In a remarkable turn of events, nearly the entire editorial board of Elsevier’s Journal of Human Evolution (JHE) took the unprecedented step of resigning—a move that has stirred considerable conversation in academic circles. This resignation was described as a decision made “with heartfelt sadness and great regret,” highlighting the emotional weight that these scholars attached to their roles. According to reports from Retraction Watch, this mass resignation marks the 20th such instance in scientific journals since the beginning of 2023, illuminating a growing trend of discontent with the established structures of scientific publishing.
The statement released by the departing editors reveals deep-seated concerns over the various changes that have transpired within the organization over the last decade. Primarily, the editorial board criticized the diminishing support provided to them by Elsevier, including the removal of a dedicated copy editor and a special issues editor. This lack of support has forced the editorial board members to assume additional responsibilities, all while being advised that focusing on language and readability was outside the purview of their roles. Such remarks signify a disconcerting shift in priorities within a platform that traditionally upheld the rigorous standards of academic publication.
Moreover, the impending reduction of associate editors raises significant red flags. The proposal to cut the number of such editors by more than half raises concerns over the journal’s capacity to effectively manage the volume of submissions, potentially leading to an erosion of quality in peer review and editorial oversight. The breadth of expertise becomes increasingly vital as the landscape of research broadens, and reducing the editorial capacity risks trivializing the journal’s mission of advancing paleoanthropological scholarship.
Perhaps one of the most unsettling changes has been Elsevier’s unilateral decision to impose a new structure on the editorial board. The move to require annual contract renewals effectively places editorial independence at risk, tying the hands of associate editors who might feel pressured to conform to institutional expectations rather than focusing on academic integrity. The introduction of a “third-tier editorial board,” which operates in a largely ceremonial capacity, further exemplifies this worrying trend of diminishing editorial agency. Such moves raise questions about who truly controls the content published in esteemed journals and whether the integrity of the scientific discourse is being compromised.
The board’s concerns about the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into the production process represent another layer of complexity in this situation. Rather than enhancing the editorial workflow, the implementation of AI without prior consultation has seemingly led to a slew of issues, including formatting errors and unfavorable alterations to authors’ manuscripts. Such IT-driven chaos not only damages the publication’s reputation but reflects poorly on the ethical standards of the publishing process. Post-acceptance modifications that reverse previously finalized versions introduce a lack of reliability in the publication process, which can have cascading effects on authors’ credibility and scholarly impact.
Economic considerations are crucial here, especially regarding author fees. The financial burden of significantly higher page charges—especially when compared to other reputable journals—presents a formidable barrier for many researchers aspiring to publish their work in JHE. This move poses a stark contradiction to the ethos of equality and inclusivity professed by both the journal and Elsevier. The implications for a more diverse range of voices in paleoanthropological research are severe, as these escalating costs risk alienating emerging scholars and those from underrepresented backgrounds.
As the dust settles from this mass resignation, it presents a critical juncture for the scientific community at large. The editorial board’s heartfelt manifesto underscores a profound disaffection that resonates beyond the boundaries of the Journal of Human Evolution. It serves as a cautionary tale reflecting broader challenges in the academic publishing landscape, where the balance between profit, technology, and scholarly integrity is precariously tipping. The evolving relationship between academics and publishers must be re-examined to ensure that the erosion of ethical standards does not undermine the foundational goals of advancement and accessibility in research. The resignation is more than a leadership change; it is a rallying cry for accountability and reform in the scientific publishing industry.
Leave a Reply