A few notes on the first 3,000

Followup: some notes on the first 3,000 journals–partly to show just how unrepresentative any sample is. Compare this to the first21,000… This is not at all a representative sample (I sort by publisher, then journal, because that speeds things up).

Some typos correcvted 1/28

A few items do seem interesting.

  • Of the 2,826 journals for which data has been recorded (174 are either unavailable or have malware issues), 1,086 have fees.
  • Of that 1,086, I find that ten have submission fees–and 20 others have both submission and processing fees. 101 others have fees that vary based on article length (I don’t record that if the surcharge begins at 15 pages or higher).
  • In 68 of the 1,086 cases, I gathered the fee status and amount from the DOAJ record because it was not easy to locate within the journal’s website.
  • Malware is still with us: 78 of the 174 for which I don’t yet have data recorded were flagged by Malwarebytes–an uncomfortably high figure. 71 others don’t seem to be there or are unworkable…and two aren’t OA journals, AFAICT.
  • In 56 cases where I do have data, the URL in DOAJ did not yield the website but a journal title search in Chrome did yield the website.
  • At DOAJ’s request, I’ve sent them the spreadsheet segment involving malware and unavailability. If the project continues, I’ll do that for every 3,000 journals.

Comments are closed.