Peter Suber unpacks the relationship between prestige and journal publishing in “Thoughts on Prestige, Quality, and Open Access.” He argues that, despite suggestions to the contrary, the institutional emphasis on prestige in the academy does not have to be a barrier to open access (OA), which many feel is not as prestigious as toll access (TA) publishing. Prestige is not an obstacle to green OA, as authors may have the option to deposit pre- or post-prints of their TA articles in repositories. But prestige is more of a challenge for gold OA, “but only because gold OA journals are new” (127). Suber is careful to underline that many TA journals are viewed as more prestigious simply because they have been established for longer, so have built up a standard of quality that is self-fulfilling. Some OA journals have also reached this degree of prestige, but more will as they age and become more established, and in doing so attract more and more authors. In the meantime, Suber suggests that universities re-assume the role of quality assurers, rather than allowing commercial publishers to suggest that research is of high quality due to its publication in (their) high ranking journal.

Work cited

Suber, Peter. 2010. “Thoughts on Prestige, Quality, and Open Access.” Logos 21 (1): 115–28. https://doi.org/10.1163/095796510X546959