<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On 2012-10-12, at 10:32 AM, Sally Morris wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>high IF journals tend to reject a higher %<br>of articles than low or no IF journals. Accepted articles have to bear a<br>share of the costs of processing these articles up to the point of<br>rejection. <br></div></blockquote></div><br><div>This is exactly why post-Green Gold will be just a <a href="http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/21348/">no-fault</a> peer-review</div><div>service: <i>Accepted papers will no longer be paying for rejected ones.</i></div><div><br></div><div>Gold OA costs will be <i>per round of refereeing, regardless of outcome</i>.</div><div>If/when a paper meets a journal's acceptance standards with no further</div><div>need for revision, "publication" will be cerified by the journal's imprimatur.</div><div><br></div><div>All the access-provision and archiving will be done by the distributed</div><div>global network of Green OA institutional repositories.</div><div><br></div><div>And journals will only be motivated to create and maintain a track-record</div><div>for high quality, to attract submissions seeking certification of having met</div><div>those standards. But papers that meet the standards will no longer be</div><div>subsidizing the costs of refereeing papers that do not.</div><div><br></div><div>And of course there will continue to be a hierarchy of journals, and </div><div>their corresponding peer-review quality standards, since human</div><div>endeavor is inevitably Gaussian, and selectivity percentiles are </div><div>selectivity percentiles.</div><div><br></div><div>Authors will not pick journals by their price (which will be the same, per round)</div><div>but by their quality standards. And even if their paper fails to meet the standards</div><div>of a journal whose quality is higher than a given author can reach, authors will</div><div>still benefit from the recommendations made by the referees of that higher-standard</div><div>journal in revising their paper for a journal more appropriate for its quality level.</div><div><br></div><div>(And to minimize their costs, authors will make more effort to choose</div><div>journals commensurate with the quality of their articles, instead of all</div><div>trying for the top journals, and thereby increasing the cost of the accepted</div><div>articles, as now, in the acceptance-based subscription and Gold OA</div><div>system.)</div><div><br></div><div>But for all these good things, we first have to mandate Green globally…</div><div><br></div><div>Stevan Harnad</div></body></html>