Interaction observation in academic publishing: a CyberSystemic approach

Purpose This paper aims to introduce a semi-structured interaction observation methodology to highlight how structures, roles, constraints and feedback loops shape the publishing process, examining in detail a single instance. It focuses on academic publishing as a systemic interaction between the author and the editor. The study invites researchers to observe their research-related interactions and, by sharing structured results, support the development of a case-based body of knowledge. Results can be comparable by applying large language models, which opens new perspectives in recording research observations. Design/methodology/approach The paper applies a newly developed CyberSystemic interaction observation methodology with an observation framework grounded in systems thinking and second-order cybernetics. It introduces subjective, structured and relational observation in research reporting. The method combines subjective insight with structural rigour and is designed for LLM-based examination. In the method application, it maps five phases of the publishing process, from framing the manuscript to its long-term impact. Findings Interactions of publishing a paper are often structurally asymmetric, recursive, cognitively demanding and affected by existing structures and emerging related interactions, many of which may not substantially contribute to advancing the body of knowledge. According to the reflexive author's observations, many of the identified pathologies result from the closed academic and publishing ecosystems. Additionally, the paper highlights the methodological potential of interaction observations for making visible the often-opaque structures of any observed interaction. Research limitations/implications The work is based on a single reflexive case. While rich in insight, it reflects the dual role of the author as both observer and method designer. To generate a requisite holistic perspective, the method should be applied by multiple observers of the interaction and combined with other examination tools. Practical implications The paper offers researchers a new tool for observing systemic dynamics in academic work. It supports critical self-reflection and opens possibilities for aligning publishing processes with societal relevance, institutional learning and AI-supported analysis. With its ontologies, it can provide an input for developing artificial intelligence-supported mind models of systemic reasoning. Originality/value The paper introduces a novel, structured methodology for observing complex interactions from within systems by proposing a rich ontology-based approach, reaching beyond the limitations of strictly quantitative modelling. It contributes to CyberSystemics and scholarly communication by framing publishing as a dynamic, reflexive process embedded in institutional environments.