The market for academic journals

Phillips, Owen R.; Phillips, Lori

doi:10.1080/00036840010029476

Cited by 20 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, the bundling practices are both an expression of market power and a reinforcing factor for generating more market power. While market power is acknowledged by many studies of the market for academic publishing (inter alia, Bergstrom and Bergstrom 2004;Chressanthis 1994, 1993;Edlin and Rubinfeld 2004;Nevo et al 2005;Phillips and Phillips 2002), the variations of market power among the publishers depending on their size and portfolio is mostly neglected in the theoretical literature. In oligopolistic markets with heterogeneous firms (e.g.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of article processing charges in open access

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large publishing companies have been dominating scientific publishing for long, which leads to high subscription fees and inhibited access to scientific knowledge. At digital era, the opportunity of an unrestricted access appears feasible, because the cost of publishing should be low. It is no longer the readers and libraries to pay subscription fees, but scientific organizations and authors themselves who pay for the cost of having their article published. As the data shows, there is a tremendous variance of article processing charges (APC) across journals, which obviously cannot be explained by the costs. One of the explanatory variables could be reputation, but it only contributes less than 5% to the variance in average APC. This study is meant to shed light on the various determinants of APC. Based on the data from the OpenAPC Initiative, the Directory of Open Access Journals and three different datasets of Web of Science, we employ ANOVAs and multivariate regressions. The results show that market power plays an important role to explain APC, inter alia, through market concentration, market position of individual publishers (publisher size), and the choice of hybrid publishing model.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of article processing charges in open access

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While market power is acknowledged by many studies of the market for academic publishing (inter alia, T. C. Bergstrom and Bergstrom, 2004;G. A. Chressanthis and Chressanthis, 1993;Rubinfeld, 2004, 2005;Nevo et al, 2005;Phillips and Phillips, 2002), the variations of market power among the publishers depending on their size and portfolio is mostly neglected in the theoretical literature. In oligopolistic markets with heterogeneous firms (e.g.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drivers of Article Processing Charges in Open Access

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large publishing companies have been dominating scientific publishing for long, which leads to high subscription fees and inhibited access to scientific knowledge. At digital era, the opportunity of an unrestricted access appears feasible, because the cost of publishing should be low. It is no longer the readers and libraries to pay subscription fees, but scientific organizations and authors themselves who pay for the cost of having their article published. As the data shows, there is a tremendous variance of article processing charges (APC) across journals, which obviously cannot be explained by the costs. One of the explanatory variables could be reputation, but it only contributes less than 5% to the variance in APC. This study is meant to shed light on the various determinants of APC. Based on data from the OpenAPC Initiative, the Directory of Open Access Journals, the Journal Impact Factor and the Essential Science Indicators of Web of Science, we employ ANOVA and multivariate regressions. The results show that market power plays an important role to explain APCs, inter alia, through market concentration, market position of individual publishers (publisher size), and the choice of hybrid publishing model.

show abstract

“…In their study of the market of academic journals, Phillips and Phillips (2002) showed the segmentation of subscribers between institutions and individuals where a price discrimination of a third degree was evident. A study of the same market by Zheng and Kaiser (2012) found the price discrimination was centered based on distinguishing the publishers as for-profit and non-profit.…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

Price Discrimination as a Marketing Strategy

Alhabeeb¹

2019

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many empirical studies have confirmed the validity and utility of price discrimination as a tool to attract more customers, increase sales, and boost revenues and profits. Several of these studies found strong market evidence of both second and third-degree price discrimination. This study confirms that price discrimination would not only work for monopolistic firms, as we have learned in the classic economic analysis, but also works effectively as essential element in a marketing strategy, especially for companies which adhere to the marketing principles on consumer satisfaction. This study also examines the utilization of price discrimination as a marketing tool by presenting the underlying theory and offering illustrative numerical examples. It further shows the different forms in which price discrimination comes in, the appropriate products eligible for price discrimination, the fields where such a strategy is applied, and the empirical studies involved.

show abstract

The market for academic journals

Cited by 20 publications

References 6 publications

Drivers of article processing charges in open access

Drivers of article processing charges in open access

Drivers of Article Processing Charges in Open Access

Price Discrimination as a Marketing Strategy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About