Spanish philosophers perceptions of pay to publish and open access: books versus journals, more than a financial dilemma

TL;DR

This study explores Spanish philosophers' perceptions and practices regarding pay-to-publish and open access, highlighting differences between books and journals, and discussing implications for equity and dissemination.

Contribution

It provides new insights into the specific habits, perceptions, and debates of philosophers in Spain concerning open access and pay-to-publish practices, an under-researched area.

Findings

Pay-to-publish is widespread for books but modest for journals.

Researchers have diverse criteria for selecting publication venues.

Debates exist over the impact of pay-to-publish on review quality and access.

Abstract

This study examines habits and perceptions related to pay to publish and open access practices in fields that have attracted little research to date: philosophy and ethics. The study is undertaken in the Spanish context, where the culture of publication and the book and journal publishing industry has some specific characteristics with regard to paying to publish, such as not offering open access distribution of books published for a fee. The study draws on data from a survey of 201 researchers, a public debate with 26 researchers, and 14 in-depth interviews. The results reveal some interesting insights on the criteria researchers apply when selecting publishers and journals for their work, the extent of paying to publish (widespread in the case of books and modest for journals) and the debates that arise over the effects it has on manuscript review and unequal access to resources to cover publication fees. Data on the extent of open access and the researchers views on dissemination of publicly funded research are also presented.