LA EDICIÓN DE TEXTOS CIENTÍFICOS VIGILADA: LAS GRANDES EDITORIALES Y LA MONETIZACIÓN DE LA INFORMACIÓN DE LOS AUTORES

Authors

  • Jefferson Pooley

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37543/oceanides.v38i1.288

Keywords:

TEXTOS CIENTÍFICOS

Abstract

Las grandes editoriales del mundo académico basan parcialmente su modelo de negocios en el trabajo
no remunerado de los investigadores y en la venta de sus productos derivados a las universidades e instituciones
académicas. Así, la labor de revisión y edición de los investigadores se traduce en la venta de estos productos en forma de artículos por separado o suscripciones a precios de usura, considerando además en muchos casos, los cobros por el procesamiento de los artículos (APC, por sus siglas en inglés). Este es un negocio lucrativo al que las
grandes editoriales no quieren renunciar. Sin embargo, ahora se añade otro negocio quizá igual o más lucrativo a
sus operaciones editoriales: la riqueza detrás de la información propia de los autores o de los datos sobre el comportamiento de estos, contenidos en las publicaciones que poseen o controlan. Las grandes editoriales y corporativos
asociados como Clarivate, Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, Taylor & Francis, SAGE y otras, utilizan el llamado
“análisis predictivo”, con el que procesan los datos de la producción científica para analizar el comportamiento de
los académicos que luego venden a sus clientes (y proveedores): las propias universidades. Estas editoriales se con- ducen con los académicos tal como lo hace Google con todos sus usuarios: obtiene datos sobre su comportamiento
generando información valiosa sobre sus tendencias, hábitos o preferencias. Google monetiza esta información con
las distintas empresas que desean vender sus productos a un público dirigido. De la misma forma, las editoriales
venden la información recolectada a las universidades y oficinas de gobierno relacionadas con la política científica
para la toma de decisiones. El nuevo negocio del “análisis predictivo” se basa en los datos de comportamiento que
producen los académicos. Es decir, los investigadores generan datos con cada participación en un artículo o informe
revisado por pares. Algunos de esos datos se introducen en los productos principales de las editoriales, en forma
de recuentos de descargas y recomendaciones de artículos. La publicación académica es su propia economía de
vigilancia emergente. Podemos denominar a una editorial como “vigilante”, si obtiene una parte sustancial de sus
ingresos utilizando el análisis predictivo a partir de la información extraída del comportamiento de los investigadores. Como dijo la Dra. Sarah Lamdan de la Facultad de Derecho de la City University of New York (CUNY School
of Law): “...tus revistas te están espiando

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anónimo. (2020). Informa PLC Press Release. Informa.com. https://www.informa.com/globalassets/documents/investor-relations/2020/informa-adds-f1000-research.pdf

Anónimo. (2023 a). Reading scientific literature can also reveal privacy, Elsevier PDF reader collects

user information. Inf.news (s/f). https://inf.news/en/tech/ebd522a6fc3a471730373ba697f55ce6.html

Anónimo. (2023 b) Stop tracking science. (s/f). Stoptrackingscience.Eu. https://stoptrackingscience.eu/

Anónimo. (2023 c). Wikipedia contributors. Goodhart’s law. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Goodhart%27s_law&oldid=1132595374

Baykoucheva, S. (2019). Eugene Garfield’s ideas and legacy and their impact on the culture of research.

Publications, 7(2), 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7020043 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/publications7020043

Bouk, D. (2018). How our days became numbered: Risk and the rise of the statistical individual. University of Chicago Press.

Brembs, B. (2021). Massive over-payment of academic publishers has enabled them to buy surveillance technology covering the entire workflow that can be used not only to be combined with our private data and sold, but also to make algorithmic (a.k.a. “evidence-led”) employment decisions. Twitter. https://twitter.com/brembs/status/1440942564094402560?s=21

Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 30(1–7), 107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-7552(98)00110-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-7552(98)00110-X

Brin, S., & Page, L. (2012). Reprint of: The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. Computer Networks, 56(18), 3825–3833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2012.10.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2012.10.007

Buranyi, S. (2017). Is the staggeringly profitable business of scientific publishing bad for science? The guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science

Büttcher, S., Clarke, C. L. A., & Cormack, G. V. (2016). Information retrieval: Implementing and evaluating search engines. MIT Press.

Chan, L. (2019). Platorm Capitalism and the Governance of Knowledge Infrastructure. Digital Initiative Symposium 2019, April 29-30, University of San Diego, CA

Cramer-Flood, E. (2021). “Duopoly Still Rules the Global Digital Ad Market, but Alibaba and Amazon Are on the Prowl.” eMarketer, May 10, 2021. https://www.emarketer.com/content/duopolys- till-rules-global-digital-ad-market-alibaba-ama- zon-on-prowl.

Cuéllar, M. F., & Huq, A. Z. (2010). Economies of Surveillance. Book Review. Harvard Law Review, 133, 1280–1336.

de Knecht, S. (2020). Dutch open science deal primarily benefits Elsevier. ScienceGuide. https://www.scienceguide.nl/2020/06/open-science-deal-benefits-elsevier/DFG-Committee (2021). Data tracking in research: aggregation and use or sale of usage data by academic publishers. A briefing paper of the Committee on Scientific Library Services and Information Systems of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.5937995

Elsevier. (2005). A Short History of Elsevier. London: Reed Elsevier. http://www.ask-force.org/web/Seralini/Elsevier-Short-History-2005.pdf.

Elsevier. (2022). Discover research: Wiley, ACS,

RSC, Taylor & Francis, Elsevier. (s/f). Sciencedi- rect.com. https://www.sciencedirect.com/org

Elsevier. (n.f. a). “Elsevier Fingerprint Engine.” Accessed November 16, 2021. https://www.elsevier.

com/solutions/elsevier-fingerprint-engine.

Elsevier. (n.f. b). “[Pure] Features.” Accessed No- vember 16, 2021. https://www.elsevier.com/solu- tions/pure/features.

Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. (2007). Rankings and

reactivity: How public measures recreate social

worlds. American journal of sociology, 113(1),

–40. https://doi.org/10.1086/517897 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/517897

Espeland, W. N., & Stevens, M. L. (2008). A socio- logy of quantification. Archives Europeennes de

Sociologie. European Journal of Sociology. Europaisches Archiv Für Soziologie, 49(3), 401–436.

https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975609000150 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975609000150

Fourcade, M., & Johns, F. (2020). Loops, ladders and

links: the recursivity of social and machine lear- ning. Theory and Society, 49(5–6), 803–832. ht- tps://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-020-09409-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-020-09409-x

Fund, S. (2021). Wiley acquires open access innovator knowledge unlatched. Knowledge Unlatched, A Wiley Brand, Wiley-VCH GmbH – A

Company of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://

openresearch.community/posts/wiley-acquires-open-access-innovator-knowledge-unlatched

Garfield, E. (2006). Commentary: Fifty years of citation indexing. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35(5), 1127–1128. https://doi.org/10.1093/ DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyl190

ije/dyl190

Gillespie, T. (2017). Algorithmically recogniza- ble: Santorum’s Google problem, and Google’s DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1199721

Santorum problem. Information, Communica- tion and Society, 20(1), 63–80. https://doi.or- g/10.1080/1369118x.2016.1199721

Hill, P. (2021). Coursera, 2U, and the emerging education platform market. PhilOnEdTech. https://

philonedtech.com/coursera-2u-and-the-emerging-education-platform-market/

Hunter, S. (2016). Wiley signs definitive agreement

to acquire atypon. Atypon: Online Publishing

Platform & Web Development Tools; Atypon

Systems, LLC. https://www.atypon.com/news/

wiley-signs-definitive-agreement-to-acqui- re-atypon/

Informa Group. (2021). Depth & Data: Informa

Group Annual Report and Accounts 2020. Lon- don: Informa Group.

Lamdan, S. (2021). Your journals are spying on you:

Research surveillance in library products. https://

scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/handle/2022/26873

La Monica, P. R. (2004). “Google Jumps 18% in Debut.” CNN Money, August 19, 2004. https://money.cnn.com/2004/08/19/technology/goog/

Lauer, J. (2017). Creditworthy: A history of consumer DOI: https://doi.org/10.7312/laue16808

surveillance and financial identity in America.

Columbia University Press.

McKenzie, L. (2018). Wiley makes a play to lead

OPM space, and signals change ahead. Insidehighered.com. https://www.insidehighered.com/

digital-learning/article/2018/10/10/wiley-makesplay-lead-opm-space-and-signals-change-ahead

Murakami-Wood, D. (2009). Spies in the informa- tion economy: academic publishers and the

trade in personal information. ACME, 8(3),

–493. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:-

de:0168-ssoar-200719

Pooley, J. (2021). Knowledge unlatched strikes again

and again. Jeffpooley.com. https://www.jeffpooley.com/2021/01/knowledge-unlatched-strikes-again-and-again/

Porter, T. M. (2020). Trust in numbers: The pursuit of DOI: https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691208411.001.0001

objectivity in science and public life. Princeton

University Press.

Posada, A., & Chen, G. (2017). Publishers increa- singly in control of scholarly infrastructure and

this is why we should care. The knowledge Gap.

http://knowledgegap.org/index.php/sub-projects/

rent-seeking-and-financialization-of-the-acade- mic-publishing-industry/preliminary-findings/

Posada, A., & Chen, G. (2018). Inequality in knowle- dge production: The integration of academic in- frastructure by big publishers. 22nd International DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/proceedings.elpub.2018.30

Conference on Electronic Publishing.

Price, D. J. de S. (1965). Networks of Scientific Papers: The pattern of bibliographic references indicates the nature of the scientific research front.

Science (New York, N.Y.), 149(3683), 510–515.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3683.510 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.149.3683.510

RELX Group. (2016). Annual Report and Financial

Statements 2015. London: RELX Group.

Sadowski, J. (2019). When data is capital: Datafication, accumulation, and extraction. Big Data & DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718820549

Society, 6(1), 205395171882054. https://doi.

org/10.1177/2053951718820549

Shockey, N. (2021). Addressing the alarming systems of surveillance built by library vendors.

SPARC. https://sparcopen.org/news/2021/addressing-the-alarming-systems-of-surveillance-built-by-library-vendors/

Zijlstra, J. (1994). The University Licensing Program DOI: https://doi.org/10.1629/0702169

(TULIP): A Large Scale Experiment in Bringing

Electronic Journals to the Desktop. Serials, 7(2),

–172.

Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New

Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs.

Wouters, P. (2017). Eugene Garfield (1925- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/543492a

. Nature, 543(7646), 492. https://doi.org/10.1038

Published

2023-09-29

How to Cite

Pooley, J. (2023). LA EDICIÓN DE TEXTOS CIENTÍFICOS VIGILADA: LAS GRANDES EDITORIALES Y LA MONETIZACIÓN DE LA INFORMACIÓN DE LOS AUTORES. CICIMAR Oceánides, 38(1), 9–18. https://doi.org/10.37543/oceanides.v38i1.288

Issue

Section

Articles