There is another review of the same publication in Learned Publishing
(www.learned-publishing.org)
Sally
Sally Morris, Secretary-General
Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers
South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK
Phone: 01903 871686 Fax: 01903 871457 E-mail: sec-gen_at_alpsp.org.uk
ALPSP Website
http://www.alpsp.org.uk
Learned Publishing is now online, free of charge, at
www.alpsp.org.uk/journal
-----Original Message-----
From: Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_coglit.ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
<AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
Date: 03 October 2000 20:49
Subject: Re: "TOWARDS ELECTRONIC JOURNALS": Tenopir & King
>BELOW ARE 6 REVIEWS OF:
>
> Tenopir, Carol, and Donald W. King (2000a) Towards Electronic
> Journals: Realities for Scientists, Librarians, and Publishers.
> Washington, D.C.: Special Libraries Association.
> http://www.sla.org
>
>THEY HAVE JUST APPEARED IN PSYCOLOQUY 11 (2000)
>
>FURTHER REVIEWS, AND COMMENTARIES ON THE REVIEWS AND AUTHORS' RESPONSES
>ARE INVITED BY PSYCOLOQUY (electronic journal of peer commentary)
>Instructions: http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/psycoloquy/
>
>(1)
>Medeiros, N. (2000) Publication costs: Electronic versus print.
>PSYCOLOQUY 11(089)
>ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/2000.volume.11/
>psyc.00.11.089.electronic-journals.2.medeiros
>http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?11.089
>
> ABSTRACT: "Towards Electronic Journals" (Tenopir & King 2000a,b)
> analyzes the scholarly journal publishing industry and the
> influences upon it that affect subscription costs. This book
> documents the impact journals have on scientists and libraries,
> especially in light of the Internet. Research studies corroborate
> most of the book's assertions, most notably the ones involving
> commercial publisher profit margins.
>
>(2)
>Bookstein, F.L. (2000) On "value-added" by electronic journals:
>infelicity of a microeconomic metaphor.
>PSYCOLOQUY 11(090)
>ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/2000.volume.11/
>psyc.00.11.090.electronic-journals.3.bookstein
>http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?11.090
>
> ABSTRACT: The book-length essay by Tenopir and King (2000a,b) is at
> once too conservative and too superficial for its subject-matter.
> Its authors have failed to consider most aspects of the social
> structure of science impinging upon the transition that ostensibly
> concerns them: matters such as the content of an article, the
> metaphor of added value in comparing media of scientific
> communication, and the role of the scholarly community in shaping
> the knowledge structures it maintains over time. As a result, the
> authors' cost extrapolations are not likely to be of much help in
> the new world.
>
>(3)
>Ebenezer, C. (2000) Electronic journals: Incremental change or radical
>shift?
>PSYCOLOQUY 11(091)
>ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/2000.volume.11/
>psyc.00.11.091.electronic-journals.4.ebenezer
>http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?11.091
>
> ABSTRACT: Tenopir and King (2000a,b) aim to root discussions of
> future developments in electronic journal publishing in fact rather
> than speculation. A systems framework for assessing scholarly
> journal publishing is set forth. Detailed accounts are presented of
> all aspects of the scientific communication system. The analyses
> represent a landmark in the study of scientific publishing; the
> book is likely to become an indispensable reference. Its scope is,
> however, more limited than the title suggests, and the authors'
> work is vitiated somewhat by the age of some of the studies
> presented, and by their implicit treatment of scientific
> information as an undifferentiated whole.
>
>(4)
>Algarabel, S. (2000) The future of electronic publishing.
>PSYCOLOQUY 11(092)
>ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/2000.volume.11/
>psyc.00.11.092.electronic-journals.5.algarabel
>http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?11.092
>
> ABSTRACT: Tenopir & King's (2000a,b) book is an excellent review of
> all the factors involved in publishing and their evolution from the
> traditional to the increasingly electronic environment. Speed,
> economy and new possibilities for interaction are the major factors
> favoring electronic publishing. The authors extensively acknowledge
> this fact. The only minor point where the book should have
> extended its analysis concerns different ways in which electronic
> publishing could aid in the establishment of a more logical
> publication system, more in agreement with academic values, where
> availability and speed predominate over other, mainly economic,
> considerations.
>
>(5)
>Miller, L. N. (2000) Will electronic publishing reduce
>the cost of scholarly scientific journals?
>PSYCOLOQUY 11(093)
>ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/2000.volume.11/
>psyc.00.11.093.electronic-journals.6.miller
>http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?11.093
>
> ABSTRACT: Using voluminous data from over 30 years of research,
> Tenopir and King (2000a,b) describe the evolution of
> scholarly/scientific publishing, primarily in the United States.
> Their data thoroughly document how scientists find and use
> information, and the ways that publishers and libraries facilitate
> or frustrate the process. They develop cost and pricing models for
> print journals, and then use the models to predict the costs and
> pricing of electronic journals. Fixed costs dominate the total cost
> of most scholarly journals. Because the fixed costs of electronic
> journals are quite similar to those of print journals, the authors
> conclude it is unlikely that electronic journals can be produced
> and distributed at significantly lower cost than print journals.
> Their conclusions presume that the developing universe of
> electronic journals ultimately will closely resemble the present
> universe of print journals. If non-profit publishers become more
> prevalent in the e-journal universe, or if free archiving of papers
> leads to free or nearly free journals, the outcome may not fit
> their model.
>
>(6)
>Shum, S. B. (2000)
>Research needed on online usage and peer review.
>PSYCOLOQUY 11(094)
>ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/2000.volume.11/
>psyc.00.11.094.electronic-journals.7.shum
>http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?11.094
>
> ABSTRACT: We know little about how scientists search for articles,
> read them, annotate them, share them, or review them, and how they
> wish things might be in the future. How could ejournals and other
> network resources better support these activities? We need to know
> not only what and how much scientists do, but how they accomplish
> this work individually and collectively in their day to day lives.
> A detailed discussion of the pros and cons of new, electronically
> mediated peer review models would also be welcome.
>
>
>PRECIS OF THE BOOK UNDER REVIEW:
>
>Tenopir, Carol, and Donald W. King (2000b) Precis of: "Towards
>Electronic Journals" PSYCOLOQUY 11(084)
>ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/2000.volume.11/
>psyc.00.11.084.electronic-journals.1.tenopir
>http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?11.084
>
> ABSTRACT: This precis of "Towards Electronic Journals" (Tenopir &
> King 2000) focuses mostly on scientists' perspective as authors and
> readers, how changes over the years by publishers and librarians
> have affected scientists, and what they should expect from
> electronic journal and digital journal article databases. We
> describe some myths concerning scholarly journals and attempt to
> assess the future in a realistic manner. Most of our primary data
> involves U.S. scientists, libraries and publishers, but much of the
> secondary data is from a European perspective, which shows few
> differences.
Received on Mon Jan 24 2000 - 19:17:43 GMT