Re: Financial Times Article on Self-Archiving: 23 July 2001

From: Albert Henderson <chessNIC_at_COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 09:40:29 -0400

on 1 Aug 2001 Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_coglit.ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
 
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Albert Henderson wrote:
>
> > > > sh> virtually all of the self-archived preprints in arxiv are
> > > > sh> submitted to refereed journals, revised... [etc]
> > >
> > > http://opcit.eprints.org/tdb198/opcit/
> >
> > In his analysis of the papers on the LANL
> > server, Tim Brody tells us:
> >
> > "The proportion of papers that have got
> > Journal-ref entries is 36.87%." This
> > would include those that are submitted
> > after formal publication rather than
> > being first submitted as preprints.
> >
> > Thank you for your help. It appears that the physics
> > situation is much the same as the informal literature
> > studied by Garvey and others.
>
> All that datum tells you is what proportion of the papers have the
> final journal citation inserted by their authors, not what proportion
> are submitted or published.

        "Virtually" speaking, physicists and mathematicians
        are so different from other scientists ...

        Great.

Albert Henderson
Former Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 1994-2000
<70244.1532_at_compuserve.com>
Received on Wed Jan 03 2001 - 19:17:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:46:12 GMT