Frontiers in Psych

Frontiers in Psych

Dr. (guest) 24 Feb 2016 01:55

I've been approached about writing a paper for Frontiers, but I don't know anything about it?
Is it a legit journal? I see it's impact factor looks pretty good but don't know how to interpret that for an OA journal.
Thanks for your thoughts!

anony (guest) 24 Feb 2016 02:11

It's a legit journal. People have varying opinions about OA-only journals (esp. senior profs), but nowadays I don't think there's any real discrimination between them versus more traditional ones.

skeptic anon (guest) 24 Feb 2016 02:23

You have to pay to publish in it. The peer review criteria are much lower than for traditional journals. The turnaround is much faster.
Pick your priorities— there are pros and cons to doing it versus not.

anon (guest) 24 Feb 2016 02:51

Isn't that true of almost every journal? Some charge for color figures, some for open access, some for attending the associated conference, etc.

anon (guest) 24 Feb 2016 05:25

I've published a few papers in Frontiers and reviewed for them quite a bit. I don't think peer review is a lower standard than other journals in that IF range, but the criteria emphasize quality of the methods and analyses and disallow judgements based on the "impact" or "novelty" of the work— basically, if it is good science you're supposed to sign off on it, which is arguably a better model than places that publish a lot of sexy stuff that doesn't necessarily replicate (see replication crisis).

As for OA, there is a movement of people pledging to only publish in OA journals. I don't feel like I can do that as a more junior person still, but I agree with the basic stance that science should not be behind pay walls, especially as authors are often still paying high fees to commercial publishers in the form of color figure charges etc. And legitimate OA journals like Frontiers usually have fee reduction programs for authors from developing countries or who otherwise don't have grant or institutional funds to pay publication fees.

OpenMind (guest) 24 Feb 2016 11:01

I have also published in.Frontiers and reviewed for them and I agree that their standards are no lower than journals with similar impact factors. The IF is certainly not a perfect measure but if they just published junk, it wouldn't get cited. They publish a lot of papers and some are better than others, but that's true of most journals and at least they are selecting for methods instead for what will get them into the popular press.

Regarding the publishing fee: I think their discounts are based on the ability of the first/corresponding author to pay, so if you're a junior person without funding for publishing fees, you may be able to get a discount.

FrontiersAnon (guest) 24 Feb 2016 12:38

I consider Frontiers to be a legit but low-tier journal (regardless of impact factor). Their peer review process does not seem as rigorous as that of other journals. The quality of the articles is highly variable and I've seen several low-quality papers in my subfield published there. However, I think both of those issues (peer review and article quality) have more to do with the editorial board than with the open-access format. It is far down on my list of potential journals where I'd submit manuscripts.