Traditional Scholarly Publishing Data Information Knowledge Lab notes Memos/letters Diary Lab/dept meetings Research notes Conversations Statistics Preprints Conferences Books Journals

Impact of the Web Data Information Knowledge Listservs Usenet E-prints E-conferences ? E-journals E-books ?

At its best, scholarship is…. …..open and collaborative

So scholars publish… to communicate to contribute to the body of information and knowledge in the field to establish presence, prestige, and authority

At its worst, scholarship is….. ….competitive and cut-throat

So scholars publish… to be “the first” for tenure (publish or perish) for grants

Scholarly publishing…. is the result of communication and social process (life cycle of information) is the result of peer review – Is the data/research valid? – Was the methodology reliable and effective? – Do the results appropriately build on the literature (I.e., add new knowledge to the field)? establishes credibility

But scholarly publishing also…. enforces status and hierarchy – core vs. “lesser” journals – senior vs. junior researchers establishes quantity vs. quality – “least publishable unit” provides publishers with power shuts out original and “controversial” ideas

Why should you care? Scholarly publishing remains the core of academic research In a survey of 3,200 faculty, undergrad & grad students: – 97% use print books and journals – 96% said they verified online info with other sources before using In a survey of 1,050 college students: – 50% said the web was inadequate for their assignments – 66% said the web did not offer a sufficiently wide range of resources for their class work

Why should you care? Results of scientific research are published in the media When results of a study contradict an earlier study, was it bad science or building new knowledge? When results of a study turn out to be false, was it bad science or results being reported in the media before they had gone through the entire scholarly life cycle?

The Baltimore Case Junior scientist accused (1988) of fabricating data that resulted in article published in Cell and later lying to cover it up Initial guilty finding (1994) resulted in her losing her job and ineligibility for federal funding for 10 years Baltimore, the senior researcher, resigned his position as president of Rockefeller Univ. Both were later (1996) cleared due to “insufficient evidence”

The Baltimore Case What happened? – Media notoriety: innocent young researcher vs. arrogant senior scientist (and Nobel winner) – Congressional scrutiny (high profile case) – Distrust of biomedical science (big labs and competition for public research funding) – Fear of biomedical science: genetic engineering – Misunderstanding of science and scientific literature

But…. The impact of technology: Free Online Scholarship movement….