Home » Blogging » How is the internet changing the way we think? The Digital Scholar: Publishing (Martin Weller)

How is the internet changing the way we think? The Digital Scholar: Publishing (Martin Weller)


• Research

• Authoring

• Submission

• Rejection/modification

• Publication

• Dissemination


• Accepted practice

• Academic respectability

• Reward and tenure

• Dissemination

• Curation

NB Bellow’s Law

‘Once the journal has been liberated from the printed format, a number of related assumptions begin to unravel and lead to more fundamental questions.’

22,000 peer reviewed journals from 9,900 publishers.

Questioning the scholarly communication process … Often the current model does not stand up to scrutiny.

The trucker’s deal Wiley 2009b

McGuigan and Russell (2008) Deutsche Bank on how 7,000 people in academic publishing add value to justify 40% margins – they don’t.

Advantages of open access publishing Harnad (2005)

• Early advantage

• Arxiv advantage

• Quality bias

• Quality advantage

• Competitive advantage

• Usage advantage

Weller’s POV

• Citation advantage

• Time lag to publication

• Copyright

• Alternative publishing methods

Desire for greatest impact and widest dissemination (without compromising its quality or findings).

VS. Time to publication due to peer review and a print mentality that restricts number of items in a journal and how often it is published.

Creative commons keeps rights with the author.

Alternative methods for communication, publishing and debate which are more rewarding.

The traditional article begins to seem remote and dry in comparison.

Google knowledge web-based authoring.

PLoS hubs

New forms of representation and communication.

Shift from filtering on the way into filtering on the way out. Weinberger (2007)

As they are the product of public funding they should be out there.

We’re at a transition state, and Weller gives in ten years for the change to occur. I see it differently as one of the early aeronauts looking out across at English Channel wanting to cross as soon as the weather permits knowing that I may just make it, wait ten years and others will be looking to cross the Atlantic.

Ware (2008) reasons to peer review (for free)

• To play your part as a member of the academic community

• To enjoy being able to improve the paper

• To enjoy seeing Newquay work ahead of publication

• To reciprocate the benefit when others review your postings.

Towards the ‘approbation of discerning readers’. Martin Rees (2010)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


%d bloggers like this: