Encouraged by the University of California's widely-discussed decision to push back against Elsevier:https://www.chronicle.com/article/U-of-California-System/245798 …
Show this thread
-
So I think the "successful" publishers are not necessarily those providing best value social benefit but those that are providing the best return on potential career success for the author(s). How do you encourage the consumer to also value social benefit and cost-efficiency?
IMO, you want a situation where the entire system - including the reputation economy - functions for social benefit. Ideally, researcher incentives, publisher incentives, library incentives, university incentives etc all align toward social benefit. We're a long way from that
-
-
To your initial question about splitting the market in two, I certainly agree there is a reputation economy component. But both those things are interrelated aspects of a larger system. It's the larger system which would ideally operate well!
-
Thanks for your response Michael. I guess I focus on the consequences of the reputation economy not being aligned with social benefit right now. A tough situ to improve, given no working replacement for impact factor yet (afaik) despite well-known problems. Useful to discuss!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.