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publishing, and too many of the results reported are out of date.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