A GameStop model for Scientific manuscripts
Image credit: plugrafico from Pixabay
Shireesh Apte May 22, 2022
Please leave the feedback on this idea
Is it original or innovative?
Is it feasible?
Is it targeting an unsolved problem?
Is it concisely described?
Bounty for the best solution
Provide a bounty for the best solution
Bounties attract serious brainpower to the challenge.
Some Journals - and publishers - charge to download scientific manuscipts published in their Journals and platforms. These fees are usually steep and beyond the reach of researchers in poor nations who can consequently not access them. Notwithstanding the emergence of open access Journals, the most cited and relevant research is still published in pay-to-view scientific journals. I propose a model where the market determines what fees are charged for viewing published manuscripts based on:
- the number of downloads that the manuscript has within X days after publication (rather than charging exorbitant flat fees). 3. Allow 'reselling' manuscripts directly from researchers and have part of the proceeds go to the publishing house (AKA the GameStop model). Prime idea for a 'ManuscriptStop' business model with a central hub-website.
This will allow access to a much greater number of scientists, which is directly proportional to a greater number of ideas generated.
Allowing both, publishers to cover their expenses and researchers to earn
J. Nikola May 24, 2022
The fees cannot be avoided yet
I think the idea is good, but the general idea of free information is a lie. The internet is full of articles, knowledge, and papers, but it's not free. We pay by our personal data, browsing histories, and by watching ads. Concerning the scientific papers, they try to maximize the signal and reduce the noise by strong peer-reviewing, fees, and non-marketing policies. As you maybe noticed, there was never a single ad in the scientific paper. That's why I think the fees for the papers cannot be avoided; the expenses are real.
However, the idea of a certain percentage of the earnings going to the researchers seems cool.
I checked some open access fees and they are mostly between 2000 and 4000 USD, depending on the journal. Let's now consider this price to be an adequate amount of money for the publishers to pay for their expenses of proofreading, editing, and publishing the paper. Now, if you take this price and divide it by the average price of a paper published in non-open access, which is around 10-30 USD, that would mean that every such paper is downloaded at least 100 times on average.
Based on the above mentioned, I suggest two models how researchers could earn money from their papers:
- Cash back for the papers that reach a certain number of downloads for open access
- Earning money for the papers that reach a certain number of downloads for non-open access
Explanation: If that's the price (2000-4000 USD) needed for the publishers to pay the proof-reading, editing and publishing the paper, then it could be set as a point from which, for every next download, a researcher also gets 5% cashback of the average paper price (for open access), or a 5% of the paper price (for non-opne access) - a concept similar to selling music.
What do you think?