Re:Editors quit top neuroscience journal to protest against ...
by AraceliHarker on Friday April 21, 2023 @11:32AM
(#35655264)
This is because academics are assessed on their achievements based on how many articles they have published in prestigious journals.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Editors quit top neuroscience journal to protest against ...
by JumpCrisscross on Friday April 21, 2023 @11:35AM
(#35655338)
> is because academics are assessed on their achievements based on how many articles they have published in prestigious journals
Why have these companies been so successful at curating prestigious journals?
I hate our academic publishing model. But I'm careful dismissing the journals as pure rent seekers. Their is a source to their staying power beyond merely habit.
Re:Editors quit top neuroscience journal to protest against ...
by ska on Friday April 21, 2023 @11:56AM
(#35655699)
Part of it is momentum, they date back from when a) everything was on paper, and b) producing and distributing the paper was hard.
However, I suspect much of the staying power is that organizing and executing on a top tier journal, or equivalently replacing it, is real work - and it is real work with no model for getting paid for or otherwise compensated for in an academic career.
There is also some value to being arms-length. A few top universities could gang together to pay for a flight of journals, but there would understandably be concerns about acceptance policies, etc.
Re:Editors quit top neuroscience journal to protest against ...
by joquarky on Friday April 21, 2023 @09:41PM
(#35662494)
It feels like they are subjecting themselves to the consequences of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law