14.0554 on electronic journals

From: by way of Willard McCarty (willard@lists.village.Virginia.EDU)
Date: 12/10/00

  • Next message: by way of Willard McCarty: "14.0555 corporate universities, industrial vs face-to-face"

                   Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 554.
           Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
             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
              Tenopir, Carol, and Donald W. King (2000b) Precis of: "Towards
              Electronic Journals." PSYCOLOQUY 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.
    Oppenheim, C. (2000) Time for a timelier analysis of electronic
    developments title.
    PSYCOLOQUY 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          publishing, and too many of the results reported are out of date.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