Scholarly Electronic Journals - Trends and Academic
Attitudes: A Research Proposal
[Comments? to] Philip McEldowney, UVa

UNCG LibSci 569  M. Shontz / K. Wright  Spring 1995

CONTENTS
Abstract
Statement of the Problem - Chapter I
Review of the Literature  - Chapter II
Methodology                    - Chapter III
Analysis of Data               - Chapter IV
Summary and Conclusions - Chapter V
Appendix - Questionnaire
Selected References
Links to sites and articles on Electronic Journals


List of Graphs 
Growth of Academic Electronic Journals and Newsletters - Graph
Growth of Academic Electronic Listserves - Graph
Scholarly Electronic Journals and Communication - Graph


List of Tables
A. Growth of Academic Electronic Journals and Newsletters - Table A
B. Growth of Scholarly Electronic Listserves with Subjectsor Disciplines - Table B
C. Scholarly Electronic Journals and Communication - Table C



Number of accesses (thanks to Web-Count) 

Abstract

McEldowney, Philip F.  "Scholarly Electronic Journals, Trends and Academic
Attitudes: A Research Proposal." Masters Project, Department of Library
and Information Studies, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 1995.

	The number of electronic journals has grown steadily in the
1990s.  A large part of this increase has been in scholarly or academic
electronic journals.  Some academics are very aware of these trends in
scholarly communication and participate actively in their production.
Other academics remain unaware of these new trends.

	This study examines two related issues --
  1. What is the growth rate of these scholarly electronic journals?
  2. What are the factors which affect acceptance or resistance toward
electronic journals among academics?  Is it possible to discover a
difference between disciplines for these factors of acceptance or
resistance?

	Information or answers to these issues will help academic
librarians and researchers anticipate trends in serials collection and
subscription, and help in financial planning and budgeting.

	Two methodologies are used: 1) the collection of numbers, and 2)
the use of a survey.  The research project will collect information on
the number of scholarly electronic journals, newsletters, and other
electronic communications, as they have changed over time, in order to
show trends and growth rates.  A questionnaire will be developed to
provide information on the factors of acceptance or resistance among
scholars toward electronic journals.

CHAPTER I

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

	The number of electronic journals has grown steadily in the
1990s.  A large part of this increase has been in scholarly or academic
electronic journals.  The five issues of the Association of Research Libraries'
Directory of Electronic Journals, Newsletters and Academic Discussion
Lists from 1991 through 1995 documents this growth.  

	In a period of shrinking or stable university and library
budgets, and of rising costs in serial print subscriptions, it is
important for academic libraries and for researchers to understand the
trends and implications of the digital information revolution.  Some
academics are very aware of these trends in scholarly communication and
actively participate in their production.  Other academics remain less
aware of these new trends and do not participate in their production.
Science journals are much more expensive than non-science journals.  It
is therefore important to make a distinction between the trends in the
growth of science versus non-science electronic journals, and attempt to
determine whether science scholars are participating more or less than
non-science scholars in the production, writing, and reading of
electronic journals.

	Information or answers to these issues will help academic
librarians and researchers to anticipate trends in serials collection and
subscription, and help in financial planning and budgeting.

	This research project will collect information on the number of
scholarly electronic journals, newsletters, and other electronic
communications, as they have changed over time, in order to show growth
rates.  A questionnaire will be developed to provide information on the
factors of acceptance or resistance among scholars toward electronic
journals.

	The purpose of this study is to investigate the growth rate of
scholarly electronic journals and survey the positive and negative
attitudes of academics toward electronic journals.  A secondary purpose
and priority is to discover any difference between the hard-science and
non-hard-science academics in their attitudes and participation in
electronic journals.

TERMS
	This Proposal generally accepts and relies on the categories and
definitions of "electronic scholarly journals" as presented in the ARL
Directories form 1991 through 1995.  Following are some of the main
points from these Directories about these terms and their meanings.
Chapter II more fully reviews opinions about these terms and categories.

	"Electronic journals" are self-defined; those who produce such
journals name them in that way.  These journals are generally accessed
electronically through communication devices or telephone lines.  The
same definitions are true for electronic "newsletters," "listserves," and
other electronic forums.  At times the boundaries between these named
formats are not clear, and blend or shade into each other.  This Proposal
concentrates on electronic journals.  Electronic journals come in many
forms.  Some of these electronic serials are traditional paper journals
simply made available electronically; others are sample selections, or
just the table of contents of the paper journal; still others have no
equivalent paper copies.

	"Scholarly" and "academic" mainly refers to research, writing,
and ideas produced at universities and colleges by faculty members.  It,
however, can also include writings of graduate students, independent
researchers, and researchers affiliated with non-academic institutions
such as foundations and laboratories.  "Hard-science" disciplines,
sometimes called the "natural sciences," include physics, biology,
chemistry, medicine, etc.  The "non-hard-sciences" includes humanities
such as philosophy, language, history, and the arts, as well as social
sciences such as anthropology, sociology, political science, etc.  Even
here the boundaries are sometimes not completely clear and distinct, such
as with business journals and computer science journals.  This Proposal
includes computer science under "hard-sciences," whereas business and
news journals are classed under "non- hard-sciences."

ASSUMPTIONS and LIMITATIONS
	The collection of the number of scholarly electronic journals is
based almost solely on the ARL Directory and its affiliated collection
forums (New Journals List).  It is assumed that these lists will continue
to be produced in the future in a similar and comparable format.  Other
lists might complement or support the ARL collection; or even replace it
in the future.  It is assumed that the electronically archived lists will
continue to be accessible.

	Since the Directory does not list electronic journals by
disciplines, or categorize them as 'hard-sciences' or
'non-hard-sciences,' but does provide broad subject disciplines for
Listserves, it is assumed the division of Listserves into subject
disciplines would approximate the same divisions for electronic
journals.  This Project has not divided electronic journals by discipline.

	The survey of academics will be limited to institutions of higher
education in Virginia and to the directors or their assistants in the
hard- and non-hard-science schools or disciplines.

	It is assumed that these academic directors or their assistants 
will be familiar with the term "electronic journals," and that their 
responses will be truthful.

===========================================================================
References (Chapter I)

Directory of electronic journals, newsletters and academic discussion
lists.  1991-.  Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, Office
of Scientific and Academic Publishing.

NewJour announcement list (New electronic journals) [Online].  1995.
Available:  Gopher.  File:
gopher://ccat.sas.upenn:5070/ll/journals/newjour

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

     There is a large and growing amount of literature on electronic
publishing, and even on the more specific subtopic of electronic
scholarly journals.  Most of this is recent, having been written in the
last five to seven years.  While this literature covers a wide range of
topics, such as how to start an electronic journal, on pricing and cost,
on cataloging, or on the relationship between print and electronic
journals, hardly any of the literature consists of reports on research
studies or surveys on electronic scholarly journals.

     A first section of this chapter will deal with the definitions and
concepts of electronic scholarly journals, while a second section will
review research studies.

I. Definitions and Categories: Clear or Blurred?

     Most of the writers about electronic scholarly journals show how
new, and especially how transitional, this topic is - there is little
agreement or definition on what an "electronic journal" is and what is
"scholarly."  Similarly the boundary lines between electronic journals
and other forms of scholarly communication and writing, such as
newsletters, news groups, discussion groups, and electronic conferences,
are not always clear.  Cataloging or categorizing journals between
"scientific" and "humanities" similarly is rarely simple.  Formats also
often overlap with the interaction of print and electronic writers,
publishers, and publications.  Finally, there are few research studies and
surveys which examine the attitudes and behavior of scholars toward
electronic journals and publishing.

     Most of the literature describing the recent growth in electronic
journals emphasize three important factors: money, technology, and
convenience or speed (Okerson 1991, ii).  In recent decades print journal
prices have continued to rise beyond inflation, especially for scientific
journals.  That negative cost factor has driven many scholars and
academic librarians to embrace and even strongly promote the alternative
of "free" electronic publishing (Quinn 1994, line 12).

     At the same time technological changes, especially in communication
hardware (the Internet) and software (access and viewing programs), have
continued to attract more and more scholars to participate in electronic
scholarly communication and publication.  There has been a steady move up
the technological scale from the early (late 1980s) low-end electronic
publications available as ASCII files, to being organized and searchable
on gophers (1992), to being tagged and graphically viewable at World Wide
Web sites (Okerson 1994, 10).  Many electronic journals, especially in
the introductions of their first issues, emphasize the speed of
publication of new ideas.  Frank Quinn emphasizes "electronic
communication is cheap, fast, and accessible." (Quinn 1994, line 18)
Rather than it taking 3 to 4 years for a scholar's article to appear in a
print journal, articles can be published immediately, whether grouped and
massaged by a cyber- editor under an electronic journal, or independently
and "privately" published and made globally available on the Internet.

     Definitions of "electronic scholarly journals" are still in
transition.  Michael Strangelove provides one of the clearest
definitions, saying an e-serial (electronic serial) attempts "to emulate
the characteristics of their print counterparts through organization,
periodicity and tropical focus" (Strangelove 1993, 53).  Like print, they
also have "the intervention of editors, reviewers, and so forth."  He
sees e-journals as a subset of e- serials, and describes them as "not
merely informational in design but . . . add to the corpus of a
discipline through the organized dissemination of original research or
knowledge" (Strangelove 1993, 53).  Others describe an electronic journal
simply as looking "like a paper journal, except for format" (Quinn 1994,
line 146).  Even a standard agreement on "scholarly" does not exist.
Peter Byrnes, of the University of Virginia's Online Scholarly Initiative
defined "scholar" as "faculty of the University of Virginia" (Byrnes
1995).  Don Schauder sees "scholar" as being the same as "scientist" or
at least overlapping, and prefers to use the term "professional."
Schauder's "'Professional' denotes the academic profession, and
particularly its research component, ranging across the entire spectrum
of pure and applied disciplines" (Schauder 1994, 73).  Ann Okerson
defines "scholarly" as "being of 'scholarly' interest" (Okerson 1992,
i).  Such self-definitions seem to abound: if the "editor" of a set of
electronic files claims they form an "electronic journal," then they are
an "electronic journal" by definition.

     The Directory has made several distinctions and categories, over its
five editions (1991-1995).  There are two broad sections of 1) Journals
and Newsletters and 2) Academic Discussion Lists and Interest Groups.
Only the second section is subdivided into subjects or disciplines.
Again definitions and rationale for these categories are not always
clear.  Sometimes discussion lists later become newsletters, and even
have a selected electronic journal spinoff.  The only electronic form of
scholarly communication which seem to be excluded from this list is
"private" electronic mail and messages.  Otherwise there is a broad
range, continually changing and interacting, of scholarly electronic
communication from loosely organized discussion groups to highly
organized and peer-reviewed electronic journals.  As Ann Okerson
mentioned in the third edition (1993) of the Directory, two trends are
"(1) blurring boundaries between the different types of electronic
serials, so that it is difficult to categorize them by the same
taxonomies as those used for paper serials; and (2) blurring boundaries
between formats" (Okerson 1993, i-ii).

     Concerning the categories of "scientific" versus "humanities"
electronic journals, Don Schauder decided that, of the 41 electronic
journals in the 1993 Directory, 26 (63%) "fell broadly into the
Humanities," 11 (27%) "into the Sciences," and 4 (10%) "were difficult to
categorize by subject" (Schauder 1994, 78).  A recalculation Schauder's
numbers and percentages indicates his 17% for 11 Sciences of 41 E
Journals is clearly 27%, thus reducing his "difficult" from 20% to 10%.
Schauder, in his own survey, uses these 4 variables of "subject field" -
Arts; Biological Science and Medicine; Physical Sciences and Engineering;
Social Sciences, Law and Business. (Schauder 1994, 88.)  There is no
explanation as to why these categories were chosen or grouped in this
manner.

     While the Directory does not divide electronic journals and
newsletters by subject or discipline, it does for its second section of
discussion groups and lists.  Again, there is little discussion of the
rationale for deciding these categories and adding to them over the five
editions.  In the first two editions (1991,1992) there were four major
categories of 1) Social Sciences and Humanities; 2) Biological Sciences;
3) Physical Science; and 4) Business and Miscellaneous Academia.  In the
third edition (1993) a new, fifth category of Computer Sciences was
added; while the fourth edition (1994) also added a sixth category of
Education and Library and Information Science.  Humanities and Social
Sciences were also separated in the fourth edition. Other minor changes
and categories were made over the years. (See "Table of Contents" of the
Directory each of the editions.)

     With the above subject or discipline categories of the Directory, it
is somewhat difficult to determine a simple division between the
"sciences" versus "humanities," or versus the "non-sciences."  Is
Computer Sciences a "science?"  What is meant by "Miscellaneous Academia"
and is it a science or non- science?  If specialized discussion groups
are hard to categorize, even more difficulty and confusion is encountered
with electronic journals.  As Okerson stated there is a blurring of
categories.  In the fourth Directory Jean-Claude Guedon asked "Why are
Electronic Publications Difficult to Classify?" But he did not provide an
answer, even though he reviewed the differences between manuscript, then
print, and then electronic forms.  Rather he suggested that "electronic
publishing will need a classification scheme that is specific to its own
nature."  And since that electronic nature is continuing to evolve,
classifications will continue to evolve for it. (Guedon 1994, 17- 23.)

     Finally, one might consider the definition, categories, and
distinction between electronic and print formats for journals.  Already
Okerson suggested that the boundaries between these formats have been
blurred.  She further stated

. . . some electronic serials are electronic only, but various of them either index or review paper publications, and others move between electronic and more traditional formats. Some electronic journals produce paper or microform spinoffs and some paper journals appear selectively in electronic form. (Okerson 1993, ii.)

In addition, some paper journals also appear electronically or are
published also in electronic form, such as the Directory, which was
originally produced as paper copy and then loaded electronically on the
Internet.

     The boundaries between electronic and print continue to collapse.
Most scholars by the mid-1990s work in an electronic format or
environment while writing, whether to produce a book, an article, or a
letter or E-Mail message, or almost any form of information.  Most
publishers, even paper or traditional publishers and vendors, use
electronic programs and formats to produce paper or electronic scholarly
journals.  It is becoming extremely rare for a scholar to be able to
provide only a non- electronic copy of a scholarly communication or
article (such as written by hand or by typewriter, as was acceptable in
the early 1980s.

     Don Schauder reminded us of two insights 1) the boundaries between
"informal" communications among scholars and the "formal" publication of
articles are blurring (Schauder 1994, 83), and 2) publications by
"printed journals is extensively electronically assisted" (Schauder 1994,
94) Almost every publication in the mid-1990s, whether print or
electronic, is from a digital or wordprocessed source.  As he concluded,
"Electronically assisted publishing of professional articles is the
mainstream mode for journal publishing in the scholarly communication
industry" (Schauder 1994, 94).

II. Research Studies or Surveys on Electronic Journals

     This research project intends to survey scholars on their attitudes
and behavior toward electronic journals.  So far, only three research
studies have been identified which are close to this goal.

     They are
     1) Janette R. Olsen's 1992 Cornell dissertation "Implications of
Electronic Journal Literature for Scholars" (Olsen 1992). 
     2) Pam Waddell's 1993 article titled "The Potential for Electronic
Journals in UK Academia" (Waddell 1993). 
and 3) Don Schauder's doctoral dissertation as summarized and reported in
the article "Electronic Publishing of Professional Articles:  Attitudes
of Academics and Implications for the Scholarly Communication Industry."
(Schauder 1994).

     Only the third research report has been received and reviewed by
this Research Project author.  J. Olsen's dissertation may be of
importance to scholars in the United States while P. Waddell's would
similarly be important to scholars in the United Kingdom.  The second
half of Schauder's article is concerned with a survey of professionals in
Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

     Schauder's detailed and extensive article summarized his doctoral
dissertation.  It fell broadly into two parts of A) a review of the
"state-of-the-art" of the history and development of professional or
scholarly article writing and publishing, bringing it to the present
(late 1993), and B) a July 1992 survey of professions and their attitudes
toward electronic publishing.  The research design, definitions, and
results of the survey are reported in detail (Schauder 1994, 87-92).

     This appears as a very substantial and good survey, in which 743
senior academics were given a questionnaire (fairly equally divided
between Australia, United States, and the United Kingdom), of which 582
or 78 percent usable responses were returned.  Besides several
information questions, Schauder asked some attitudinal questions
concerning professional journal access and use.  
     Since this survey was conducted almost three years ago, and since
the electronic publishing industry changes rapidly, this survey might be
a good one to replicate.  In June 1995, Schauder emailed,

Yes, I think replication of the study would be a good idea. However the questionnaire could definitely be shortened and improved. Many things have changed (e.g. the rise of the Web, Adobe Acrobat) since the study was undertaken. I would warmly encourage follow-up or replicative work, and give every assistance (Schauder 1995, Email, 23 June)

     Schauder faxed a copy of the 11-page questionnaire, upon request.
While shortening and improving the Schauder survey might rise the
percentage of responses, etc., it is difficult to see exactly where the
questionnaire might be cut; and any change to the Schauder survey could
destroy some of its comparability to the first survey.  It is also
suggested that the Schauder survey could be replicated using an
electronic questionnaire form on the Web, or by email, or through File
Transfer Protocol, specifically targeting selected responders and using
password protections to verify and maintain identity of respondents.
Andrew Treloar, a researcher in association with Schauder, is continuing
research and writing on some of the issues of the Schauder survey (Treloar
1995). 

     The Schauder survey provides some interesting suggestions and
methods which were considered in designing the survey of this Research
Project.

Conclusion

     While the library literature concerning electronic scholarly
journals is large and growing, it is almost entirely restricted to
theoretical writing.  Very little research surveys and reporting have
been designed or reported as yet on the growing publication of electronic
journals.

================================================
REFERENCES (Chapter II)

Byrnes, Peter.  1995. Death of the monograph. Lecture and Q&A, 201
Clemons Library, University of Virginia, 3-4 pm, 3 May.

Directory  of electronic journals, newsletters and academic discussion
lists.  1991-.  Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, Office
of Scientific and Academic Publishing.

Guedon, Jean-Claude.  1994.  Why are electronic publications difficult to
classify?: The orthogonality of print and digital media.  In Directory:
17-22.

Okerson, Ann.  1991. Foreword. In Directory: i-iv.

Okerson, Ann.  1992. Foreword. In Directory: i-iii.

Okerson, Ann.  1993. Foreword. In Directory: i-ii.

Okerson, Ann.  1994. Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz.  or,
there is a there there. Surfaces.

Olsen, Janette R. 1992. Implications of electronic journal literature for
scholars. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University.

Quinn, Frank. 1994.  A role for libraries in electronic publishing
[Online].  Available: Gopher.  File: gopher://e-
math.ams.org:70/00/genInfo/e-pubs/quinn2

Schauder, Don. 1994. Electronic publishing of professional articles:
attitudes of academics and implications for the scholarly communication
industry. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 45
(March): 73-100.  [Also , Email June 1995 Extract].

Strangelove, Michael.  1993. Electronic journals and newsletters,
introduction. In Directory: 53-58.

Treloar, Andrew. 1995.  Electronic scholarly publishing and the World
Wide Web.  Proceedings of AusWeb95 - The First Australian World Wide Web
Conference.  Spring [Online].  Available:  URL.  File:
http://www.scu.edu.au/ausweb95 /papers/publishing/treloar/

Waddell, Pam. 1993.  The Potential for electronic journals in UK
academia.  In Libraries and IT: Working Papers of the Information
Technology Sub-committee of the HEFC's Libraries Review: 239-271.  Bath,
UK: The Office for Library and Information Networking.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

     In order to collect information on electronic scholarly journals two
methods will be used.  First, data and lists of present and past
published electronic journals will be compiled and analyzed to identify
growth trends.  Second, scholars will be surveyed to discover their
attitudes concerning electronic journals.  Subsequently in this chapter,
these are referred to as List and Survey.

The List
     The numbers and titles for the List will be collected and analyzed
from the Directory of Electronic Journals, Newsletters, and Academic
Discussion Lists (1991-1995), as produced annually.  It will be
supplemented as necessary and as they become available (sometimes on a
daily basis) from the NewJourals-ListServe.  This List will provide a
longitudinal view of past, present, and future trends in electronic
scholarly publications.  This List will be analyzed, in June 1995, to
determine if it still adequately provides the significant reference
source for electronic scholarly journal publication.  At such time the
Directory will be retained or replaced by a more appropriate reference
source.  This precaution is necessary as lists and sources are often not
stable electronically, and reconsideration of those lists and sources
should be undertaken periodically.
 
    The List will be the total (population) list as available for
electronic scholarly journals, not a sample.  Only the 1992 or Second
Edition of the Directory provided some detail on the deletion of
E-journal entries, as well as name changes, revised entries, new entries,
and inactive e-journals and newsletters (Directory 1992, 9-11).
Otherwise this important information about changes over time do not seem
to be available to the general public.

The Survey
     This Research Project will conduct a survey of scholars' attitudes
and behavior toward electronic scholarly journals.  The survey will
consist of an information and attitudinal questionnaire.  (See Appendix A
for a copy of the questionnaire)

Survey Population and Sample
     The survey population will be members of the faculty at the 77
institutions of higher education in the Commonwealth of Virginia, in the
United States of America.  The sample will be of four persons at each of
those institutions - two each in the 'hard-sciences' and two each in the
'humanities' or 'non-hard- sciences,' with one being the head of a
department or school of that subject or discipline, and the other being a
'non-head' faculty member in the same department or school.  These
respondents should provide views of faculty administrators as well as
teaching faculty.  The surveys will be filled out and returned
independently in order to maintain some anonymity.  The 308
questionnaires will be sent out first in mid-September 1995.  A second
will be sent out in late October, if it appears that there is less than a
50 percent response rate.  The analysis of the questionnaires and a
report on it will be made during December 1995 and be made available in
[NOTE: This survey and report was NEVER done: This paper was 
only a research Proposal, not an actual reserach activity-->] March 1996 
on World Wide Web.

Variables
     Two variables are mentioned above - whether the respondent is in
sciences or non-sciences, and whether or not the respondent is a
director.  These two first variables will be requested in the
questionnaire under the first two questions.
     Therefore, questions 1, 2, and 3 are mainly information questions,
while the questions from 4 through 6 are largely attitudinal combined
with some informational requests.

Data Collection.
     The questionnaire will be sent out in mid-September 1995 by when
most scholars will have returned to their faculty activities. If, within
a month, less than 50 percent have responded, a second mailing will be
done in late October 1995.
     A single researcher will receive the filled out questionnaire.

Validity and Reliability.
     The questionnaire will be pre-tested at a North Carolina university,
utilizing 4 faculty, two each as heads and subordinates in departments in
the sciences and non-sciences.

================================================ 
References (Chapter III)

Directory of electronic journals, newsletters and academic discussion
lists.  1991-.  Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, Office
of Scientific and Academic Publishing.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF DATA


     The analysis of the data collection of the lists of electronic
scholar publishing will indicate trends in past, present, and future
electronic publishing.  It will consist of tables and graphs.

     The analysis of the data collected and tabulated from the returned
questionnaires will be presented in tables and graphs.  These will
indicate numbers and percentages of the Virginia sample scholarly
population involved in scholarly electronic publication, and the degree
of their involvement.  While the survey questionnaire remains only a
proposal and not an actual survey, the Directories have been
published.

     Numbers have been collected from the seven annual Directories, 1991 -
1997.  They are presented in the following tables and graphs.  The graphs 
are accessible on the Web (McEldowney 1995b is graphs and McEldowney 
1995c is tables).

Tables - ALL 3 TABLES or ALL
Table A  Table B  Table C
================================================

TABLE A.  Growth of Academic Electronic Journals and Newsletters*

            Jly 1991  Mar 1992  Apr 1993   May 1994   May 1995	May 1996 Dec 1997
Electronic
Journals       27        36         45         181       306	  1093      2459

Electronic
Newsletters    83        97        195         262       369	   596       955

       Total  110       133        240         443       675	  1689      3414

===============================================

TABLE B. Growth of Scholarly Electronic Listserves with Subjects or
Disciplines*

            Jly 1991  Mar 1992   Apr 1993   May 1994   May 1995	  May 1996  Dec 1997
--Soc &
Humanities     318       470       610        717         1145	    1440
--Education &
Lib Science    ---       ---       ---        275          365	     434
--Business      24        72        51         82          117	     183
--Sciences
Computers      ---       ---       126        311          359	     447
--Biological   104       125       124        155          222	     304
--Physics       71       102       151        245          272	     310

   Total       517       769      1062       1785         2480	    3118       3807


Percentage--
Non-Sciences   66.2%     70.5%    62.2%       60.2%       65.5%	    66.0%
Sciences       33.8%     29.5%    37.8%       39.8%       34.4%	    34.0%

================================================

TABLE C.  Scholarly Electronic Journals and Communication*

            Jly 1991  Mar 1992   Apr 1993   May 1994   May 1995	  May 1996   Dec 1997
--Journals &
Newsletters    110       133       240         443       675	    1689        3414
--Listserves &
Discussions    517       769      1152        1784      2480	    3118        3807

  Total        627       902      1392        2227      3155	    4807        7221

*Numbers found in Directory 1991, 1-3, 69-70; Directory
1992, 1-4, 83-84; Directory 1993, 47-51, 141-42; Directory
1994, 55-62, 223-24; Directory 1995, 89-100, 347-348; Directory
1996, i-xxx; Directory 1997, 3.

Graphs of Electronic Journals and other Scholarly
Publications

CLICK for ALL Three Charts of Electonic Publications 1991-1997

Journals and Newsletters 1991-1997

Listserves by Discipline 1991-1996

Electronic Publication of Journals, 
Newsletters, and Listserves 1991-1997



References (Chapter IV)

Directory of electronic journals, newsletters and academic
discussion lists.  1991-.  Washington, DC: Association of Research
Libraries, Office of Scientific and Academic Publishing.

McEldowney, Philip.  1995b.  Electronic publications, 1991-1995,
Charts [Online]. Available: URL. 
 File: http://people..virginia.edu/~pm9k/libsci/charts.html 

McEldowney, Philip.  1995c.  Electronic publications, 1991-1995,
Tables [Online]. Available: URL. 
File Tables: http://people.virginia.edu/~pm9k/libsci/97/ejtables.html

Survey of Virginia Scholars on Electronic Journals.  September, October
1995.  [NOTE: Never published, only PROPOSED!]

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION


 
     This research project will reveal two aspects of the new, emerging
electronic scholarly journals.  
     One is the annual snapshots of the types and numbers of electronic
scholarly communications since 1991, and the trends in their growth
rates. 
     The second will be the attitudes of scholars toward this emerging
scholarly communication, both their level of participation and their
views on the advantages and disadvantages of the electronic communication.
     The tables and graphs developed from numbers in the annual Directory
for five years reveal a steady increase in the number of electronic
scholarly titles and discussion groups (Table C).  The rate of increase
seems fairly constant and shows no sign, as yet, of leveling off'.  The
numbers for 1995 are five to seven times the numbers from the first
Directory in 1991.  If there was ever any doubt, these graphs indicate a
robust growth in electronic scholarly communication.
     One unexpected result is that the percentage of hard-science to
non-hard-science Listserves (Table B) remains fairly steady and at about
only one-third of the total Listserves.  This is significant and
indicates librarians and researchers who may have anticipated cost
savings from expensive science print journals may not be able to find
those savings in cheaper electronic science journals and communications.
     The survey of Virginia university faculty might reveal a high use of
electronic communication, some of which may fall outside the electronic
communications listed in the annual Directory.  Science faculty may have
a more positive attitude toward electronic communication, and therefore
may use the available electronic resources more than do non- science
faculty.  It would be a significant finding if the survey revealed an
equally positive attitude toward electronic journals by non-science
faculty.
     The graphs from the Directory reveal interesting comparisons between
the science and non-science electronic communications; the Survey might
confirm some of these same characteristics or contradict them.  The close
and complex relationship of electronic scholarly production and faculty
attitudes will aid in understanding the nature and future of this
electronic age.
     It is unfortunate that so few research surveys and studies have been
made of scholarly electronic activities and attitudes.  The topic of
electronic scholarship is certainly very actively debated.  Stevan Harnad
claims we are in a "post-Gutenberg" age in electronic scholarly or
esoteric publishing (Harnad 1991), and has made the 'Subversive Proposal'
that scholars everywhere publish their research and ideas, electronically
and free.  As Harnad stated

If every esoteric author in the world this very day established a globally accessible local ftp archive for every piece of esoteric writing he did from this day forward, the long-heralded transition from paper publication to purely electronic publication (of esoteric research) would follow suit almost immediately. (Harnad 1994)

Such ideas are interesting and exciting.  Still, more might be done to
discover the meaning, significance, and implications of these
developments.  One way is through tracking trends such as the annual
Directory.  However, even the Directory does not cover all forms, such as
electronic preprints (Ginsparg 1995).
     The Survey proposed in this Project might be repeated annually or
bi-annually to provide information on scholarly electronic activity among
the faculty at the universities in Virginia.  The Survey might also be
extended to be a national survey.

================================================
References (Chapter V)

Directory of Electronic Journals, Newsletters and Academic Discussion
Lists. 1991-.  Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, Office
of Scientific and Academic Publishing.

Ginsparg, Paul.  1995.  First steps towards electronic research
communication. In Directory, 1995: 1-10.

Harnad, Stevan.  1991.  Post-Gutenberg galaxy: the fourth revolution in
the means of production of knowledge.  The Public Access Computer Systems
Review 2, no. 1: 39-53.

Harnad, Stevan.  1994.  (The subversive proposal) [Online].  Available:
FTP.  File:
ftp://cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/Subversive.Proposal/e-
print.01.harnad.public-e-print-archives-subversive-proposal. 09 November.

Scholarly Journals at the Crossroads: A Subversive Proposal for
Electronic Publishing.  1995.  Washington, DC: Association of Research
Libraries, Office of Scientific and Academic Publishing.

Treloar, Andrew. 1995.  Electronic scholarly publishing and the World
Wide Web.  Proceedings of AusWeb95 - The First Australian World Wide Web
Conference.  Spring [Online].  Available: URL.  File:
http://www.scu.edu.au/ausweb95/papers/publishing/treloar/

Appendix A
QUESTIONNAIRE
on Electronic Scholarly Journals

     This survey seeks your opinions about electronic scholarly
journals.  Your responses will provide important information on the
attitudes of scholars about electronic publications.  University
officials, researchers, librarians, and publishers, all are very
interested and concerned about the directions and impact of electronic
journals in the future.  Please take a few minutes to fill out this
questionnaire and return it to the address below.  All efforts will be
made to maintain confidentiality of responses.  The results of this
survey will be reported in [NOTE: This survey and report was NEVER done; 
this paper is only a PROPOSAL.] March 1996 at this URL
  http://people.virginia.edu/~pm9k/libsci/ejSurvey.html

Please fill in the blanks and return the questionnaire to the address
at the end.
Space is provided near the end of the questionnaire and on the back
pages for additional comments.

First identify your type of discipline and your position

A. Hard-sciences   ____  Or Non-Hard-science  ____

B. Director or Head ____ Or Non-director  _____ 
=============================================================

1. In the last 5 years, have you published journal articles?

     _____ Yes      ____ No (if "No," go to question #3).

2. If yes, have any of these been in electronic format or journals?

     _____ Yes      ____ No


================================================
3. Do you use a computer or wordprocessor for scholarly writing and
communication (letters, papers, reports, class work)?

     ___ Very Often

     ___ Often

     ___ Sometimes

     ___ Rarely

     ___ Never

4.  Place the appropriate number (1 to 5) next to the activity which
describes yourself.
 
1.Alot    2.Often   3.Some    4.Rarely    5.Never

     ___ Use Email

     ___ View Newsnet groups

     ___ Write to Newsnet groups

     ___ Subscribe to Listserves

     ___ Send messages to Listserves

     ___ Use FTP (File Transfer Protocol) to receive or send materials

     ___ Use or view gophers

     ___ Use or view Web sites

     ___ Create an HTML (HyperText Markup Language) document

     ___ View electronic journal(s)


5.  Do you encourage and support other scholars to publish
electronically?

     ___ Yes.  ___ No.

================================================
6. Following are two suggested lists of advantages or disadvantages of
electronically published or publishing scholarly articles.  Please add
any items to the lists.

RANK each list separately with 1 as the lowest and 10 highest or most
important.

     Advantages of                     Disadvantages of
     electronic scholarly              electronic scholarly
     articles                          articles

     ___  Speed of publication         	___  Poor quality 

     ___  Access - 24 hours a day      	___  Not refereed

     ___  Convenience                   ---   Copyright concerns

     ___  Quick response to ideas      	___  Plagiarism

     ___  Paperless                    	___  Lack of technical
                                               			skill/training 
     ___  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _           ___  Format not user friendly

     ___  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _          	___  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

     ___  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _           ___  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _



Comments (below and on the back of pages)






===============================================================
Return questionnaire to:
     Philip McEldowney             Phone 1-804-924-4987
     Alderman Library              Email philipmc@Virginia.edu
     University of Virginia
     Charlottesville, Va. 22903
===============================================================

SELECTED REFERENCES

Links to resources on Electronic Scholarly Journals

Amiran, Eyal, Elaine Orr, and John Unsworth. 1991.  Refereed electronic
journals and the future of scholarly publishing.  Advances in Library
Automation and Networking 4: 25-53.

Bailey, Charles W., Jr. 1995. Network-based electronic publishing of
scholarly works: a selective bibliography.  The Public-Access Computer
Systems Review 6, no. 1.

Bailey, Jr., Charles W.  1994.  Scholarly electronic publishing on the
Internet, the NREN, and the NII: charting possible futures.  Serials
Review 20, no. 3 : 7-16.

Bailey, Charles W., Jr. 1992.  Network-based electronic serials.
Information Technology and Libraries 11 (March): 29-35.

Byrnes, Peter.  1995. Death of the monograph. Lecture and Q&A, 201
Clemons Library, University of Virginia, 3-4 pm, 3 May.

Clement, Gail. 1994.  Evolution of a species: science journals published
on the Internet. Database 17 (October/November): 44-54.

Directory of electronic journals, newsletters and academic discussion
lists. 1991-. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, Office
of Scientific and Academic Publishing.

Ginsparg, Paul.  1995.  First steps towards electronic research
communication. In Directory, 1995: 1-10.

Guedon, Jean-Claude.  1994.  Why are electronic publications difficult to
classify?: the orthogonality of print and digital media.  In Directory,
1994:. 17-22.

Harnad, Stevan.  1991.  Post-Gutenberg galaxy: the fourth revolution in
the means of production of knowledge.  The Public Access Computer Systems
Review 2, no. 1: 39-53.

Harnad, Stevan.  1994.  (The subversive proposal) [Online].  (09 November
1994) Available: FTP.  File:
ftp://cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pub/harnad/Psycoloquy/Subversive.Proposal
/e-print.01.harnad.public-e-print-archives-subversive-proposal. 09
November.

Harrison, Teresa M., Timothy Stephen, and James Winter.  1991.  Online
journals: disciplinary designs for electronic scholarship.  The
Public-Access Computer Systems Review 2, no. 1: 25-38.

Harter, Stephen P. Harter and Hak Joon Kim.  "Electronic Journals and
Scholarly Communication: A Citation and Reference Study." Paper delivered
at the ASIS Midyear Meeting, San Diego, CA, May 20-22, 1996.  Available:
URL. File: http://www-slis.lib.indiana.edu/PrePrints/
harter-asis96midyear.html

Leslie, Jacques. 1994.  Goodbye, Gutenberg.  Wired 2 (October): 68-71.

Maggot, Larry.  1995.  Interview (about information copying on the
Internet, pirating information, and the coming information Gold Rush).
National Public Radio, 4 May (about 6:10-17 pm).

Manoff, Marlene. 1992.  Electronic journals: postmodern dream or
nightmare.  Academic and Library Computing 9 (September): 10-12.

McEldowney, Philip.  1995a.  Electronic journals - references and links
[Online].  Available: URL.  File:
http://people.virginia.edu/~pm9k/libsci/ejref.html

McEldowney, Philip.  1995b.  Electronic publications, 1991-1995, Charts 
[Online]. Available:  URL.  File:
http://people.virginia.edu/~pm9k/libsci/charts.html

McEldowney, Philip.  1995c.  Electronic publications, 1991-1995, Tables 
[Online]. Available:  URL.  File:
http://people.virginia.edu/~pm9k/libsci/tables.html

McEldowney, Philip.  1995d.  Scholarly electronic journals - trends and
academic attitudes: a research proposal [Online].  Available:  URL.
File:  http://people.virginia.edu/~pm9k/libsci/ejs.html

McKnight, Cliff. 1993.  Electronic journals--past, present . . . and
future?  Aslib Proceedings 45 (January): 7-10.

McMillan, Gail. 1991. Embracing the electronic journal: one library's
plan.  The Serials Librarian 21, nos. 2/3: 97-108.

Metz, Paul. 1991.  Electronic journals from a Collection Manager's
point of view. Serials Review 17, no. 4: 82-83.

NewJour announcement list (New electronic journals) [Online].  1995.
Available:  Gopher.  File:
gopher://ccat.sas.upenn:5070/ll/journals/newjour

Okerson, Ann.  1991.  The electronic journal: what, whence, and when?
The Public-Access Computer Systems Review 2, no. 1: 5-24.

Okerson, Ann.  1991. Foreword. In Directory: i-iv.

Okerson, Ann.  1992. Foreword. In Directory: i-iii.

Okerson, Ann.  1992. Publishing through the network: The 1990s
debutante.  Scholarly Publishing 23 (April): 170-177.

Okerson, Ann.  1993. Foreword. In Directory: i-ii.

Okerson, Ann.  1994.  Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz. or,
there is a there there.  Surfaces.

Okerson, Ann.  1995. Foreword. In Directory: i-iv [Online].  Available:
URL.  File:  http://people.virginia.edu/~pm9k/libsci/for.html

Okerson, Ann.  1996. Introduction. In Directory: p. 1-6.

Olsen, Janette R. 1992. Implications of electronic journal literature for
scholars.  Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University.

Parang, Elizabeth, and Laverna Saunders. 1994.  Electronic Journals in
ARL Libraries: Policies and Procedures. SPEC Kit 201. Washington, DC:
Office of Management Services, Association of Research Libraries.

"Paperless papers: Electronic Science Journals," The Economist, 16 Dec
1995, p. 78-80.

Peek, Robin P. 1994. Where is publishing going? a perspective on change.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science 45, no. 10:
730-736.

Quinn, Frank.  1994.  A role for libraries in electronic publishing
[Online].  Available: Gopher. File:  gopher://e-
math.ams.org:70/00/genInfo/e-pubs/quinn2

Rodgers, David L. 1994.  Scholarly journals in 2020.  The Serials
Librarian 24, nos. 3/4: 73-76.

Rowland, Fytton. 1994. Electronic Journals: Neither Free Nor Easy. EJournal 
4, no. 2 (1994).

Schauder, Don. 1994.  Electronic publishing of professional articles:
attitudes of academics and implications for the scholarly communication
industry.  Journal of the American Society for Information Science 45
(March): 73-100.

Scholarly Journals at the Crossroads: A Subversive Proposal for
Electronic Publishing.  1995.  Washington, DC: Association of Research
Libraries, Office of Scientific and Academic Publishing.

Strangelove, Michael.  1993.  Electronic journals and newsletters,
introduction. In Directory: 53-58.

Treloar, Andrew. 1995.  Electronic scholarly publishing and the World
Wide Web.  Proceedings of AusWeb95 - The First Australian World Wide Web
Conference.  Spring [Online].  Available:  URL.  File:
http://www.scu.edu.au/ausweb95/papers/publishing/treloar/

Waddell, Pam. 1993.  The potential for electronic journals in UK
academia.  In Libraries and IT: Working Papers of the Information
Technology Sub-committee of the HEFC's Libraries Review: 239-271.  Bath,
UK: The Office for Library and Information Networking.