One of the underrecognized truths of scholarly publishing is its reliance on volunteer work. Researchers throughout most scientific communities share a sense of responsibility to volunteer their time and support the advancement of scientific literature, a holdover from times when journals operated with miniscule budgets and nearly unsustainable profit margins. Despite the recent skyrocket in the scientific publishing industry’s overall valuation, many vital positions remain unpaid. However, change is on the horizon. Here, we’ll review the range of volunteer-based positions in scholarly publication and evaluate potential future shifts in industry practices.
Peer Review
Peer review is a fundamental bedrock of medical research. Today, readers expect that published papers have been evaluated and vetted by at least two subject matter experts in addition to the journal’s editorial staff. However, finding relevant experts who are willing to review manuscripts has become increasingly difficult, especially when considered in proportion with the exponential increase in the number of manuscripts published annually.
Compensation for peer review isn’t a new topic, but the conversation has grown louder in recent years. Proponents argue that paying peer reviewers would lead to more efficient, effective, and timely review; detractors counter that the costs are unsustainable and would lead to higher article processing charges, in addition to ethical concerns. However, many proponents find financially-based rebuttals hard to entertain when academic publishers have seen staggering profit margins in recent years. Elsevier, one of the largest medical publishing groups, reported revenue exceeding $9.8 billion in 2019.
One recent result of this debate was the 450 Movement. The 450 Movement started with James Heathers’ eponymous 2020 online manifesto, which embraced $450 as adequate compensation for peer reviewing a manuscript. Though this movement has amplified debate throughout the scientific community, no significant industry shifts have yet been seen. For now, at least, the vital service of peer review remains an unpaid effort.
Editorial Board Members
Almost any journal you encounter will have a lengthy editorial board, often exceeding 50 members. Members of a journal’s editorial board are subject matter experts who advise on the journal’s content and direction; they also evaluate manuscript submissions and promote the journal to colleagues and at conferences. However, the position is almost universally unpaid.
Serving as an editorial board member can offer a wide range of non-financial benefits. Community dialogue has cited career progression as one of the most notable benefits. Serving as a board member can improve a scientist’s resume or CV and provide valuable networking opportunities. The role also allows earlier-career investigators to gain firsthand experience on how the publishing industry works and develop a more keen sense of how to design and write manuscripts that’ll be accepted for publication. For many, the act of being able to shape and improve scientific literature is a benefit in and of itself.
Despite these benefits, it’s hard to ignore the intense time commitment required. Researchers must find time to review submissions, chase down peer reviewers, join strategic planning meetings, and field submitting authors’ questions in addition to their own full-time jobs, research commitments, and personal lives. In addition, some community members worry that editors may offer unfair advantages to authors they know or respect, oftentimes citing a potential expectation that favorable reviews will be reciprocated regardless of a paper’s scientific quality.
Editors-in-Chief
Many who are new to the industry are astounded to learn that the role of Editor-in-Chief, the most prestigious and highest-ranking editorial position of a journal, is often unpaid. Some journals, particularly the largest and most prestigious, will hire a salaried Editor-in-Chief who is expected to provide full-time support for journal operations. On the other end of the spectrum, the majority of journals do not provide any payment at all for Editors-in-Chief. The remaining journals fall somewhere in the middle: editors-in-Chief who are not fully-paid journal staff members may receive honorarium ranging from a few hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars, but this isn’t guaranteed. As an alternative incentive, some research institutions may offer protected time for employees to complete journal responsibilities during work hours.
Editor-in-Chief positions are highly respected and reflect extremely well on a researcher’s CV. Editor-in-Chief roles are almost universally offered to highly respected experts in their respective fields, often senior-level academic researchers, professors, or emeriti. These researchers often have many opportunities and demands on their time, most of which provide much more significant financial compensation. Though it’s surprising that this important role remains largely unpaid, the industry prestige accompanying the designation is often seen as sufficient compensation in and of itself.
Miscellaneous Volunteer Roles
Peer reviewers, editorial board members, and Editors-in-Chief are hardly the only volunteers in the scholarly publishing landscape. Some examples of other volunteer positions, varying in their degree of formality, include:
- Colleague-to-colleague favors. Many intermediate- to advanced-career authors will review their colleagues’ manuscripts and provide feedback before the paper is submitted for consideration with a journal.
- Research mentorship programs. Organizations such as AuthorAid, National Research Mentoring Network, or SPARK Research Mentorship Program, match early-career researchers or students interested in medical research with experienced researchers who volunteer their time and expertise, often with a final end goal of publishing a manuscript.
- Scholarly publishing societies. These societies act to advance issues in academic and research publishing and are often volunteer-based.
Conclusions
As highlighted by the aforementioned 450 Movement, change is brewing throughout the scientific publishing industry. Support for compensation is rapidly gaining support, especially given the global peer review crisis, which clearly demonstrates that the current model is unsustainable. Industry-shifting changes are anticipated over the next few years, and conversations about volunteer responsibilities in academic publishing are sure to be at the center of the action.
