Trends in transforming scholarly communication and their implications

Information Processing and Management

Volumn 39, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 889-898

  Liu, Ziming ^a  

^a SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Authorship; Citation analysis; Digital library; Scholarly publishing

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; DIGITAL LIBRARIES; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; PUBLISHING;

SCHOLARLY COMMUNICATION;

DATA PROCESSING;

EID: 0041764506     PISSN: 03064573     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0306-4573(02)00057-2     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Broad W.J. The publishing game: Getting more or less. Science. 211:1981;1137-1139.
2. Buckland M.K. Redesigning library services: A manifesto. 1992;American Library Association, Chicago, IL.
3. Cason J.A. Authorship trends in poultry science, 1981 through 1990. Poultry Science. 71:1992;1283-1291.
4. Crawford S.Y., Hurd J.M., Weller A.C. From print to electronic: The transformation of scientific communication. 1996;Information Today, Medford, NJ.
5. Darnton R. Towards a history of reading. Wilson Quarterly. 13(4):1989;87-102.
6. Drenth, J. (2001). Professors responsible for increasing in authorship. International Congress on Biomedical Peer Review and Scientific Publication. Available: http://www.ama-assn.org/public/peer/prau.htm.
7. Epstein R.J. Six authors in search of a citation: Villains or victims of the Vancouver convention? British Medical Journal. 306(6880):1993;765-767.
8. Goodrum A.A., McCain K.W., Lawrence S., Giles C.L. Scholarly publishing in the Internet age: A citation analysis of computer science literature. Information Processing and Management. 37:2001;661-675.
9. Hawkins B.L. Creating the library of the future: Incrementalism won't get us there! The Serials Librarian. 24(3-4):1994;17-47.
10. Lanham R.A. The economy of attention. Michigan Quarterly Review. 36(2):1997;270-284.
11. Levy, D.M. (1997). I read the news today, oh boy: Reading and attention in digital libraries. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM international conference on digital libraries, July 23-26, 1997. Philadelphia, PA.
12. Liu Z., Stork D.G. Is paperless really more? Rethinking the role of paper in the information age. Communications of the ACM. 42(11):2000;94-97.
13. McKnight, C. (1997). Electronic journals: What do users think of them? In Proceedings of international symposium on research, development and practice in digital libraries, November 18-21, 1997. Tsukuba, Japan.
14. Metz P., Gherman P.M. Serials pricing and the role of the electronic journal. College and Research Libraries. 52(4):1991;315-327.
15. Odlyzko A.M. Tragic loss or good riddance? The impending demise of traditional scholarly journals. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 42(1):1995;71-122.
16. Price D. Little science, big science. 1965;Columbia University Press, New York, NY.
17. Sampson Z.J. Authorship counts: Forty years of the Physical Review and Physical Review Letters. Scientometrics. 32(2):1995;219-226.
18. Sobal J., Ferentz K.S. Abstract creep and author inflation. New England Journal of Medicine. 323:1990;488-489.
19. Tenopir C., King D.W. Designing electronic journals with 30 years of lessons from print. Journal of Electronic Publishing. 4(2):1998; http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/04-02/.
20. Wurman R. Information anxiety. 1989;Doubleday, New York.