What do we mean by ethnographic research? In essence we are talking about a rich, multi-factorial descriptive approach. While quantitative research uses pre-existing categories in its analysis, qualitative research is open to new ways of categorizing data. We take a look at how we can use this technique to delve into the subtleties of online user behavior – a must for publishers and societies involved in new product development
Guest Chef Bryn Geffert (Librarian of the College at Amherst College) tries to envision a world in which publishers can spend less time and money wrestling with copyright issues and scholars can more effectively share their work.
Do publishers need to integrate the creation, management, delivery, and discovery of different content types? What best meets customer needs, optimizes resources, and encourages innovative new content products and services?
As North American university presses struggle with identity, and seek to redefine their place in the publishing ecosystem, it is worth exploring the activities, and outlook of the American University in Cairo Press through the eyes of its Director, Nigel Fletcher Jones. What can we learn from this publisher, who has ambition, optimism, and a recent track record of significant growth?
Technology is great, but does it deserve top billing? Leon Wieseltier’s essay in the New York Times as well as articles by other academics raise a challenge to the information industry as a whole.
The Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) meeting in Europe is 10 years old, but feels as fresh and frisky as some of the meetings in the US used to. This report touches on some of the most interesting threads of two days’ worth of interesting presentations and conversations.
The University of California Press has announced two new open access publishing initiatives, one a monographs program and the other an OA mega journal. Here UCP director Alison Mudditt answers some questions posed by the Kitchen about these new initiatives.
When thinking about open access to content, is it appropriate to equate disabling downloads with lack of support for the visually impaired?
A recent study finds that academic press offices exaggerate claims in their press releases about published research. Worse, the vast majority of these find their way into subsequent reporting.
Revisiting a holiday classic: ‘Twas the month before Christmas, and by listening hard, you can hear Joe Esposito yearn for a library card. The reasons are simple, yet give publishers pause. No wonder Joe’s only hope is with Santa Claus.
Librarians have been acting in a limited way as publishers since well before the internet, but over the last 5 years or so, a revitalized librarian-publisher movement has emerged. This new wave of library innovation may have had its origins partly in a desire to disrupt traditional publishers, but it’s beginning to make a positive impact on the landscape of scholarly communication in some unexpected ways.
Publishers often slap labels on activities that are complex, expensive, and high-value. Worse, we often accept people calling these activities “value-add” when they are core functions of how scientific information shared.
Are we all talking about the same thing when we say “open access” — and do we all mean the same thing when we talk about an “open access future”? Short answers: “yes (kind of)” and “no way.”
Simple things are often more complex than we initially think, and the push for faster publication may be an expensive and risky trend to follow too much further.
There are many reasons to be cheerful in the world of scholarly publishing. Taking a cue from Ian Dury and the Blockheads, and his song, Reasons to be Cheerful, Part 3., this post describes an example of good things afoot in the library community. It is up to you to provide parts 1. and 2.