arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Perceptions, défis et prises de positions concernant l’ <i>Article Processing Charges</i> (APC) dans la publication scientifique : une enquête auprès des chercheur·e·s du CONICET en Argentine

Fernanda Beigel & Víctor Montoya

Social Science Information2025https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184251351425article
ABDC C
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

Article Processing Charges (APC) play a crucial role in the dynamics that structure science and are at the heart of many debates. In this article, we analyze the perceptions, challenges and stances towards APCs of 3,313 researchers from CONICET (Argentina) who responded to the survey carried out as part of the GRIP APC project. Based on field theory (Bourdieu) and on the concept of structural heterogeneity, we formulate two hypotheses, which we test through multiple correspondence analysis: firstly, that the space of positions taken with regard to APC reveals the heterogeneity of a space marked by the existence of bifrontier elites, characteristic of the polarized functioning of a semi-peripheral scientific field such as Argentina’s; secondly, that there is a structural homology between the space of positions taken and scientific fields.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184251351425

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{fernanda2025,
  title        = {{Perceptions, défis et prises de positions concernant l’ <i>Article Processing Charges</i> (APC) dans la publication scientifique : une enquête auprès des chercheur·e·s du CONICET en Argentine}},
  author       = {Fernanda Beigel & Víctor Montoya},
  journal      = {Social Science Information},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184251351425},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Perceptions, défis et prises de positions concernant l’ <i>Article Processing Charges</i> (APC) dans la publication scientifique : une enquête auprès des chercheur·e·s du CONICET en Argentine

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.