IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v12y2024i4p46-d1537327.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interactions of Publication Volume, Journal Impact, and Article Processing Charges: Comparative Study of China and Global Practices in Nature Portfolio

Author

Listed:
  • Xinyi Chen

    (Editorial Office of Electrochemical Energy Reviews, Periodicals Agency of Shanghai University, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

Abstract

In the commercial realm, the annual publication volume (PUB) significantly influences the business models of article processing charge (APC)-based open access (OA) journals, though it may negatively impact journal reputation. Despite this, the interactions among APC, PUB, and the Journal Citation Indicator (JCI)—a key marker of journal reputation—have not been thoroughly examined. The objective of this study is to reveal the interactions among APC, PUB, and JCI, determine if there are differences between the interactions inside and outside of China, and uncover the possible mechanisms enabling dominant publishers to set APC prices without compromising their market position. Through cross-correlation and linear regression analyses, our findings reveal distinct APC business models between China and the rest of the international OA journal landscape. Specifically, while both cases demonstrate a proportional relationship between APC and JCI, China exhibits an inverse relationship between APC and PUB, contrasting with the global trend. This suggests that the business model in China sets an “optimized” PUB for Chinese APC-based OA journals, which would pose challenges for journal management and the expansion of the domestic APC-based OA market volume. In the rest of the international context, by contrast, the business model supports a proactive annual increase in APC list prices driven by the proportional relationships between APC and PUB. These insights underscore the need for more nuanced APC business models that can adapt to regional variations in funder requirements and policy expectations.

Suggested Citation

  • Xinyi Chen, 2024. "Interactions of Publication Volume, Journal Impact, and Article Processing Charges: Comparative Study of China and Global Practices in Nature Portfolio," Publications, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:12:y:2024:i:4:p:46-:d:1537327
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/12/4/46/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/12/4/46/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oliver Budzinski & Thomas Grebel & Jens Wolling & Xijie Zhang, 2020. "Drivers of article processing charges in open access," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2185-2206, September.
    2. Xianwen Wang & Chen Liu & Wenli Mao & Zhichao Fang, 2015. "Erratum to: The open access advantage considering citation, article usage and social media attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(3), pages 1149-1149, June.
    3. Katharine Sanderson, 2023. "Who should pay for open-access publishing? APC alternatives emerge," Nature, Nature, vol. 623(7987), pages 472-473, November.
    4. Lin Zhang & Yahui Wei & Ying Huang & Gunnar Sivertsen, 2022. "Should open access lead to closed research? The trends towards paying to perform research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7653-7679, December.
    5. Bo-Christer Björk & David Solomon, 2015. "Article processing charges in OA journals: relationship between price and quality," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 373-385, May.
    6. Xianwen Wang & Chen Liu & Wenli Mao & Zhichao Fang, 2015. "The open access advantage considering citation, article usage and social media attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 555-564, May.
    7. Sumiko Asai, 2020. "Market power of publishers in setting article processing charges for open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 1037-1049, May.
    8. Cleusa Pavan & Marcia C. Barbosa, 2018. "Article processing charge (APC) for publishing open access articles: the Brazilian scenario," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 805-823, November.
    9. Abdelghani Maddi & David Sapinho, 2022. "Article processing charges, altmetrics and citation impact: Is there an economic rationale?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7351-7368, December.
    10. Rosângela Schwarz Rodrigues & Ernest Abadal & Breno Kricheldorf Hermes de Araújo, 2020. "Open access publishers: The new players," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-13, June.
    11. Holly Else, 2018. "Radical open-access plan could spell end to journal subscriptions," Nature, Nature, vol. 561(7721), pages 17-18, September.
    12. Abdelghani Maddi & David / Sapinho, 2022. "Article Processing Charges, Altmetrics and Citation Impact: Is there an economic rationale?," Post-Print hal-03552377, HAL.
    13. Layal Liverpool, 2023. "Open-access reformers launch next bold publishing plan," Nature, Nature, vol. 623(7986), pages 238-240, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sumiko Asai, 2023. "Does double dipping occur? The case of Wiley’s hybrid journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(9), pages 5159-5168, September.
    2. María Bordons & Borja González-Albo & Luz Moreno-Solano, 2023. "Improving our understanding of open access: how it relates to funding, internationality of research and scientific leadership," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4651-4676, August.
    3. Fernanda Morillo, 2020. "Is open access publication useful for all research fields? Presence of funding, collaboration and impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 689-716, October.
    4. Hajar Sotudeh & Zohreh Estakhr, 2018. "Sustainability of open access citation advantage: the case of Elsevier’s author-pays hybrid open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 563-576, April.
    5. Abdelghani Maddi & David Sapinho, 2023. "On the culture of open access: the Sci-hub paradox," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5647-5658, October.
    6. Liwei Zhang & Liang Ma, 2023. "Is open science a double-edged sword?: data sharing and the changing citation pattern of Chinese economics articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 2803-2818, May.
    7. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    8. Lin Zhang & Yahui Wei & Ying Huang & Gunnar Sivertsen, 2022. "Should open access lead to closed research? The trends towards paying to perform research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7653-7679, December.
    9. Liwei Zhang & Liang Ma, 2024. "Different open access routes, varying societal impacts: evidence from the Royal Society biological journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3407-3431, June.
    10. Hajar Sotudeh & Zeinab Saber & Farzin Ghanbari Aloni & Mahdieh Mirzabeigi & Farshad Khunjush, 2022. "A longitudinal study of the evolution of opinions about open access and its main features: a twitter sentiment analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(10), pages 5587-5611, October.
    11. Barbara McGillivray & Mathias Astell, 2019. "The relationship between usage and citations in an open access mega-journal," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 817-838, November.
    12. Ying Guo & Xiantao Xiao, 2022. "Author-level altmetrics for the evaluation of Chinese scholars," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(2), pages 973-990, February.
    13. Zhentao Liang & Jin Mao & Kun Lu & Gang Li, 2021. "Finding citations for PubMed: a large-scale comparison between five freely available bibliographic data sources," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9519-9542, December.
    14. Liwei Zhang & Jue Wang, 2021. "What affects publications’ popularity on Twitter?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 9185-9198, November.
    15. Li, Huixu & Liu, Lanjian & Wang, Xianwen, 2021. "The open access effect in social media exposure of scholarly articles: A matched-pair analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    16. Siluo Yang & Xin Xing & Dietmar Wolfram, 2018. "Difference in the impact of open-access papers published by China and the USA," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 1017-1037, May.
    17. Guoqiang Liang & Haiyan Hou & Qiao Chen & Zhigang Hu, 2020. "Diffusion and adoption: an explanatory model of “question mark” and “rising star” articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 219-232, July.
    18. Zhiqi Wang & Wolfgang Glänzel & Yue Chen, 2020. "The impact of preprints in Library and Information Science: an analysis of citations, usage and social attention indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1403-1423, November.
    19. Guangyao Zhang & Yuqi Wang & Weixi Xie & Han Du & Chunlin Jiang & Xianwen Wang, 2021. "The open access usage advantage: a temporal and spatial analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6187-6199, July.
    20. Bikun Chen, 2018. "Usage pattern comparison of the same scholarly articles between Web of Science (WoS) and Springer," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 519-537, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:12:y:2024:i:4:p:46-:d:1537327. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.