Mike Taylor at SV-POW exhorted scientists to stop reviewing for journals that are not open access.
Sorry, but I’m not stopping.
I say this not because of any great love for “for profit” publishers, but because I don’t think it will hurt them.
If I don’t review an article, who do I hurt? I hurt the scientist(s) who submitted the paper. A journal editor is going to keep looking for reviewers until they have them. Indeed, they have to. I want you to imagine what you would think and feel if you got back a reply from a journal saying, “I’m sorry, but we cannot publish your paper, not because we find any fault with your science, but because we cannot find a willing reviewer.”
If I don’t review a paper I could review, all I am doing is needlessly dragging out the review process, making it more difficult for the scientists submitting their results.
For whatever reason, they picked that journal to publish in. They don’t deserve to become pawns in someone else’s game.
If you don’t think a journal deserves your support, don’t submit papers to it. Submit your paper elsewhere, especially if it’s good. Encourage others to submit their papers elsewhere, especially their best papers. The glamour magazines like Science, Nature, and Cell thrive on the high-profile articles that drive up their impact factors, keep their brand in the eyes of both scientists and journalists.
Don’t tear down the castle. Build a more livable city instead.