No Journal is an Island: The John Donne Journal and the Possibilities of Open Access
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the possibilities for moving a print journal to Diamond Open Access electronic publication. It uses a case study of a mature academic publication, the John Donne Journal, to explore options for a transition that retains a print version of the journal—and thus its institutional and individual subscribers—while at the same time establishing a fully Open Access electronic version. Informed by a survey-based assessment of the interests and values of the membership of the John Donne Society (the journal's issuing body) and by a brief survey of the state of Open Access journal publication in Renaissance Studies, this paper then examines the means by which other journals have achieved electronic publication and the remaining options for sustainable (i.e. funded) Open Access journal publication. It ends by proposing an independent ('hipster') model for the John Donne Journal that leverages the print form as an asset and basis for approaching subscribing libraries to join the journal as continuing subscribers and partners in Open Access publication.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it