Academic Journals: Visibility in Challenging Times

by Thomas Jung (DIE) and Kristin Biesenbender (ZBW)

It is often said that the academic journal is in crisis. A few years ago, it was the questionable business models of corporate publishers, the digitisation of workflows and the emergence of repositories that plunged journals – and, with them, both the publishing industry and the publicly funded research system – into an economic crisis. Today, AI-systems, paper mills and platforms are not only causing the flood of manuscripts to grow, they are also forcing those working in publishing to raise questions about credibility, authorship and regulation. Ultimately, it is about trust in the academic publication system, about the journal itself, and about ensuring that attention is focused on valid, quality-assured content.

A dialogue amongst those responsible for the journal as a product in their day-to-day editorial work – from the initial concept right through to the finished digital and/or printed edition – is needed to ensure that the journal continues to hold the top position in the format hierarchies of the academic publication and reputation system as a medium and forum for the exchange of research findings. This year’s Journal Management Workshop (German language) of the Leibniz Association, jointly organised by ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics and DIE – Leibniz Centre for Lifelong Learning, and held from 22 to 23 June 2026 at the Leibniz offices in Berlin, once again provided a forum for editors to seek guidance and engage in collegial reflection on the future of their journals amidst search engines, commercialised indices, platform logic and AI response systems.

New infrastructures, new challenges

The open-access transformation within the academic system has created new, non-commercial infrastructures, which journals published by Leibniz institutions increasingly rely on. A survey (PDF, german language) conducted within the Leibniz Association has shown that two-thirds of the journals published by Leibniz Institutes have already transitioned to Diamond Open Access. Challenges remain, however: How can such infrastructures be funded? How can the visibility of each journal be enhanced? What options are available for getting the journal listed on an index relevant to the respective discipline? And how can the quality of content be ensured – particularly in view of the new possibilities for unethical publication practices brought about by AI systems?

A wide range of aspects relating to the visibility of journals were discussed as part of the presentation of the academic journals Junior Management Science, Kommunikation@Gesellschaft (German language), Journal of East Central European Studies and the German Yearbook of Contemporary History. Among other things, the discussions centred on self-organised indexing by editorial teams, experiences with Open Access and editor-led journals – some with a history of over 25 years –, the implementation of the PKP Plattform Open Journal Systems, on which high-quality journals are published, and the labour-intensive secondary publication of journal content, which successfully increases discoverability in the Anglo-American-speaking world.

New reputation mechanisms and approaches to AI sought

The discussions in the working groups focused on issues relating to the indexing and visibility of academic journals, as well as the use of artificial intelligence in editorial work. Although many researchers continue to call for their own journals to be included in Web of Science or Scopus, Leibniz journals are also seeking alternative, discipline-specific metrics for visibility and mechanisms for building academic reputation within their own fields. The uncertainty surrounding how to reach the journal’s intended readership in the digital space was also addressed. Finally, it became clear during discussions within working groups and during breaks that participants wanted to share their thoughts on the uncertainties they had identified, as well as the potential for reduced workloads they had hoped for, albeit vaguely, in light of the latest AI developments. These developments are radically transforming day-to-day editorial work, from manuscript screening to the peer-review process and marketing.

Media transformation in science communication too

Christoph Engemann (Ruhr University Bochum) spoke of a new “secondary orality” that would challenge the conventional “format hierarchy” of books, magazines and other written media formats. In his presentation, he drew on current developments in the field of AI and platform-based technologies, including so-called “speaking devices”. Bearing in mind the changes in the media landscape – not least the talk of the end of the Gutenberg era – one might well ask when the orally performed text will replace the written text in public discourse. Indeed, even in science communication, it has long been taken for granted that the printed article is accompanied by – or, in the case of younger audiences, replaced by – podcasts, YouTube lectures, social media posts and AI-based summaries.

However, the research article published in a peer-reviewed and indexed journal still counts. And so, we may assume a mutually enriching coexistence of academic content, the media used and varying modes of presentation across the various platforms. How visibility – or rather, attention – is generated and how it can be measured beyond commercial citation indices remains an open question, one that will need to be revisited in future Journal Management Workshops.

You may also be interested in:

• Open Access During the Pandemic: Prelude to a Permanent Change in Publishing Behaviour?
• SeDOA Workshop: Financing Diamond Open Access in the Long run
• Open Access Days 2025: Goal Achieved – or how can it (Ever) be Accomplished?
• Financing Diamond Open Access for Economics Sciences: How OLEcon Works