Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

As co-editors of this themed section of New Media & Society, we introduce the four articles comprising the section and briefly address facets of the changes transpiring in scholarly publishing and, more generally, scholarly communication. A plethora of issues and developments is related to this transformation and we suggest the diversity and challenges involved. We mention one development in more detail, enhanced publishing, and conclude with promising inroads for theoretical understanding and empirical investigation of how scholarly publishing and communication are evolving.

Keywords

Enhanced publishing scholarly communication scholarly publishing social media and scholarship

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acord

Harley

(2012) Credit, time, and personality: The human challenges to sharing scholarly work using Web 2.0. New Media & Society. 15(3): 359–377.

Associastion of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) (2007) Establishing a research agenda for scholarly communication: A call for community engagement. Report. Available at: http://www.acrl.ala.org/scresearchagenda/index.php?title=Main_Page (accessed 15 January 2013).

Beall

(2012) Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature 489: 179. Available at: www.nature.com/polopoly_fs/1.11385!/menu/main/topColumns/topLeftColumn/pdf/489179a.pdf (accessed 31 October 2012).

Borgman

(2007) Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Bradley

Fulton

Helm

. (2011) Non–traditional book publishing. First Monday 16: 8. Available at: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/3353/3030 (accessed 31 October 2012).

Brembs

(2012) The Finch report illustrates the new strategy wars of open access. In: Blog post 2 July, LSE Impact of Social Sciences. Available at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2012/07/02/strategy-wars-open-access/ (accessed 31 October 2012).

Breure

Voorbij

Hoogerwerf

(2011) Rich Internet publications: ‘Show what you tell’. Journal of Digital Information 12(1). Available at: http://journals.tdl.org/jodi/article/view/1606/1738 (accessed 30 October 2012).

Bulger

Meyer

De la Flor

. (2011) Reinventing research? Information practices in the humanities. Report. London: Research Information Network. Available at: http://www.rin.ac.uk/our-work/using-and-accessing-information-resources/information-use-case-studies-humanities (accessed 30 October 2012).

Calabrese

(1992) Changing times for scholarly communication: The case of the electronic journal. Technology in Society 14: 199–220. Available at: http://spot.colorado.edu/~calabres/Changing%20Times%20for%20Scholarly%20Communication.pdf (accessed 31 October 2012).

10.

Campbell

Pentz

Borthwick

(eds) (2012) Academic and Professional Publishing. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.

11.

Cope

Phillips

(eds) (2009) The Future of the Academic Journal. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.

12.

Danowski

Gluesing

Riopelle

(2011) The revolution in diffusion theory caused by new media. In: Vishwanath

Barnett

(eds) The Diffusion of Innovations: A Communication Science Perspective. New York: Peter Lang, pp.123–144.

13.

Finch

(2012) Accessibility, sustainability, excellence: How to expand access to research publications. Report of the working group on expanding access to published research findings. Available at: www.researchinfonet.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Finch-Group-report-FINAL-VERSION.pdf (accessed 31 October 2012).

14.

Fitzpatrick

(2011) Planned Obsolescence: Publishing, Technology, and the Future of the Academy. New York: New York University Press.

15.

Garvey

(1979) Communication, the Essence of Science: Facilitating Information Exchange among Librarians, Scientists, Engineers, and Students. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

16.

Harley

Acord

(2011) Peer Review in Academic Promotion and Publishing: Its Meaning, Locus, and Future. Berkeley, CA: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California. Available at: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/1xv148c8 (accessed 30 October 2012).

17.

Harley

Acord

Earl-Novell

. (2010) Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines. Berkeley, CA: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California. Available at: http://escholarship.org/uc/cshe_fsc (

accessed 30 October 2012

18.

Harnard

(2012) Why the UK should not heed the Finch report. In: Blog post 4 July, LSE Impact of Social Sciences. Available at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2012/07/04/why-the-uk-should-not-heed-the-finch-report/ (accessed 31 October 2012).

19.

Jankowski

(2009) The contours and challenges of e-research. In: Jankowski

(ed.) e-Research: Transformation in Scholarly Practice. New York: Routledge, pp.3–31.

20.

Jankowski

Scharnhorst

Tatum

. (2012) Enhancing scholarly publications: Developing hybrid monographs in the humanities and social sciences. Scholarly Research and Communication 4(1): 1–26.

21.

Mackenzie Owen

(2005) The scientific article in the age of digitization. PhD Dissertation, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Available at: http://dare.uva.nl/record/167602 (accessed 31 October 2012).

22.

McQuail

Windahl

(1993) Communication Models for the Study of Mass Communications. London: Longman.

23.

Merton

(1979) The Sociology of Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

24.

Meyer

Bulger

Kyriakidou-Zacharoudiou

. (2011) Collaborative yet independent: Information practices in the physical sciences. Report. London: Research Information Network. Available at: http://www.rin.ac.uk/our-work/using-and-accessing-information-resources/physical-sciences-case-studies-use-and-discovery- (accessed 30 October 2012).

25.

Nentwich

König

(2012) Cyberscience 2.0: Research in the Age of Digital Social Networks. Frankfurt: Campus Wissenschaft.

26.

Nielsen

(2012) Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

27.

Peek

Newby

(eds) (1996) Scholarly Publishing: The Electronic Frontier. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

28.

Procter

Williams

Stewart

. (2010a) Adoption and use of Web 2.0 in scholarly communications. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences 368: 4039–4056.

29.

Procter

Williams

Stewart

. (2010b) If you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use web 2.0. Report for the Research Information Network. Available at: www.rin.ac.uk/our-work/communicating-and-disseminating-research/use-and-relevance-web-20-researchers (accessed 30 October 2012).

30.

Roberts

(1999) Scholarly publishing, peer review and the Internet. First Monday 4(4). Available at http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1287/1207 (accessed 30 October 2012).

31.

Rowland

(1997) Print journals: Fit for the future? Ariadne, Issue 7. Available at: www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue7/fytton (accessed 30 October 2012).

32.

Rowlands

Nicholas

Russell

. (2011) Social media use in the research workflow. Learned Publishing 24(3): 183–195.

33.

Stewart

Procter

Williams

Poschen

(2012) The role of academic publishers in shaping the development of Web 2.0 services for scholarly communication. New Media & Society. 15(3): 378–397.

34.

Suber

(2012) Open Access. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

35.

Swan

(2012) Policy guidelines for the development and promotion of open access. Report. Paris: UNESCO. Available at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002158/215863e.pdf (accessed 15 January 2013).

36.

Tatum

(2011) Formalization of informal scholarly communication. In: Paper presented at iCS-OII symposium, a decade in Internet time. University of Oxford, 21–23 September. Available at: http://archive.oii.ox.ac.uk/ics2011/microsites.oii.ox.ac.uk/ics2011/content/programme.html (accessed 20 November 2012).

37.

Tatum

Jankowski

(2012) Openness in scholarly communication: Conceptual framework and challenges to innovation. In: Wouters

Beaulieu

Scharnhorst

. (eds) Virtual Knowledge: Experimenting in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp.183–218.

38.

Thompson

(2005) Books in the Digital Age: The Transformation of Academic and Higher Education Publishing in Britain and the United States. Cambridge: Polity.

39.

Ware

Mabe

(2009) The stm report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing. Oxford: International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers. Available at: www.stm-assoc.org/2009_10_13_MWC_STM_Report.pdf (accessed 30 October 2012).

40.

Weller

(2001) Editorial Peer Review: Its Strengths and Weaknesses. Medford, NJ: ASIST Monograph Series.

41.

Weller

(2011) The Digital Scholar. How Technology is Transforming Scholarly Practice. Hampshire: Bloomsbury Academic.

42.

Willinsky

(2006) The Access Principle: The Case for Open Access to Research and Scholarship. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Scholarly publishing and the internet: A NM&S themed section

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References