Pergamon

Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 359-361, 1996 Copyright © 1996 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in the USA. All rights reserved

0364-6408/96 $15.00 + .00

PII S0364-6408(96)00053-1

1995 CHARLESTON CONFERENCE

PUBLISH ELECTRONICALLY OR PERISH

JOHN McNEIL

Publisher, Annual Reviews Inc.

P.O. Box 10139

Palo Alto, CA 94303-0139

Intemet: meneil@annurev.org

http://www.ann urev.org

In a recent Science editorial entitled, "Wired Science or Whither the Printed Page," Shmuel Winograd and Richard Zare concluded, "The printed page has had over 500 years to mature, whereas electronic publishing is truly in its infancy. Could we be living in an age in which elec- tronic publishing will revolutionize the dissemination of information as Gutenberg's invention of the type mold revolutionized printing? The scientific community has developed mechanisms to use the printed page to communicate, disseminate, and archive results. We call upon this group to become involved with the complex i s sue s . . , so that the full potential of electronic publishing to enhance and quicken the pace of scientific progress will be realized."

What we have heard the past few days indicates that cooperation is required of all of us to quicken the pace and enhance the quality of science and scholarship. In the past year, we at Annual Reviews have asked some of our readers to respond to surveys that included a section on the posi- tive and negative effects of computers in our reader's pursuit of knowledge in their field of interest and related fields. Comments on the POSITIVE contributions of computers are as follows:

1. E-mail (most often mentioned) 2. Bibliographic searches (often mentioned) 3. Data storage 4. Database access 5. Facilitates communication 6. Searching

Comments on the NEGATIVE effects of computers are as follows:

1. No substitute for print (often mentioned) 2. None (often mentioned)

359

360 J. McNEIL

3. Illiteracy 4. Explosion of e-mail 5. Can be overwhelming 6. Pressure to keep up with the technology rather than with field of interest 7. Leads to superficial analysis 8. Electronic "soundbite mentality" 9. Sloppy research

10. Bad writing 11. Neglect of past literature 12. Ideas get lost in the technological dazzle 13. Wastes time 14. Shift from substance to form 15. Security problems

After reviewing the reader responses, we decided we needed additional information to deter- mine what changes might be required to keep our publishing activity flourishing for some time into the future. We organized two focus groups: one group covered the physical and life sciences, and the second covered the biological sciences. The groups were largely made up of graduate and postdoctoral students; however, a few mature scientists were also included in each group. Some of the focus group findings:

1. In response to the question "is print still a convenient medium, or the medium of choice?" most participants preferred print to online reading, but several participants read online mater- ial almost exclusively.

2. Regarding the use of the Annual Reviews, A. The younger participants utilized library (main and departmental) copies and read only 1

to 2 articles per volume. B. The older participants purchased individual volumes if there were a sufficient number of

articles of interest. 3. When asked about purchase habits,

A. The younger participants photocopied desired articles/chapters rather than purchasing the entire volume for the following reasons: 1) The job market is too uncertain. They don't want to be burdened with having to move

books and journals from place to place. Also, since they don't need more than 1 or 2 articles per issue, why buy the whole volume?

2) The current "mentality" among their peers is to expect information and its delivery to be cheap or free.

3) They want information published within the past 5 years. 4) When asked to envision electronic products of choice, it was decided that the ideal

product will be one that enables members of the scientific and scholarly community to search through the critical mass from multiple publishers~ then request one article at a time delivered by e-mail.

5) Features desired in electronic products: A. Would like to click from literature cited to an updated abstract of the full article. B. Would like links to subsequent papers that cited or commented on the current article. C. Serve as a repository of images, tables, and plots. D. Indication of citation frequency for each cited article. E. Established interest profiles for automatic notification of articles of interest. E Author interaction with reader, want direct access to author to clarify, update, etc.

Publish Electronically or Perish 361

In summary, graduate and postdoctoral students:

1. are strapped for funds. 2. are vagrant researchers - - they can't accumulate shelves filled with books and journals. 3. have little time to read in areas other than their own field of interest. 4. peruse an article's figures and tables first as graphics are deemed to be very important indi-

cators of the value of an article. 5. still feel rewarded for publishing in "prestige" journals but stated that prestigious does not

necessarily mean good. 6. suggested that their peers do not read their field's technical journals. 7. want articles not books or journals. 8. want information now and free, or as inexpensive as possible. 9. want centralized and powerful searching for all information.

10. have no loyalty to brand names but went on to add that as authors they want to write for the most prestigious journals.

We learned from our surveys and focus groups that the more mature scientists are still interest- ed in reading in the hard copy/printed format. However, their interest in using electronic delivery systems is growing. The younger scientists, in particular, make us keenly aware of the necessity to produce and expand electronic products. Our future depends upon our meeting the changing needs of the diverse marketplace we serve with a product line that is mutually beneficial. Dual publica- tion, both hard copy and electronic, appears to be the requirement of our customers at the present time. For many years the academic community has been required to publish or perish. Publishers are now required to alter their publishing programs to include electronic delivery systems or they too may perish.