Search results

This paper provides an extensive survey of the recent literature on scholarly publishing and its conversion to the electronic medium. It then presents the results of a questionnaire survey of the UK‐based scholarly publishing industry. The results of this survey suggest that the publishers are moving quickly towards the use of the Internet as a major medium for the distribution of their products, though they do not expect an early print publication. They also do not expect that any alternative system, based on scholars providing their results free of charge at the point of use, will seriously threaten the future of the commercial scholarly publisher. They do, however, perceive several significant difficulties in the near future. These include a shortage of appropriately trained staff, uncertainties about pricing mechanisms, lack of adequate budgetary provision by universities for library purchases, and unrealistic expectations on the part of scholars that electronic information should be inexpensive.

The literature of the evaluation of Internet search engines is reviewed. Although there have been many studies, there has been little consistency in the way such studies have been carried out. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that recall is virtually impossible to calculate in the fast changing Internet environment, and therefore the traditional Cranfield type of evaluation is not usually possible. A variety of alternative evaluation methods has been suggested to overcome this difficulty. The authors recommend that a standardised set of tools is developed for the evaluation of web search engines so that, in future, comparisons can be made between search engines more effectively, and that variations in performance of any given search engine over time can be tracked. The paper itself does not provide such a standard set of tools, but it investigates the issues and makes preliminary recommendations of the types of tools needed.

This paper considers whether copyright has a future in an electronic environment. A number of issues face copyright owners in the networked environment, most of them caused by the ease with which materials can be copied. Some relevant examples of legal cases are considered. Some responses to the stresses, in terms of both attitudes and legislation, such as the EU Database Directive and the EU Draft Directive on Copyright, are considered. It is concluded that copyright is unlikely to survive in its present form, and that attempts to strengthen it by means of increasing owner rights could be counterproductive. Innovative thinking and ideas are necessary, together with increased owner‐user co‐operation, if copyright is to survive.

The purpose of this paper is to examine Nick Moore’s information policy matrix and how it has been used by Moore and others.

This study involved secondary search and a bibliographic study of the impact Moore’s work has had on other authors.

It is clear that there have been two quite separate trains of research in information policy, one in the USA and one in Europe, and that it appears from the literature that there is limited awareness of each other’s work. Focusing on the UK and European research, the papers the authors inspected that report information policy analyses make no mention of Moore’s work. It could be argued that Moore’s matrix is too simplistic for such a complex topic as information policy, but it may also be the case that there is a lack of awareness of how the matrix can be used in policy analysis as Moore’s published papers were general descriptions of the matrix, reported the findings of his analyses or suggested policy goals. Moore did not publish theoretical or methodological papers to explain how to go about policy analysis using his matrix.

This study is based on secondary research and bibliographic analysis. Furthermore, primary research could have revealed deeper insights into use and impact of Moore’s framework by analysts and policy makers.

The paper highlights potential opportunities for international collaboration on information policy research, to explore more deeply theoretical models that could be used to underpin policy analysis as well as the potential value of Moore’s matrix.

This is the final study in a series of six emanating from the UK JISC‐funded RoMEO Project (rights metadata for open‐archiving), which investigated the intellectual property rights issues relating to academic author self‐archiving of research papers. It reports the results of a survey of 542 academic authors, showing the level of protection required for their open access research papers. It then describes the selection of an appropriate means of expressing those rights through metadata and the resulting choice of Creative Commons licences. Finally, it outlines proposals for communicating rights metadata via the Open Archives Initiative’s Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI‐PMH).

The Internet gives access for blind and visually impaired users to previously unobtainable information via Braille or speech synthesis interpretation. This paper looks at how three search engines, AltaVista, Yahoo! and Infoseek presented their information to a small group of visually impaired and blind users and how accessible individual Internet pages are. Two participants had varying levels of partial sight and two Subjects were blind and solely reliant on speech synthesis output. Subjects were asked for feedback on interface design at various stages of their search and any problems they encountered were noted. The barriers to access that were found appear to come about by lack of knowledge and thought by the page designers themselves. An accessible page does not have to be dull. By adhering to simple guidelines, visually impaired users would be able to access information more effectively than would otherwise be possible. Visually disabled people would also have the same opportunity to access knowledge as their sighted colleagues.

This article explores recent developments in the production and delivery of scholarly journal articles in digital form. It identifies the key stakeholders as authors, publishers, librarians and end users. It explores their concerns with regard to the digital journal production and delivery chain. It also explores the interrelationships of different stakeholder groups and considers how their concerns accord or conflict. The paper goes on to review cost and pricing developments. There appears to be no relationship between production costs and subscription prices of scholarly journals. Journals are priced according to what the market will bear, but, at the same time, the market is inelastic. As a result, prices have consistently increased annually at a rate well above the general inflation rate for the last two decades. Digital publishing by publishers has done nothing to relieve this problem. The ‘serials crisis’ has been the impetus for a number of developments that aim to use digital technology to reduce costs for the HE sector. These include alternative models of journal production such as that proposed by Harnad, and initiatives that aim to influence the structure of the market for scholarly journals with a view to driving prices down such as SPARC and HighWire Press. These developments are reviewed.

A citation study was carried out on all 217 academics who teach in UK library and information science schools. These authors between them received 622 citations in Social Scisearch for articles they had published between 1988 and the present. The results were ranked by department, and compared to the ratings awarded to the departments in the 1992 Universities Funding Council Research Assessment Exercise. Using the Spearman Rank Order Correlation coefficient, it was found that there is a statistically significant correlation between the numbers of citations received by a department in total, or the average number of citations received in the department per academic, and the Research Assessment Exercise rating. The paper concludes that this provides further independent support for the validity of citation counting, even when using just the first authors as a search tool for cited references. The paper also concludes that the cost and effort of the Research Assessment Exercise may not be justified when a simpler and cheaper alternative, namely a citation counting exercise, could be undertaken. The paper also concludes that the University of North London would probably have benefitted from being included in the 1992 Research Assessment Exercise.

This review aims to show, broadly, how the h‐index has become a subject of widespread debate, how it has spawned many variants and diverse applications since first introduced in 2005 and some of the issues in its use.

The review drew on a range of material published in 1990 or so sources published since 2005. From these sources, a number of themes were identified and discussed ranging from the h‐index's advantages to which citation database might be selected for its calculation.

The analysis shows how the h‐index has quickly established itself as a major subject of interest in the field of bibliometrics. Study of the index ranges from its mathematical underpinning to a range of variants perceived to address the indexes' shortcomings. The review illustrates how widely the index has been applied but also how care must be taken in its application.

The use of bibliometric indicators to measure research performance continues, with the h‐index as its latest addition. The use of the h‐index, its variants and many applications to which it has been put are still at the exploratory stage. The review shows the breadth and diversity of this research and the need to verify the veracity of the h‐index by more studies.

Economic aspects of digital journal production and delivery were explored using Ithink Analyst, a modelling software package. Three models were developed and simulations were used to monitor the effect of variations in the values of key model elements. The results suggest that scholarly journals can be produced and distributed for a modest fee as long as there are at least 500 subscribers. Alternative models such as author‐funded production are also viable. While a model that shares costs between authors and subscribers is viable, administration of two sets of fees would increase costs.