1 / 24

THE FUNCTION OF THE JOURNAL

THE FUNCTION OF THE JOURNAL. Developing a predictive model for scholarly communication. System Drivers. Major drivers Researcher behaviour as authors Human factors: ego, recognition, renown Amplifying factors Professional environment Reward mechanisms Institutional environment

gusty
Télécharger la présentation

THE FUNCTION OF THE JOURNAL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. THE FUNCTION OF THE JOURNAL Developing a predictive model for scholarly communication

  2. System Drivers • Major drivers • Researcher behaviour as authors • Human factors: ego, recognition, renown • Amplifying factors • Professional environment • Reward mechanisms • Institutional environment • Tenure and support • Governmental and societal factors • Resource justification and allocation

  3. First Scientific Journal • 6th March 1665 Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Ed. Henry Oldenburg Secretary of the Royal Society • First true scholarly journal • Published for profit at Oldenburg’s expense

  4. [We must be] very careful of registring as well the person and time of any new matter.., as the matter itselfe; whereby the honor of ye invention will be inviolably preserved to all posterity. [Oldenburg, 24 November 1664] all Ingenious men will be thereby incouraged to impart their knowledge and discoveryes [Oldenburg, 3 December 1664] [I should not] neglect the opportunity of having some of my Memoirs preserv’d, by being incorporated into a Collection, that is like to be as lasting as usefull [Boyle, 1665] [Phil. Trans. should be] licensed under the charter by the Council of the Society, being first reviewed by some of the members of the same.” [R.Soc. Order in Council 1/3/1665] Inventing the Journal: Oldenburg’s Letters REGISTRATION DISSEMINATION ARCHIVE CERTIFICATION

  5. Peer Reviewed Journal Growth 1665-2001 M A Mabe The growth and number of journals Serials16(2).191-7, 2003 Data from Ulrich’s International Periodicals Directory on CD-ROM Summer 2001 Edition Total number of active refereed learned journals in 2004: 17,700

  6. Article Growth 1981-2002 ~3% p.a. ISI Data

  7. Journals & Researcher Growth Source data: NSF, Ulrich’s & ISI More researchers⇒more journals

  8. Current Environment • 2,000+ journal publishers • 600 commercial, 1400+ not for profit • 18,000 active, peer reviewed journals • 1.2-1.4 m articles published yearly • ~1 m unique authors each year • ~10-15 m readers

  9. Scientific Communication Units X X X ? ? ? ? X X X X X X X X ? X X ? X X

  10. Scientific Communication Vehicles ? ? X ? X X X X

  11. How do Authors Choose a Journal? • They already know the subject coverage of their research paper and its quality and approach • They select the set of most appropriate journals in terms of subject coverage • They match the general quality of their paper (best, good, ok) to a class of journals (top, middling, run-of-the-mill) with the same subject and approach • From that class they select a specific journal based upon experience

  12. ? ? ? ? How do Authors Choose a Journal? Key Factors: Which Category? Marginal Factors: Which Journal? Journal Hierarchy Impact Factor Reputation Editorial Standard Publication speed Access to Audience International Coverage Self Evaluation A&I Coverage Society Link Track Record Quality/Colour Illustrations Service Elements, e.g. author instructions, quality of proofs, reprints, etc Experience as Referee J J A J J J J B J J J J C J

  13. Choice of Journal (Coles 93) quality collection

  14. Authors’ Reasons for Choosing the Last Journal to Publish in (Ciber 2004) 0 = no influence, 100 = strongest influence

  15. What matters most to Authors? 2= 1 6 5 7 8 4 2= QUALITY & SPEED Data from 36,188 Authors; 0= unimportant 10= very important Elsevier survey data presented at Fiesole 2003

  16. REGISTRATION: to register a discovery astheirs and made by them on a certain date to assert ownership and achieve priority CERTIFICATION: To get their research (and by implication, themselves) quality stampedby publication in a journal of known quality to establish a reputation, and get reward DISSEMINATION: To let their peers know what they have done to attract recognition and collaboration ARCHIVE: To leave a permanentrecord of their research renown, immortality What do modern researchers want as authors? SPEED QUALITY AUDIENCE PERMANENCE

  17. What do modern researchers want as readers? • Reassurance as to its status and quality • prestige and authority ⇒ CERTIFICATION • Material that is appropriate to theirresearch interest • Specialisationand relevance ⇒DISSEMINATION • Tools that allow the material to belocated and browsed • browsing andindexing⇒NAVIGATION • Availability of sources over time • persistence andcontinuity ⇒ARCHIVE QUALITY COLLECTION TECHNOLOGY PERMANENCE

  18. Needs READERS constant citation authority specialisation continuity navigation Functions JOURNAL registration certification dissemination archive navigation A Functional/Behavioural Model for the Journal Needs AUTHORS • ownership • reputation • recognition/audience • renown Provided by the publishing entity through • third party authority (rhetorical independence) • brand identity management • long-term management of continuity • technology

  19. Research Community Monitoring and feedback EDITOR & BOARD QUALITY SPEED COLLECTION Brand Identity & Its Management READERS AUTHORS TITLE PUBLISHER

  20. Nature of content Objective knowledge about external facts in the world Subjective knowledge about internal critical processes Each author has his own critical faculties All authors equally able to make “discoveries” Each author’s “discoveries” can only be his Credit goes to who is “first” Priority and speed of publication paramount Priority and speed unimportant Very strong Very weak Registration function Testing the Model: Content humanities sciences

  21. Testing the Model: Discipline Subject variation Theoretical & V Large Scale Experimental Small to Medium Scale Experimental/Empirical Many investigators Co-authorship low Small fields where quality of each researchers’ work is known personally to peers MATHS COMPUTERSCIENCE THEORETICALPHYSICS MOLECULAR &ATOMIC & SOLIDSTATE PHYSICSCHEMISTRYLIFE SCIENCESMATERIALS SCIENCEENGINEERINGGEOLOGY Theoretical paper, “Right” or “Wrong” by inspection Peer review as methodological and quality filter HIGHENERGYPHYSICS Co-authorship high Very strong Very weak Certification function

  22. Ave co-authorship level 2003 High Energy Physics 4 Where/when the model breaks down… Pre-print or self-archiving culture? Unimportant Registration Certification Traditional journal culture Crucial 1 Level of Co-authorship 100s

  23. Is Co-authorship Rising? From: Mabe & Amin ASLIB Proc. 54(3).149-175, 2002 Data from ISI Science Citation Index 3.98 3.03 0.75

  24. The Future: A Tentative Prediction • Journal model will remain • Drivers unchanged, human factors same as 1665 • Paradigm collapse by coauthor expansion doesn’t seem likely for 50-100+ years • Technology used will develop • Delivery technology has changed • unrecognisable from 10 years ago; paper to www • Unrecognisable in the future? • Economic models evolve • Business models are constantly changing • Models can feedback in unexpected ways

More Related