Options

PeerJ - a new open access publisher

PeerJ is a new open access publisher for biology and medical science.

I saw it discussed here. I liked this, from one of the comments:

[...] it’s unquestionable that Elsevier and other barrier-based publishers used to be good things. But those days are long over. For a decade or more, now, they have been a net negative for science. The Shirky Principle describes precisely what they are doing: “Institutions will try to preserve the problem to which they are the solution”.

Comments

  • 1.

    PeerJ charge $99 for a lifetime membership which allows you to publish one paper a year. This is from the PeerJ FAQ:

    What if I don't do a review when asked? And how often may I be asked?

    We aim to make PeerJ a community, and no one is forced to provide a review if they choose not to do so. To help the community though, we are incentivizing participation by asking members to submit a review at least once per year (and we consider a 'review' to be an informal comment on a submission to PeerJ PrePrints; a formally requested peer-review of a paper submitted to PeerJ; or an informal comment on a published paper). If you choose not to perform at least one review every 12 months, then at our discretion your membership will lapse and you will need to pay $99 to reactivate your membership the next time you want to publish with PeerJ. We think this give-and-take is fair to the community as it incentivizes participation in the ongoing task of peer review and will collectively reduce everyone's burden.

    I think that's interesting: it is creeping towards the idea that academics pay one another for reviews.

    Comment Source:PeerJ charge $99 for a lifetime membership which allows you to publish one paper a year. This is from the PeerJ FAQ: > What if I don't do a review when asked? And how often may I be asked? > We aim to make PeerJ a community, and no one is forced to provide a review if they choose not to do so. To help the community though, we are incentivizing participation by asking members to submit a review at least once per year (and we consider a 'review' to be an informal comment on a submission to PeerJ PrePrints; a formally requested peer-review of a paper submitted to PeerJ; or an informal comment on a published paper). If you choose not to perform at least one review every 12 months, then at our discretion your membership will lapse and you will need to pay $99 to reactivate your membership the next time you want to publish with PeerJ. We think this give-and-take is fair to the community as it incentivizes participation in the ongoing task of peer review and will collectively reduce everyone's burden. I think that's interesting: it is creeping towards the idea that academics pay one another for reviews.
  • 2.

    That sounds interesting!

    Natural Computing by Springer takes papers on a range of topics including Petri Nets --- one of the core topics is "Evolutionary & Developmental Biology".

    They have some open access options which I should probably look into more, since I'm on the editorial board. I hope some Azimuth related projects are finished and sent there, particularly, the Petri Net Programming stuff, after it's developed for a while, might fit into their scope!

    Comment Source:That sounds interesting! <a href="http://www.springer.com/computer/theoretical+computer+science/journal/11047 ">Natural Computing</a> by Springer takes papers on a range of topics including Petri Nets --- one of the core topics is "Evolutionary & Developmental Biology". They have some open access options which I should probably look into more, since I'm on the editorial board. I hope some Azimuth related projects are finished and sent there, particularly, the Petri Net Programming stuff, after it's developed for a while, might fit into their scope!
  • 3.

    I just noticed that there is a biology counterpart of arXiv growing in beta version: http://biorxiv.org

    Comment Source:I just noticed that there is a biology counterpart of arXiv growing in beta version: <http://biorxiv.org>
  • 4.

    Yes, I have two papers there. I guess I didn't like PeerJ so much after all!

    Comment Source:Yes, I have [two](http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2014/12/11/003178 ) [papers](http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2014/12/11/010199) there. I guess I didn't like PeerJ so much after all!
Sign In or Register to comment.