Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 554. Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London <http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/> <http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/> Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 19:00:19 +0000 From: Stevan Harnad <harnad@COGLIT.ECS.SOTON.AC.UK> Subject: Oppenheim Review of Tenopir & King (2000) The following review of Tenopir & King (2000a,b) on Electronic Journals has just been published in Psycoloquy (retrievable at the URLs indicated): ORIGINAL BOOK PRECIS: 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.cogsci.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. 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 REVIEW: Oppenheim, C. (2000) Time for a timelier analysis of electronic developments title. PSYCOLOQUY 11(129) ftp://ftp.princeton.edu/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/2000.volume.11/ psyc.00.11.129.electronic-journals.9.oppenheim http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?11.129 ABSTRACT: Although Tenopir and King (Tenopir & King ,2000a)have put in enormous effort pulling together scattered strands of research and consultancy, the book fails to give serious consideration to the more innovative ideas regarding the future of scholarly journal publishing, and too many of the results reported are out of date. Nonetheless, the book is recommended as the first comprehensive overview of the economics of, and the author and reader habits of, scholarly journals.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/10/00 EST