Open‐access mega‐journals (OAMJs) are characterized by their large scale, wide scope, open‐access (OA) business model, and “soundness‐only” peer review. The last of these controversially discounts the novelty, significance, and relevance of submitted articles and assesses only their “soundness.” This article reports the results of an international survey of authors (n = 11,883), comparing the responses of OAMJ authors with those of other OA and subscription journals, and drawing comparisons between different OAMJs. Strikingly, OAMJ authors showed a low understanding of soundness‐only peer review: two‐thirds believed OAMJs took into account novelty, significance, and relevance, although there were marked geographical variations. Author satisfaction with OAMJs, however, was high, with more than 80% of OAMJ authors saying they would publish again in the same journal, although there were variations by title, and levels were slightly lower than subscription journals (over 90%). Their reasons for choosing to publish in OAMJs included a wide variety of factors, not significantly different from reasons given by authors of other journals, with the most important including the quality of the journal and quality of peer review. About half of OAMJ articles had been submitted elsewhere before submission to the OAMJ with some evidence of a “cascade” of articles between journals from the same publisher.

中文翻译：

---

开放获取大型期刊作者的动机、理解和经验：大规模调查的结果

开放获取大型期刊 (OAMJ) 的特点是规模大、范围广、开放获取 (OA) 商业模式和“健全性”同行评审。最后一个争议性地低估了提交文章的新颖性、重要性和相关性，只评估它们的“合理性”。本文报告了一项国际作者调查 (n = 11,883) 的结果，将 OAMJ 作者的回复与其他 OA 和订阅期刊的回复进行了比较，并在不同的 OAMJ 之间进行了比较。引人注目的是，OAMJ 作者对仅健全性同行评审的理解很低：三分之二的人认为 OAMJ 考虑了新颖性、重要性和相关性，尽管存在明显的地域差异。然而，作者对 OAMJ 的满意度很高，超过 80% 的 OAMJ 作者表示他们会在同一期刊上再次发表，尽管标题有所不同，而且水平略低于订阅期刊（超过 90%）。他们选择在 OAMJs 发表的原因包括多种因素，与其他期刊作者给出的原因没有显着差异，其中最重要的包括期刊质量和同行评审质量。大约一半的 OAMJ 文章在提交给 OAMJ 之前已经在其他地方提交过，有一些证据表明来自同一出版商的期刊之间的文章“级联”。与其他期刊作者给出的理由没有太大区别，最重要的是期刊的质量和同行评审的质量。大约一半的 OAMJ 文章在提交给 OAMJ 之前已经在其他地方提交过，有一些证据表明来自同一出版商的期刊之间的文章“级联”。与其他期刊作者给出的理由没有太大区别，最重要的是期刊的质量和同行评审的质量。大约一半的 OAMJ 文章在提交给 OAMJ 之前已经在其他地方提交过，有一些证据表明来自同一出版商的期刊之间的文章“级联”。