-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: What is wrong with this picture? (Refereed
JournalPublishing) -- Stevan Harnad
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 11:51:47 -0400
From: "ad6509@wayne.edu" <ad6509@wayne.edu>

Was it Boswell or Johnson who said, "only a fool writes except for
money?"
Why do acacemics do it? The pat answer is, "if you write, you get to
keep
your job."

It is fairly easy to track access to items downloaded from a Web server.
Most servers come with usage tracking, and you can always get Analog for
free from Cambridge at http://www.statslab.cam.ac.uk/~sret1/analog.

However, mere _usage_ of materials has never been a criterion for P&T
because there has not been a way to measure it until the Web. P&T
committees have not understood that server logs and "splash factor" are
related, perhaps because academics as a tribe have not yet figured out
the
innards of the Web. If they really understood how the Web works, they
would probably demand some strict guidelines - because it is very easy
to
manipulate the Web.

Tim Berners-Lee (who invented it), sees the Web as a place to publish
both
the "draft and highly polished", I think we have a right to be cautious
about using raw access logs for tenure.

Though it is quite easy to earn money from Web publications, (see
http://www.tinman.org for advice about click-through revenues), I'm not
sure we should encourage that either.

However, if Web articles meet the test of peer acceptance - by being
cited
somewhere - that should count for something.

It does not follow that someone will _not_ be cited if their work
appears
on the Web.

Sed contra:

"Splash factor" is traditionally measured using citation indexes, and by
listings in abstracting and indexing sources. The assumption that all
worthy articles apear in these sources is flawed.  It sometimes takes a
publisher 2-3 years to get the indexing and abstracting sources to take
on
a new journal.

I once worked for the Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality. Several of
the
major indexes refused to take it on, despite the fact that its editorial
board had on it about 20 PhDs and distinguished urologists and surgeons
with MDs. That was a few years ago, mind you. At the time, one respected
source said that after receiving free issues for 3 years, they would
think
about it.

LIS authors seem to be particularly vulnerable. How many LIS authors
appear in SSCI? It would make a fascinating study!

cbs
---
       Chris Brown-Syed PhD. Editor, Library & Archival Security.
       <mailto:ad6509@wayne.edu> <http://valinor.purdy.wayne.edu>
     Never give up if the objective is worthwhile - Lionel Gregory.