Towards Electronic Journals Carol Tenopir [email protected] And Donald W. King [email protected].
Electronic or Print: Are Scholarly Journals Still Important? Carol Tenopir, University of Tennessee,...
33
Electronic or Print: Are Scholarly Journals Still Important? Carol Tenopir, University of Tennessee, USA
Transcript of Electronic or Print: Are Scholarly Journals Still Important? Carol Tenopir, University of Tennessee,...
Electronic or Print:Are Scholarly Journals Still
Important?
Carol Tenopir, University of Tennessee, USA
Scholarly Journals
• Peer-reviewed
• Have an editorial voice
• Ongoing publication of articles
• Published by commercial publisher, scholarly society, or other entity
Why Scholarly Journals are Important
1. Scientists read a lot
2. Information in journals is essential
3. Scientists use many ways to get articles
4. Electronic journals are adopted when it is easier
5. Fields have core journals and peripheral
Data From
• 15,000 scientists
• All fields of science
• University and non-university settings
• Over 100 organizations
1. Scientists Read a Lot
Average Number of Scholarly Article Readings Per Year
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1977 1978-1983
1984 1985-1989
1990-1993
1994-1998
2000-2001
Years of Observation
Scholarly Article Readings by Work Field
• Engineers ~ 72 articles per year
• Physicists ~ 204 articles per year
• Chemists ~ 276 articles per year
• University medical faculty ~ 322 articles per year
Time Spent Reading
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1977 78/83 1984 85/89 90/93 94/98 00/01
Total Scientists
Time Spent Reading by Work Field
97118
153
198
0
50
100
150
200
Hou
rs s
pen
t R
ead
ing/
Yea
r
Engineers Medical faculty Physicists Chemists
Time spent reading per article
81 minutes per articleEngineers
45 minutes per articlePhysicists
43 minutes per articleChemists
22 minutes per articleUniversity Medical Faculty
2. The Information Found in Journals Is Essential
What Scientists Are Reading
• Approx. 50% of readings contain information that is new to the reader
• Over 35% of readings are of articles older than one year
• Older articles tend to be more valuable to scientists’ work
Usefulness of Article Content
• Achievers read more than others
• Many purposes of reading
• Journals are important compared with other resources
Value of Article Content
• Considerable savings result
• Improved productivity, quality, and timeliness of work
• Users are “willing to pay” for information in time
3. Scientists Use a Variety of Ways to Get Journal Articles
Average Annual Price Increase (%) in Scientific Journals
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
1960-1975
1967-1986
1972-1988
1975-1995
1991-1995
1995-1998
1998-2000
Time Periods Examined
Average Number of Personal Subscriptions to Scholarly Journals
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1977 1978-1983
1984 1985-1989
1990-1993
1994-1998
2000-2001
Years of Observation
Proportion of Readings of Scholarly Scientific Articles
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Personal Library-Provided Other
1977 1993-1998
Sources of reading- ORNL scientists
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
PersonalSubscription
LibrarySubscription
Shared Dept/Unit
Collection
Separate Copy
1984
2000
4. Scientists Use Electronic Journals When It Is Easier
arXiv.org
• Connections averaged 61,000 per day in February 2002
• 35,000 new papers in 2001
• Each article gets an average of 300 downloads per year
E-print Use by ORNL Scientists (2000)
• E-prints account for 3.6% of all reading
• 1/3 of ORNL scientists are aware of arXiv.org
• 1/4 are aware of DOE PrePrint Network
E-print Use by Astronomers (2001)
• E-prints account for 21.6% of all reading
• 85% of AAS members are aware of arXiv.org or the subset astro-ph
• 4.7% aware of DOE PrePrint Network
Bibliographic Database Impact
• A strong, linked db leads to journal use
• 90% of all Medline searches are in PubMed
• Today, the number of PubMed searches ranges from 1/2 to over one million per day
• 96.5% of astronomers know and use ADS
• Half of them read 6 or more articles per month as a result of ADS use
Reasons for Reading More Separates
• Increase in readings 7.5% in 1984
identified by 13.3% in 2000
online searches
• Increase in readings 8.6% in 1984
identified by 24.0% in 2000
other persons
Electronic Journal Reading
• ORNLScientists– 17.3% Ejournal
– 3.6% eprints
– 14% other electronic
– 35% Total electronic
• AAS Members– 52.7% Ejournal
– 21.6% eprints
– 5.3% other electronic
– 80% Total electronic
Sources of Articles Read: UT Faculty
24Library Print Subscription
11Electronic Subscription
(Library or Personal)
6Free Web
15Separate Copy
41Personal Print Subscription
PercentSource (n=99)
5. The Journal Model Is Important for Core Journals
Sources of Readings
Scientists appear to be reading from more journals—at least one article per year from approximately 23 journals, up from 13 in the late 1970s and 18 in the mid-1990s.
% and amount of readings from separate copies
use of personal subscriptions
Aspects of Journal Readings
• Scientists read from an increasing number of journals each year
• Half are read less than five times
• Only one of 26 have over 25 readings
• High reading titles form a core in the discipline (varies, but generally 2-6 titles)
Sources of readings by medical faculty
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Personalsubscription
Librarysubscription
Other
Electronic
Journals Title Model versus
Separate Articles Model
Multiple Co-existing Alternatives
• Print journals
• E-journals with many links
• Articles databases
• E-print servers
• Authors’ web sites
