Apologies for a very belated response to this.
Although a high percentage did, indeed, state that they considered preprint
and/or 'postprint' archives important, it was clear from the actual
responses that, outside the field of high energy physics, most respondents
had not the faintest idea what was meant by the question. Answers like
'pdf' were common.
The change to peer review which was most strongly supported was simply to
speed it up through electronic communications; there was relatively more
modest support for making reviewers' names public, or the addition of public
commentary to supplement peer review.
I am sure most readers of this list appreciate that, as a not-for-profit
association, we have to cover our costs; thus it was essential to sell the
report of our research in order to recoup the research costs. Copies are
still available and may be ordered via our website.
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
ALPSP Website
http://www.alpsp.org
Learned Publishing is now online, free of charge, at
www.learned-publishing.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Goodman" <dgoodman_at_PRINCETON.EDU>
To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 8:38 PM
Subject: Re: ALPSP Research study on academic journal authors
> Having not yet seen more than the summary and graphs, I take the risk of
> making erroneous remarks in the context of the entire material, and make
> these preliminary comments:
>
> I.
> 62% of authors thought "reprint archives" important, and at least 78%
> thought they would be important in the future. This includes
> university-based sites and discipline-based sites. For preprint
> archives, 33% considered them important now, at least 44% in the future.
> I am pleased, encouraged, and a little surprised that the free access
> movement has been so persuasive, even outside of the sciences. I had not
> thought we have come so far.
>
> II.
> At least 45% of those surveyed wanted major changes in the practice of
> peer review.
>
> I do wish the society had considered disseminating the results more
> important, and partially recovering the cost of the survey and its
> publication less important. Then they could have made the entire survey
> available on line, instead of requiring a $200 payment.
>
>
> Sally Morris wrote:
> >
> > You will now find details of the latest ALPSP research report, Authors
> > and Electronic Publishing, on our website (http://www.alpsp.org), from
where
> > you can order a copy.
> >
> > 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
> > ALPSP Website http://www.alpsp.org
> >
> > Learned Publishing is now online, free of charge, at
> > http://www.learned-publishing.org
>
> --
> David Goodman
> Research Librarian and
> Biological Science Bibliographer
> Princeton University Library
> Princeton, NJ 08544-0001
> phone: 609-258-7785
> fax: 609-258-2627
> e-mail: dgoodman_at_princeton.edu
Received on Tue Jun 25 2002 - 01:21:30 BST