{"74015":{"#nid":"74015","#data":{"type":"news","title":"Comparing Traditional \u0026 Newer Open Access Journals","body":[{"value":"\u003Cp\u003ERising subscription costs in the 1990s forced university libraries into a \u0022serials crisis\u0022 as they cancelled many academic journals, spawning a movement toward Open Access journals, where authors pay a fee to submit or publish a paper that is available at no cost online. In 2000, the average price of a subscription to a scholarly journal was shown to have more than tripled over the previous 14 years, reflecting the publishing industry\u0027s growing consolidation and therefore, less competition. Dr. Mark McCabe, assistant professor in the School of Economics at the Georgia Institute of Technology, studies the economic viability of a new approach to academic publishing called Open Access.\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EOn February 19 at the 2005 American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Annual Meeting, McCabe will present \u0022\u003Cem\u003EThe Economics of Open Access Publishing: A Strategic Perspective\u003C\/em\u003E,\u0022 during a session entitled, \u0022Changing Scientific Publishing: Open Access and Implications for Working Scientists.\u0022\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EMcCabe will present findings from his ongoing research on scientific communication with co-author Christopher M. Snyder of George Washington University. Their research compares the traditional business model of scholarly journals in which the \u0022Reader Pays\u0022 for a (possibly electronic) subscription with the newer \u0022Author Pays\u0022 or \u0022Open Access\u0022 publishing model. \n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EMany of the findings and lessons from the seemingly narrow domain of journal publishing apply to other two-sided markets, such as telephone networks and credit card payment systems. For journals, authors who benefit from greater impact and increased citations from appearing in more prestigious journals compose one side of the market. The other side of the market is made up of the readers, who benefit from the journals\u0027 content and prefer journals with more articles.\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EMcCabe explores the conditions under which either model is \u0022best\u0022 for profits, and\/or society. McCabe and Snyder have developed a formal economic framework to study these questions and continue to build on this framework to add more realism in order to better examine the issues of which business model - \u0022Reader Pays\u0022 or \u0022Open Access\u0022 - is \u0022best.\u0022\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMajor findings include:\u003C\/strong\u003E\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EMcCabe and Snyder use a formal economic framework to sort out the complicated question of what business model is \u0022best.\u0022 The basis for this framework is the journal-mediated dynamic between readers and authors, referred to in economics literature as a \u0027two-sided\u0027 market. On one side of the market, authors benefit from greater impact and citations and thus prefer a journal that has more readers. On the other side of the market, readers benefit from content and thus prefer journals with more articles.\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EDetermining the optimal balance between these two sets of players - whether from the perspective of the publisher or society - involves measuring the benefits that each side obtains from greater or lesser participation by the other side, calculating the costs of adding (or subtracting) authors and readers, and then identifying the set of prices, i.e., the author fee and subscription price, that maximizes profits or net societal benefits.\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EMcCabe and Snyder\u0027s economic framework indicates that optimal prices will differ depending on the degree of competition in the market for journals. At one extreme, a monopoly journal seeking maximum profit will raise prices for both authors and readers, even with minimal distribution costs. Even with low distribution costs of electronic publishing, Open Access will not result in this scenario. So, journals with lower market power are more likely to adopt Open Access.  \n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EAt the other extreme, with perfect competition between equal quality journals, Open Access appears efficient when distribution costs are minimal, and author and reader benefits are roughly equal. Under these conditions, Open Access maximizes the total net benefits for authors and readers and for society as a whole.  However, if readers obtain disproportionate benefits from reading additional articles, it can be efficient to have positive reader fees in order to subsidize authors\u0027 submissions.\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003EMcCabe and Snyder have extended their economic framework to allow for articles and journals to vary in quality, which makes their model of journals more realistic.  In this work they find that editorial quality may affect the profitability of adopting Open Access. However, given some level of editorial quality, they conclude that Open Access journals are no more likely than traditional journals to boost revenue by accepting \u0022too many\u0022 articles. \n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cem\u003EThe authors\u0027 full papers are available by request.\u003C\/em\u003E\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003EMedia Contact: \u003C\/strong\u003EElizabeth Campell, 404-894-4233, \u003Ca href=\u0022mailto:elizabeth.campell@icpa.gatech.edu\u0022\u003Eelizabeth.campell@icpa.gatech.edu\u003C\/a\u003E\n\u003C\/p\u003E\n\u003Cp\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003ETechnical Contact:\u003C\/strong\u003E Mark McCabe, 404-385-0512, \u003Ca href=\u0022mailto:mark.mccabe@econ.gatech.edu\u0022\u003Emark.mccabe@econ.gatech.edu\u003C\/a\u003E\n\u003C\/p\u003E","summary":null,"format":"limited_html"}],"field_subtitle":[{"value":"Findings based on two-sided market framework"}],"field_summary":[{"value":"Dr. Mark McCabe, assistant professor in the School of Economics, studies the economic viability of a new approach to academic publishing called Open Access, where authors pay a fee to submit or publish a paper that is available at no cost online.","format":"limited_html"}],"field_summary_sentence":[{"value":"Traditional subscriptions vs. Author Pays model"}],"uid":"27301","created_gmt":"2005-02-17 01:00:00","changed_gmt":"2016-10-08 03:02:30","author":"Elizabeth Campell","boilerplate_text":"","field_publication":"","field_article_url":"","dateline":{"date":"2005-02-19T00:00:00-05:00","iso_date":"2005-02-19T00:00:00-05:00","tz":"America\/New_York"},"extras":[],"related_links":[{"url":"http:\/\/www.econ.gatech.edu\/people\/faculty\/McCabe.htm","title":"School of Economics"}],"groups":[{"id":"1214","name":"News Room"}],"categories":[{"id":"135","name":"Research"}],"keywords":[{"id":"3241","name":"human subject"},{"id":"3238","name":"IRB"},{"id":"626","name":"public policy"},{"id":"3239","name":"research ethics"},{"id":"3240","name":"review board"}],"core_research_areas":[],"news_room_topics":[],"event_categories":[],"invited_audience":[],"affiliations":[],"classification":[],"areas_of_expertise":[],"news_and_recent_appearances":[],"phone":[],"contact":[{"value":"\u003Cstrong\u003ELisa Grovenstein\u003C\/strong\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003ECommunications \u0026amp; Marketing\u003Cbr \/\u003E\u003Ca href=\u0022http:\/\/www.gatech.edu\/contact\/index.html?id=lgrovenste3\u0022\u003EContact Lisa Grovenstein\u003C\/a\u003E\u003Cbr \/\u003E\u003Cstrong\u003E404-894-8835\u003C\/strong\u003E","format":"limited_html"}],"email":["lisa.grovenstein@comm.gatech.edu"],"slides":[],"orientation":[],"userdata":""}}}