CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Mega journal

academic journal covering multiple disciplines

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 28, 2025
Entity authorityQ18215934
Source-derived summary

A mega journal (also mega-journal and megajournal) is a peer-reviewed academic open access journal designed to be much larger than a traditional journal by exercising low selectivity among accepted articles. It was pioneered by PLOS ONE. This "very lucrative publishing model" was soon emulated by other publishers.

Definition

A mega journal has the following defining characteristics:

broad coverage of different subject areas;

accepting articles for publication based on whether they are technically sound rather than selecting for perceived importance; and

using article processing charges to cover the costs of publishing, although it is also possible for a mega journal to function as a non-profit (one example is Open Library of Humanities).

Other less universal characteristics are

"an accelerated review and publication process", "fast turnaround time";

"academic editors", even "a large editorial board of academic editors", (instead of professional editors); and

value-added services such as reusable graphics and data through Creative Commons licenses.

Mega journals are also online-only, with no printed version, and are fully open access, in contrast to hybrid open access journals. Some "predatory" open access publishers use the mega journal model.

Influence

It has been suggested that the academic journal landscape might become dominated by a few mega journals in the future, at least in terms of total number of articles published.

Mega journals shift the publishing industry's funding standard from the subscription-based model common to traditional closed access publications to article processing charges.

Their business model may not motivate reviewers, who donate their time to "influence their field, gain exposure to the most current cutting edge research or list their service to a prestigious journal on their CVs."

Finally, they may no longer serve as "fora for the exchange ... among colleagues in a particular field or sub-field", as traditionally happened in scholarly journals.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Mega journal” as academic journal covering multiple disciplines. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current 297-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Mega, journal and academic can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as academic journal covering multiple disciplines. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 28, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q18215934. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Mega journal”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Mega journal primary sources, Mega journal archive and Mega research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Mega journal”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Mega journal” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.