You start with the people who haven't been educated to rationalize the racket, in journals that have the least amount of reputability in the first place. (Ignoring fake journals, journal mills, etc.) They are also more likely to understand the underlying technology and probably do a lot of the implementation work, too.
Same for grads.
Then you get the journals that only function within the scope of a single university-- i.e., they are used to publish and gain notoriety within the university but are of only limited value outside of it. Probably best to start with a high-fallutin' uni whose stature could be used to convinced them the publicity of being the first mover is reason enough for the risk.
Then regional journals, where again the notoriety is relatively low and personal relationships are leveraged more for notoriety/credibility. (For example, an anthropological journal that covers a small region.) Because these academic communities probably already can recite the names of all the current scholars in the field, moving the research content isn't as disruptive.
In each case the science journals should go first. Humanities have a natural envy of science's verifiability/falsifiability, so they'll quickly follow whatever the scientists do.
1. University-scope undergrad journals
2. University-scope grad journals
3. University-scope science journals
4. University-scope humanities journals
5. Regional-scope science journals
6. Regional-scope humanities journals
7. Nation-scope obscure science journals
8. Nation-scope obscure humanities journals
9. Nation-scope science journals.
10. Nation-scope humanities journals.
11. Nature.
You start with the people who haven't been educated to rationalize the racket, in journals that have the least amount of reputability in the first place. (Ignoring fake journals, journal mills, etc.) They are also more likely to understand the underlying technology and probably do a lot of the implementation work, too.
Same for grads.
Then you get the journals that only function within the scope of a single university-- i.e., they are used to publish and gain notoriety within the university but are of only limited value outside of it. Probably best to start with a high-fallutin' uni whose stature could be used to convinced them the publicity of being the first mover is reason enough for the risk.
Then regional journals, where again the notoriety is relatively low and personal relationships are leveraged more for notoriety/credibility. (For example, an anthropological journal that covers a small region.) Because these academic communities probably already can recite the names of all the current scholars in the field, moving the research content isn't as disruptive.
In each case the science journals should go first. Humanities have a natural envy of science's verifiability/falsifiability, so they'll quickly follow whatever the scientists do.
Edit: clarification