This seems about a factor of 2 lower than I expected. My guess would be that this just includes the actual cost of fixing formatting errors, not the cost of fitting your ideas to fit the formatting at all (i.e. having to write all the different sections, even when it doesn’t make sense, or being forced to use LaTeX in the first place).
(Note: I did not yet get around to reading the paper, so this is just a first impression, as well as registering a prediction)
Yes, one could define broader notions of “formatting”, in which case the cost would be higher. They use a narrower notion.
For the purpose of this work, formatting was defined as total time related to formatting the body of the manuscript, figures, tables, supplementary files, and references. Respondents were asked not to count time spent on statistical analysis, writing, or editing.
The authors think that there are straightforward reforms which could reduce the time spent on formatting, in this narrow sense.
[I]t is hoped that a growing number of journals will recommend no strict formatting guidelines, at least at first submission but preferably until acceptance, to alleviate the unnecessary burden on scientists. In 2012, Elsevier initiated a process like this in the journal Free Radical Biology & Medicine with “Your Paper, Your Way”, a simplified submission process with no strict formatting requirements until the paper has been accepted for publication.
It may be more difficult to get acceptance for more far-reaching reforms.
This seems about a factor of 2 lower than I expected. My guess would be that this just includes the actual cost of fixing formatting errors, not the cost of fitting your ideas to fit the formatting at all (i.e. having to write all the different sections, even when it doesn’t make sense, or being forced to use LaTeX in the first place).
(Note: I did not yet get around to reading the paper, so this is just a first impression, as well as registering a prediction)
Yes, one could define broader notions of “formatting”, in which case the cost would be higher. They use a narrower notion.
The authors think that there are straightforward reforms which could reduce the time spent on formatting, in this narrow sense.
It may be more difficult to get acceptance for more far-reaching reforms.