The world of scientific publishing changed exponentially in the past decade: More journals join forces to recommend authors to upload their manuscripts to preprint servers; Code and data are required to be made publicly available for replication. At the same time, journals are providing open access options, sometimes exclusively, which means that authors must pay a large amount of money (e.g., up to €9,500) for publishing one single paper. Journals also seek for new publishing models. For instance, the online journal eLife is running a new model of no rejection after peer review. Our generation is facing the rapid evolution of research publishing. We have noticed that researchers have different thoughts on these changes. Topics will include but not limit to: cultural changes regarding assessment of funding and paper quality; what model is more accessible – higher publication fees & open access vs. reader fees; auxiliary materials that accompany papers.

Questions addressed during this panel discussion will include:

How do journals balance cost and benefit?

Have you benefited from the open materials (e.g., code and data) with published papers? And how do you deal with such materials of your own studies?

Does a journal’s publishing model (e.g., APC) influence your decision to peer review?

What are your thoughts about the future of peer review?

As authors and reviewers, what do you think about eLife’s new model? What do you think is the best publishing model from the view of researchers?

OSR 2023 | Panel 2: Evolution of open publishing