The Hybrid Model has more Article Processing Charges than Open-Access: An Analysis of Top 50 Psychiatry Journals

Abstract

Background: Article processing charges (APCs) are a major concern for the researchers globally. We aimed to assess the differences of APCs between open-access and hybrid models and the association of APCs of the top 50 psychiatry journals. Methods: We used the Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) website to acquire the free information. The associations of APCs of the top 50 psychiatry journals and the differences in APCs between open-access and subscription models were assessed. Additionally, we gathered data on the APCs from the websites of other journals. Results: Out of 50 journals examined, only one used a subscription model. Elsevier published the majority (14), followed by Wiley (8), Springer (6), and Cambridge University Press (4). 45 journals had an APC, with 12 using open-access and 33 using hybrid models. The mean APC was $3711.4 (±1007.7) USD, with open-access averaging $3086.7 (±1231.7) USD and hybrids averaging $3938.5 (±821.8) USD. APC and Scimago Journal Rank (SJR) scores had a moderate correlation (rs = 0.54; p= 0.001). Conclusions: Psychiatry journals have seen more open-access publications in the past decade, resulting in higher article processing charges. Hybrid journals charge more for open-access publications than purely open-access journals. Regulating APCs is important to ensure quality research is published.