHahn@fediscience.org

Written by Lisa Schiff on 2024-09-24 at 22:58

@UlrikeHahn @roaldarboel @jonny@neuromatch.social @brembs @j_feral @jonny@social.coop I don't think small or big is the question, it's just that small societies typically have fewer resources. And as @UlrikeHahn points out, that is just one dimension of difference to consider, not the only one, and not always the most important one.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lschiff@mastodon.sdf.org

Written by Mikkel Roald-Arbøl on 2024-09-25 at 06:13

@UlrikeHahn @jonny @brembs @j_feral @lschiff @jonny@social.coop That’s very likely - I have no idea about what humanities societies look like. What are some big and small societies we could look at as examples?

One reason I focus on natural and medical sciences (besides them being my fields) is that they pull the vast majority of funding. CNS papers are a thing because stakes are so high in those disciplines. So the aforementioned natural and medical societies seem like places where inertia towards change would be the largest. And the bigger the society, the larger sums, the more inertia towards change. My impression of the humanities (which might well be off) is that the money is much smaller and that they are generally much more open to change.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from roaldarboel@neuromatch.social

Written by Björn Brembs on 2024-09-25 at 06:18

@roaldarboel @UlrikeHahn @jonny@neuromatch.social @j_feral @lschiff @jonny@social.coop

We have some examples in our paper:

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.230207

Personally, for me the most shining example of how to do it is HCommons, with their own Mastodon instance:

https://hcommons.social/about

We wouldn't be having this conversation if all societies had their mindset.

Oh, and yes to your guess about money, of course.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from brembs@mastodon.social

Proxy Information
Original URL
gemini://mastogem.picasoft.net/thread/113194571471531910
Status Code
Success (20)
Meta
text/gemini
Capsule Response Time
330.856259 milliseconds
Gemini-to-HTML Time
3.397901 milliseconds

This content has been proxied by September (3851b).