Issues of Structure and Control in the Scholarly Communication System

The Nature of Three History Journals

“…In consequence of a decided emphasis upon primary sources rather than upon journals or even monographs, the Joumal of the History of Ideas (1,037) produced fewer than the Journal of Social History (1,646) and the Joumal of Interdisciplinary History (1,666). Journal titles most heavily represented were in history (218), the general category (274), reviews, and society transactions.…”

Rejoinder to Open Access: The Whipping Boy for Problems in Scholarly Publishing

“…In the current system of scholarly publishing, readers are nearly always other researchers who are interested in tracking the development of a research area to inform their own research. The increased specialization of science and the emphasis on novelty of research findings means that research results are generally incomprehensible to the general reader (Osburn, 1984). Furthermore, most scholarly communications venues emphasize the novelty of research findings (vs. utility or integration), again with an orientation toward a researcher audience.…”

Customer Expectations: Concepts and Reality for Academic Library Services

“…Whether using survey instruments, interviews, focus groups, or other assessment methods, academic librarians can gain insight into their customers' needs by understanding: (1) Before embarking on a more extensive discussion of expectations, the authors would like to offer a definition so that there is a common understanding of what is involved. Expectations are assumptions about the likelihood of something occurring; coupled with these assumptions is the acknowledgment that the outcome may not be as expected.…”

“…Zeithaml et al offer four key factors: (1) what customers hear from other customers; (2) individual characteristics and circumstances relating to personal needs; (3) experience with using a service; and (4) communications from service providers to customers. 15 The third factor is multifaceted in that customers will not base their expectations solely on experience with one academic library, but will also consider experiences with other libraries as well as providers of other types of services.…”

“…A number of factors could be responsible for this gap. Key among them are: (1) employee role ambiguity which includes uncertainty about what library supervisors or managers expect from staff in direct service positions as well as a lack of information needed to perform the job adequately; (2) a poor employee job fit because of a lack of training or skills needed to perform the job combined with the use of inappropriate tools or technology; (3) a major role conflict for staff who perceive that they are unable to satisfy all of the demands of their internal and external customers; and (4) a supervisory or management system that focuses solely on output, that allows staff few options or too little flexibility in resolving service problems, and that does not convey the sense that management truly cares about staff.…”