I have dabbled once with open access journals, and it ended up being a bad idea! We found the journal online and read some of the articles in it to be intriguing. We found it odd, however, that our article was accepted within a day of submitting and that we had to sign over the copyright BEFORE paying. We decided not to do that, and luckily, our paper was accepted in a peer-reviewed journal.
I decided to look up a psychology article through “Scientific Research Publishing.” It claims to be peer-reviewed, although the company is known for some predatory tactics. Its headquarters are in Wuhan, China.
The journal Psychology is the publishing companies psychology international journal. And, it takes EVERYTHING psychology related. I am so used to journals that are specific to a topic (I have my favorite journals I submit to), that it is bizarre to see how many fields this journal covers. The journal vows to spread scientific ideas of any psychological field. While I like this idea, I think the journal was too disjointed to make sense.
What I did like about it was the authors of the various articles were from all around the world. There was research done in Vietnam, and Mexico, and Iran, and Venezuela, and China, and Italy, among several others. While some were general research, others were specific to populations in those countries. An issue we often have in the university setting is we get white, college students for our studies. It makes generalization very difficult and usually impossible.
I was also surprised with the editorial board, as it includes individuals from all over the world (although still mostly from the US). What is funny is I looked up the editor-in-chief for the journal. On his webpage of interests, he included editorial boards he is on. He did not include this journal on his list….
To publish in the journal, there is a fee. For articles that have 10 or fewer pages, it costs an easy $700 (sarcasm). For each additional page over 10, it costs $50. Easy money…
I have many issues with the concept of open access journals. I know a lot have been accused of plagiarism and fraud. I like the idea behind spreading scientific knowledge far and wide, allowing people to see what was done so others can build upon it. That is what science is. But the method needs to change. Paying $700 is ridiculous, and while there is a claim that there is a peer review, the fact that my one submission took only a day says that either this is false, or one person reviewed it. Having a critique is crucial for scientists to make sure all possible issues are addressed or alternative hypotheses are thought about.