Disclaimer: This document is not legal advice. Acknowledgement: I thank Peter Suber and Volkan Topalli for their feedback. Note: Since drafting this Pub in 2023, the Editors of Criminology announced their open-data initiative,1 for which I congratulate and thank them.

Introduction

If a learned-society is serious about maximizing its scientificity and impact with social justice, it must provide 100% open access (OA) to its publications. In an earlier Pub (Jacques, 2023), I describe and explain how it’s practically possible—right now—to achieve this for ASC’s journals: Criminology (CRIM) and Criminology & Public Policy (C&PP). The strategy is to systematically provide “green OA.” By definition, green OA is to an article’s “preprint” or “postprint.” Authors pay zero to provide this, whereas “gold OA” to the “version-of-record” involves an “article processing charge” (APC).2

Different publishers have different green OA policies. ASC’s publisher is Wiley. In this Pub, I outline Wiley’s policy; explain its meaning for ASC’s authors; and, on this basis, recommended ASC implement its own policy:

For a submission to be considered for publication in CRIM or C&PP, the author(s) must first publish the exact same paper as a preprint. Each new submission, such as original vs R&R, must be published this way.

Wiley’s green OA policy

Most criminology-authors won’t check a publisher’s OA policy. But when they do, they usually start with the journal’s website. For example, CRIM’s homepage on wiley.com directs visitors to pages for “Open Access”3 and “OA Advantages.”4 Yet neither page provides information on green OA; they focus on gold OA.5 However, those pages have hyperlinks to additional resources for green OA (Wiley, n.d., b, c). One goes to “Open access options for your article,”6 which leads to “How to comply with open access policies”7 and Wiley’s “Author Compliance Tool.” If the filter is set to CRIM or C&PP, the result shows the “Submitted Version” (i.e., preprint) can be self-archived “On submission”; the “Accepted Version” (i.e., postprint) is “24mo embargo.”8

Wiley’s definitions of preprint and postprint

The “View Policy” hyperlink on the Author Compliance Tool-page leads to Wiley’s Self-Archiving Policy.9 It states:

Authors of articles published in Wiley journals are permitted to self-archive the submitted (preprint) version of the article at any time, and may self-archive the accepted (peer-reviewed) version after an embargo period.” (Wiley, n.d., c)

This raises the question, What exactly is a “preprint”?

• The “Submitted (preprint) Version” is defined as “the author’s version that has not been peer-reviewed,10 nor had any value11 added to it by Wiley (such as formatting or copy editing).” (Wiley, n.d., d)

Does this mean an author can’t make a preprint OA once it’s started the review process at a journal? I think not because of how Wiley defines the alternative …

• The “Accepted (peer-reviewed) Version” “incorporates all amendments made during the peer review process” (emphasis added). Meaning, until a preprint has stopped being amended, it’s still a preprint; once the amending is over, it’s a postprint.

Implication of Wiley’s policy

Per Wiley’s policy, CRIM and C&PP authors are permitted to publish (i.e., “self-archive”) an article’s preprint until the Editors accept it for publication. Once accepted, it becomes the “postprint” and subject to the 24-month embargo. This distinction is the linchpin to my recommendation, restated here:

For a submission to be considered for publication in CRIM or C&PP, the author(s) must first publish the exact same paper as a preprint. Each new submission, such as original vs R&R, must be published this way.

If ASC implements it, there’ll be 100% green OA to future ASC articles, with zero embargo, in a manner that’s free and equitable to authors (because there’s no APC), among other potential benefits (e.g., scientificity, first-mover benefits).

Why’s this so complicated?

ASC could’ve—and should’ve—already eliminated the embargo on its journal. This is explained in Piza and Jacques (2020), a public-letter cosigned by about 300 criminologists, including ASC Fellows and Editors, former and current, of CRIM and C&PP. What came of this letter? Nothing. Why not? Don’t blame Wiley, as they make explicit: “society partners may set policies independently” (Wiley, n.d., c). What’s stopping ASC from instituting a zero-embargo policy for CRIM and C&PP? Leadership.

References

Jacques, S. (2023). Open access to journal articles of the American Society of Criminology: A little study to illustrate concepts and costs. CrimRxiv. doi.org/10.21428/cb6ab371.b8929691/7cc1f2de

Piza, Eric, and Scott Jacques. 2020. ASC Should Make It Legal for Their Journals’ Authors to Immediately, Publicly Share the Accepted Version of Their Manuscripts. Criminology Open. https://doi.org/10.21428/b7013076.d09c41de

Wiley. No date (n/d), a. Article publication charges. https://authorservices.wiley.com/author-resources/Journal-Authors/open-access/article-publication-charges.html

—. How to comply with open access policies. https://authorservices.wiley.com/author-resources/Journal-Authors/open-access/author-compliance-tool.html

—. Wiley’s self-archiving policy. https://authorservices.wiley.com/author-resources/Journal-Authors/licensing/self-archiving.html

—. Wiley’s preprints policy. https://authorservices.wiley.com/author-resources/Journal-Authors/open-access/preprints-policy.html