Lazy ass peer reviewers (and authors), although it's also probably the editor/publisher doing open access/pay to publish as well. The journal's impact factor isn't horrible (5.5), but they're open access and charge authors $3,300 per article to publish.

Right now, the science publishing industry has two predatory models: traditional closed access publishing that bilks universities/libraries, and open access publishing that bilks researchers. The people who actually do the review (editors and peer reviewers) are paid little or nothing, so all those fees are pure profit/rent, especially as most publishing is electronic. So, this article is just a more obvious grift than others.

[–] RyanGosling@hexbear.net 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

How would it be a grift? How would the research benefit if they had to pay thousands to publish their rat penis

[–] JohnBrownsBussy2@hexbear.net 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Researchers need to publish papers to advance in their career. Complete your pHD, get a faculty position, apply for grants, fulfill grant obligations, go up for promotion, etc... depends on publishing papers, and preferably in high impact journals.

As for the term "grift," probably not the right one to use.

[–] RyanGosling@hexbear.net 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well yeah I know why researchers need to publish their research I just wasn’t sure how grifting is applicable. Unless they mean that’s what the publication is doing.

[–] HexBroke@hexbear.net 2 points 2 years ago

Isn't all grifting undertaken for improvement in one's material conditions?

I'm not sure how it's different