There are three main reasons provided for the lack of significant change in journals as a result of the internet:
1. The fundamental needs of researchers, such as having work certified by peers and archived permanently, have remained largely unchanged over time despite technological advances.
2. Researchers, both young and old, have shown themselves to be quite conservative in their preferences and behaviors, preferring familiar formats like PDFs over novel options.
3. The information niches occupied by scholarly communication, such as one-to-many oral presentations, have remained constant, and digital technologies have primarily served to enhance existing niches rather than replace them. Only incremental changes have occurred as a result.
Integration and Automation in Practice: CI/CD in Mule Integration and Automat...
Why the journal has changed little despite the internet
1. Why hasn’t the journal changed more
as a result of the internet?
Michael A Mabe
CEO, STM
&
Visiting Professor, Information Science,
University College, London
5. Not alone in wondering why not
much change…
• Michael Clarke
– Scholarly Kitchen 4 Jan 2010
• Why hasn’t scientific publishing been disrupted
more?
• Joe Esposito
– Posts and articles (Logos 21.13-19, 2010)
• Publishing After the Apocalypse
• Geoff Bilder
– Presentations
• Digital Incunabula
6. The Digital Incunabula Argument
Pre 1450: Post 1450: incunabulum
hand written illuminated mss printed book with hand
Illumination (Gutenberg Bible)
7. Invention of scientific journal
by Oldenburg AD 1665
AD 100
Invention of the Codex
“Digital incunabula”
8. Pre-Classical and Classical Classical
Scrolls Wax tablet note books
continuous linear access random access
Late antiquity and mediaeval
Codex: manuscript book
random access
9. First revolution
• Scrolls:
– Linear, continuous
First reason for lack of change: – No pages
– Single scroll:
“Pages” and “book structure” are deeply embedded in
volumen
the culture of reading and are reader friendly
Two millenia of habit and utility take some undoing
• Books:
Even when all file types are offered–(and they mostly
Random access
are) downloads of PDFs predominate
– Chapters
– Paragraphs
– Pages
10. Prof. Sir D’Arcy Wentworth
Thompson
On Growth and Form
First Published 1917
12. From this... ...to this...
No article
structure
Highly structured
13. Fundamental needs of researchers (I)
AUTHOR MODE
• To be seen to report an idea first
• To feel secure in communicating that idea
• [For empirical disciplines] To persuade
readers that their results are general and arise
from enactment of the scientific method
• To have their claim accepted by peers
• To report their idea to the right audience
• To get recognition for their idea
• To have a permanent public record of their
work
14. Fundamental Needs of Researchers (II)
READER MODE
• To identify relevant content
• To select based on trust and authority
• To locate and consume it
• To cite it
• To be sure it is final and permanent
15. Functions of the journal à la Oldenburg
• Date stamping or priority via registration
• Quality stamping (certification) through
peer-review
• Recording the final, definitive, authorised
versions of papers and archiving them
• Dissemination to targeted scholarly
audience
• [Added later] For readers, search and
navigation
– Achieved via creation and then management
of the “journal brand”
15
16. Evidence of researcher needs
2nd
CERTIFICATION 1st
6th
QUALITY 5th
&
8th
SPEED
7th
REGISTRATION 4th
3rd
Data from 63,384 Authors;
0= unimportant
10= very important
Source: Elsevier Author Feedback Programme 2009
17. Motivations for Publishing
100%
1993. B. R. Coles: “STM Information System in the UK”. Royal
Society/ ALPSP/ British Lib.
80%
60% 57%
40%
40%
27%
20%
18%
20% 15%
13%
8%
2% 3%
0%
Disseminate Further my Future funding Recognition Establish
results career precedence
1st most important motivation (93) 2nd most important motivation (93)
18. Motivations for Publishing
100% 1993. B. R. Coles: “STM Information System in the UK”. Royal
Society/ ALPSP/ British Lib.
80% 2005. Elsevier/NOP study
73%
What would you say are the two most important motivations for
publishing? Base: (6344)
60% 57%
40%
40%
27% 26% 25%
20% 20%
18%
20% 15% 16%
13% 13%
11%
8%
5% 5% 4%
2% 3%
0%
Disseminate Further my Future funding Recognition Establish
results career precedence
1st most important motivation (93) 2nd most important motivation (93)
1st most important motivation (05) 2nd most important motivation (05)
19. Similarities
• Form follows function...
... and function follows need
• At fundamental level
– researcher human needs change little over
time...
... so functions remain constant
... and gross form remains stable
23. Form follows function
• Relatively short articles
• Author names prominent
• Dates of submission, acceptance,
publication present
• Registration, certification, dissemination
and archive achieved simultaneously via
the act of formal publication
• Branded by journal title
25. Generational Change?
Second reason for lack of change:
• Mass market versus scholarly market
• Expected age effects are not foundstatic,
Fundamental needs of researchers are remarkably
with little change as a result of digitisation
• Young scholars more conservative than
older peers
These needs are like evolutionary selection pressure
When Elsevier Core Trends studythey hardly change
– animals fit an unchanging niche 2005
– Tenopir on Astronomers & Engineers 2003-7
There are NEW tools but they serve OLD purposes
– RIN/CIBER study on scholarly behaviour 2009
– Berkeley Study on scholarly behaviour 2010
“When I was a child, I spake as a
child...: but when I became a man, I put
away childish things.”
— Corinthians 13:11
26. Information Ecology
• Communication Niches
– Mode
• 1:1, 1:many, many:many
– Directionality
• unidirectional, interactive
– Delivery regime
• oral, written
– Temporality
• Live or recorded
– Register:
• private, public, informal, formal
– Enhancement:
• local, at a distance
27. Information Ecology: Talk Niche
• Case of an oral presentation (like this!)
– Mode: one-to-many
– Directionality: unidirectional (except for Q&A)
– Delivery regime: oral
– Temporality: live
– Register: public, formal
– Enhancement: in the lecture hall none
• but technology allows development to “at a distance”
– broadcast, but reduced directionality
– webcast, no reduced directionality
28. Delivery Mode Instances Digital technology
Local Live
Third reason for lack ofDistance
change: Recorded
Talk VOIP
There are only so many information niches
1:1
Phone call Audiofile
Oral Each one is occupied by communication instances
Lecture Webcast
which are not changed by technology merely
1:many
enhanced Broadcast Videofile
Note
Little change in human senses: most options remain
1:1 E mail
READ, WRITE, SPEAK, LISTEN
Letter
Written Notice
1:many E publication
Publication
Many:many Wiki
29. Future Change
• Formal scholarly publishing system has
evolved to satisfy
– Human needs of researchers
– Philosophical requirements of knowledge
generation
...and to occupy its
– Information ecological niches
• Needs and niches are relatively constant over
time
• Conservatism of form reflects this constancy
• Technology enables greater efficiency
– New tools, but new tools for old purposes
The most comprehensive study of the motivations for publishing in the ‘paper’ age was conducted in 1993 by B.R.Coles in the “STM Information System in the UK”, our study re-visits those questions. What the researcher was asked was what was their most important motivation for publishing, and then also their second most important motivation. Those bars coloured in dark blue are the first most important motivation for publishing and those in light blue the second most important motivation. Clearly, dissemination is the most significant factor, with 57% indicating it is the most important reason. Examining motivations can be a difficult matter. Individuals are not always as forthright as they might be. You can overcome this by thinking of the first order motivations as the overt motivations, and the second order motivations, as the covert and possibly most important motivations. Once you view dissemination in this context you can see that Furthering my career and securing future funding are key differentiators.
We’ll now look at the results from 2005. Those bars coloured in red and orange are from the 2005 study. When comparing the two studies it is worth noting that the 1993 study was conducted in the UK, in contrast our survey was global, so any conclusions are indicative rather than definitive. However, that said, we did examine the UK data from the 2005 study and saw little difference comparative to the global data In the 10 year period between the studies, an era in which internet usage has increased in both in terms of quantity and the maturity of use, motivations remain largely consistent Dissemination is still most significant factor, with 73% indicating it is the most important motivation, and furthering my career and securing future funding are still the key second order differentiators.s If we examine the differences more closely we see….