The Point

Critics suggest that scholarly scientific communication is a "vanity fair." Although some scientists are entrepreneurial and have made substantial sums of money from their research and their companies, scientific success is mostly a matter of reputation and visibility. Scientists create intellectual property. The value of that property is seen in  [1] where it is published, [2] where it is indexed and abstracted, and how frequently it is cited and by whom. The Science Citation Index [Web of Science] is the measure of a scientist's worth and value. Those who are most cited receive the most attention.

While scientific periodicals developed in the 17th Century, they did not become common in academic disciplines until the middle 19th Century. Note that authors are paid for their intellectual property only by the visibility and citations that their work receives. Peer reviewers similarly receive only a line or two in their CV or resume. As academic librarians are fond of saying, "we give away our intellectual property, and they buy it back at expensive prices." In fact, the cost of STM periodicals has increased at a rate substantially higher than inflation in general. This is much more the case with those titles published by for-profit socities than those published by non-profit scholarly societies.  Note the importance of the "third payer" issue where the authors and consumers do not pay for STM content. Instead, the cost is borne by information agencies. Note that some estimates suggest that STM knowledge is now doubling every two to three years so the body of scientific content is growing rapidly.

Those who conduct research begin with the research as literature that's gone before [standing on the shoulders of others]. Thus, research depends on those who supply previous research. Each primary disclosure results in research literature to be used by others. Scientific communication is a collective effort were researchers are both users and creators.

The Traditional Model

The standard model of scholarly scientific communication is linear and includes these steps:

1. Preliminary reports
2. Reports at conferences [proceedings if published]
3. Conference papers indexed [bibliographic control]
4. Preprints distributed to researchers in the research area
5. Manuscript submitted for publication [peer review] to one journal at a time until it is published
   
6. Work appears on list of papers accepted for publication
7. Work published after some delay [a few months to a year or two]
   
8. Work indexed and abstracted to appear in secondary publications
9. Work listed and evaluated in annual review articles [if a notable contribution]
10. Work cited in other research articles.

Several have predicted that digital content will alter this model, but so far the model continues with digital equivalents substituted for the hard to copy content previously used. The major change has been the appearance of research results and papers on author websites and in institutional repositories [available via a common university portal and appropriate metadata].

Primary sources, normally articles or technical reports, represent the first complete disclosure of the research results. Secondary sources, such as indexing and abstracting services, provide intellectual access to the primary sources. Tertiary sources place the primary sources in context and provide evaluation and relationships.

As science and the number of scientists has grown substantially, research has become increasingly specialized so that scientific knowledge has become increasingly specialized -- narrow and deep. This has created demand for research periodicals that are also narrow in scope and appeal to a relatively small scientific community.

Does it seem reasonable that the Internet and digital creation/publishing will change this model?

The 21st Century Model

The steps listed above remain the same. The costs are about the same except for some reduction in the cost of manufacturing and distribution. Major differences are:

• Content can be made available much more quickly, perhaps article by article rather than assembling an issue
• In theory, all papers that meet the editorial standard could be "published"
• Digital access = desktop access = easier access
• Access via contract replaces access by ownership [no first sale rights]
• Costs could be lowered [perhaps twenty percent or so]
• Eprint archives substantially increase access to preliminary editions of papers.
  

Alternatives to the traditional model generally appear under the "open access" label where the costs of publication are borne by the author or her research institution so that access is free for all. The Public Library of Science is a good example of such an initiative as is PubMedCentral.

Does this model seem reasonable? Likely to be implemented?

Invisible College

Informal communication is as important as formal communication for many scientists.

The invisible college is a network of scientists engaged in similar research who communicate informally to share ideas and insights. Originally [perhaps 17th Century London], ideas were exchanged by post, at meetings, or personal visits. Telephone followed and today much communication is done digitally via the Internet although other opportunities for interaction continue to be popular. Derek de Solla Price is associated with this concept.

Scientists belong to several groups and communication takes place in each:

1. The laboratory work team
2. The reference group or others who do similar work in the same sub-discipline
3. Professional membership groups including sections and round tables
4. The employer.

Informal, interpersonal contact, with face-to-face preferred, takes place in each. These are sometimes called scientific social circles where productive, perhaps elite, scientists interact. The relationships can be interesting, especially since scientists compete with each for recognition and to be first in research breakthroughs.

For scientists, membership in this college often begins in undergraduate work and then in graduate work where future researchers develop relationships with their peers and with the faculty who teach them. As doctoral students working in a lab under the direction of a PI, students develop strong relationships with themselves and with the PI. A good PI will introduce his or her students to colleagues at scholarly meetings and help them to get good appointments for their post-doc experiences. Much of the important information sharing between scientists is informal and part of this network often called the invisible college. Typically, those who graduate from strong, well regarded doctoral programs find it easier to be part of the invisible college and familiar with the movers and shakers. Those from less well-regarded programs may find life more difficult.

As with other professions, there are norms and values in scientific research. Senior scientists establish these norms and pass them on to doctoral students. Thus, certain methods and certain issues/topics/problems are acceptable and others are not. Publication of research in premier journals further strengthens ways of doing research and this is enforced by the peer-reviewing system. Norms would include finding and using information sources.

How might the information professional be more involved in this informal communication?

Creation

Since research builds substantially on previously shared findings and methods, the literature search and review plays an important role. Typically, both informal [contacting colleagues] and formal means are used to find appropriate literature. Browsing is the most common method to find literature with a referral by a colleague being second and pearl fishing being third. Personal subscriptions are much more important than library ones. As intellectual property becomes more important, patent searching [which can be complex and difficult] has become more important.

Not all research projects are completed. Sometimes, they are completed but the results have been eclipsed by other studies or the results simply don't seem publishable. Since funders, including Universities, have little interest in research but considerable interest in publication and the recognition that follows, research that is not published [digitally or in paper] is incomplete and doesn't really count except to provide the researcher with useful experience. The Ph.D. student who does not complete her dissertation research is forever known as an ABD [all but dissertation] and suffers.

In the old days, amateur and professional scientists might spend years on a research project and then publish a single substantial monograph. Those days are long gone. There is considerable emphasis on completing the research sooner rather than later and publishing as soon as possible, especially if valuable intellectual property is at stake.

Funded Research

Given the need for additional funding, Universities and other non-profit organizations place considerable emphasis on securing external funding. Given the cost of maintaining laboratories [and the equipment/instrumentation], much scientific research cannot be done without additional funding.

Ordinarily, funded research requires certain publications at certain times with a prescribed format and style. The first research-related publication is the request for proposal. When a winning proposal is selected, that proposal is the second major publication. Following are interim reports and perhaps additional reports on particular aspects of the research as requested by the funding agency. Following the completion of the research, a final report is issued. It may be proprietary with limited access [for profit firms] or readily available [many federal government agencies. Conditions set by the funding agency may allow for additional publication outside the funding agency, usually beginning with conference presentations. Some federal government funded research requires wide-spread dissemination of research results.

There are several websites listing government and corporate funding sources. Michigan State Library provides a good example. Funding agencies typically focus on applied rather than pure research. In recent years, military research and development has been a notable funder of scientific research via such agencies as the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the Office of Naval Research. The National Science Foundation is the best known agency funding science research. Note that these agencies determine their own research agenda which in turn determines the agenda of many individual researchers.

How might the library or the information center help the parent agency to be more successful in gaining external funding?

Non-funded Research

The researcher has considerably more freedom here since he may design the study according to his own preferences. Still, he will be influenced by recently published articles in the journal where he hopes to be published. Again, there is a culture to research so that certain things are typically done in certain ways. Deadlines are self-imposed so the researcher has considerably more freedom in project completion. However, imposed deadlines may result in quicker completion and a more focused approach.

Individual Authors

Individual authors have the greatest freedom since they may follow their own agenda and conduct research in the way that is more comfortable and builds on the researcher's experience and strength. The negative is that one person does not benefit from the specialization of labor found in team research where one person may do the literature review and another handles the illustrations.

Multiple Authors

Scientific research is characterized by multiple authors and team research with the principle investigator serving as the team leader. Given the complications of scientific research, especially with instruments in an experimental setting, it is difficult for an individual to conduct scientific research outside of fields where observation of the natural world in the field works well.

The team approach not only allows specialization, but it also creates an environment in which technicians and graduate students can do much of the grunt work under the supervision of the experienced Ph.D. This is also where the future researcher gains hands-on experience in the practice of research to complement the more theoretical knowledge gained in classes.

Submission

Preprints and eprints

A growing number of scientists circulate draft copies of their research findings to benefit from reactions and comments that allow the author to anticipate problems and improve the content and presentation. Several scientific fields have eprint servers. The American Mathematics Society provides a directory of preprint and eprint servers for math. OSTI provides a well regarded eprint network.

Pre-prints are draft copies of the research report before peer review is completed. Post-prints are done after the peer review is completed.
Since the submission, especially the peer review, process may take considerable time, preprint circulation creates recognition and visibility for the author and the work as soon as possible and has the potential for substantially increasing the impact of the research itself. Since it is costly and time-consuming to circulate print copies, eprints or digital pre- or post-prints have obvious advantages and have become the primary pre-print medium since the early 1990s. World-wide access is relatively easy 24/7.

Since pre-prints do not represent the final and permanent disclosure of the research results, they allow the author to be published conventionally later.

How might digital pre- and post-prints revolutionize scientific communication?

Process

Although not always followed, the rule is that the researcher submits the article to only one journal or publisher at a time. This means that if an article is rejected, it may be some time before it can be submitted to a second journal or a third. Query letters may be sent to multiple journals to ascertain likely interest.

Papers received by the journal are given to an editor or an editorial assistant to be filtered for appropriateness. If the pass, they are sent to at least two subject experts in the research area. After some time, the experts [often called referees] return comments to the editor with recommendations to publish as is, publish with minor changes, publish with major changes, or reject. This process may take some time and the results are aging and their is an opportunity for another to publish similar research.

Regardless of the outcome, the author eventually receives comments used to improve the manuscript before it is resubmitted or submitted to another journal. If resubmitted, the editor and sometimes the referees will check the manuscript to insure that the required or desired changes were made. If all is in good order, the paper is scheduled for publication. In some cases, the wait may be as long as two years.

Since publication involves costs, the publisher stays in business via subscription fees, subsidies, or author page charges. Page charges are normally not a condition of publication and are usually charged by not-for-profit publishers not well subsidized by the parent organization. Most open-source publishing involves some sort of author fee if though that may be paid by the college or the university.

Better for the university to pay page charges for its authors or subscription fees? For the library?

Publication

Journal

As mentioned earlier, the standard medium for scientific publication/communication is the journal. Articles may cover the entire research project or separate articles may cover different stages or parts of the research project. Articles are relatively short, the format is established [fill in the blanks], and it is relatively easy for a lab research team to author several articles each year.

The fundamental attribute of scientific journals is that all published articles are peer-reviewed and that should insure quality control. The negative is that established researchers serving as referees may be unwilling to recognize new methods or approaches.

The first scientific periodical was issued in 1665, the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society.

Acceptance standards vary notably, but a large number of submissions are rejected. There is a clear hierarchy of journals in most disciplines with the leaders being most rigorous and having the highest rejection rate. With time and patience, the researcher is likely to find a publication outlet.

The typical scientific journal contains articles, letters to the editor, and book reviews as well as some advertisements. Articles may include research notes, letters or communications [short descriptions of recent research findings], and review articles [bibliographic essays]. Some journals will also include news about the field, grants, and scholarly society events.

Publishers fall into two categories: non-profit  scholarly societies and for-profit commercial firms. The later have received considerable criticism for their substantial profits and regular increases in subscription prices. This has resulted in the "serials pricing crisis" which has resulted in serials accounting for a growing percentage of the library collections budget and serials cancellations. Non-profit societies provide subscriptions to members as part of their annual dues and higher priced subscriptions to libraries and others. These periodicals are less expensive than the commercial titles.

Assets and liabilities of the journal rather than the monograph being the primary disclosure format?

Technical Reports

Technical reports, most often produced for applied science research, go through a similar process. The major difference is the lack of a peer-review process and the fact that virtually all research projects will be published. Typically, editors are concerned with style, format, and the like rather than the quality or the originality of the research. Most technical reports are issued in a series under a common title. The quality and value of technical reports often reflect that of the parent institution. For example, IBM has an excellent reputation for solid, cutting edge research and creates many patents for applied science research.

While individual reports may be available, subscriptions or standing orders are the easiest way for external agencies to have access to technical reports. Bibliographic control of non-governmental technical reports or technical papers is often problematic. As long as the reports do not contain content that would threaten the issuing agency in some way, they may be available. Today, the web provides access to a wide variety of technical reports that formerly would have been difficult to obtain. Some reports may be found via Google Scholar while others are found on technical report servers such as NASA's. Stanford provides a good guide to finding technical reports. UC Berkeley provides another excellent guide.

Would the lack of peer review be a major problem? Why?

Conference Proceedings

Research reports at scholarly meetings often appear before the final accounts are published in periodicals. Thus, conference proceedings are often the first substantial disclosure of important new research. Note that many conference presentations are never published.

Conference proceedings are normally published sometime after the conference presentations. The presentations may be invited or researchers may ask to be included. Normally, for the  larger conferences, presentation proposals are reviewed by a jury with only the better project reports accepted. The presentations are often less detailed and less complete than the following written version. 

Conference proceedings are often published as a collection [may be more than one volume] that may appear in the society periodical, as a separate item, or an annual serial publication. The collection may be selective or comprehensive. Typically, the proceedings are available at one price to  society members and another for non-members and institutions.

UC Berkeley and UC San Diego have good guides to finding these proceedings. Besides Conference Papers Index and ISI Proceedings, many discipline specific databases include technical reports. Known items may be found via WorldCat. Bibliographic control of proceedings can be problematic.

Monograph

The periodical article and technical report are the most common formats for primary disclosure of research findings. Still, some research will appear in a monograph. The monograph is a detailed, documented, and specialized examination of a relatively narrow topic. In science, the monograph is more likely to be an integrative examination of previously published research and not primary disclosure.

Authors may be invited to submit a manuscript for a series [more common than being published alone] devoted to a scientific topic issued by a university press or a commercial publisher or authors may begin with a query letter. Normally, manuscripts are reviewed by an editor, and, if promising, given to a subject expert for review. University presses often have members of their editorial board [faculty members] also review the manuscript. There may be some time lag after the MSS is accepted before it is published.

Bibliographic Control

With the exception of some governmental and commercial agency research, bibliographic control is very good for most science publications issued in North America and Western Europe. This is especially true of the discipline specific databases issued by the major scientific scholarly societies. Chemical Abstracts is a model example.

Annual Reviews

Annual reviews have made a substantial contribution to scientific literature since the early 1930s. An editorial board, usually of distinguished scientists for the discipline or sub-discipline, selects the key topics in the field and a time frame so that certain topics are reviewed periodically. A biochemistry example is BIOCHEMISTRY OF MAMMALIAN PEROXISOMES REVISITED. Reviewers are then selected to gather and evaluate the relevant literature on this topic. Reviewers are well-regarded subject experts. They gather as much literature as possible, filter out the less important items, and evaluate "the most notable primary research literature." Evaluations are critical, indicating strengths and weaknesses in individual contributions, making suggestions for improvement, and relating newer contributions to older ones. The result is a synopsis of the current literature with a clear indication of the state of the art, of gaps and strengths. The resulting synthesis eliminates many of the filtering problems associated with the traditional literature review. The annual review process is very similar to the information analysis center approach of Alvin Weinberg at ORNL. In the IAC, Ph.D. scientists would devote full-time effort to literature evaluation. ORNL does have IACs, such as the Carbon Dioxide IAC, but they do not evaluate the literature as much as the primary data files.

What would be needed for the original IAC concept to work?

Indexes

Indexing services are less visible today in a world where full text access to the literature is expected and abstracts seem to be the acceptable minimum for most users. Indexes provide the user with the full and correct bibliographic citation as well as providing subject access by analyzing content and assigning specific subject descriptors. Those without a known item citation may search by author, subject, method, institutional affiliation or whatever to find relevant items. In the past few years, most indexing services have become abstracting services. Typically, the index terms are taken from a subject specific thesaurus or list of approved subject headings.

Besides the discipline specific indexes, often issued by the leading scholarly society in the discipline, there are a variety of science search engines with some aimed at scientists and others aimed at a more popular audience. Elsevier's Scirus is a product of the leading publisher of STM scholarly periodicals. SciSeek is a "focused web directory created by human editors" that covers all of the sciences. Strong browsing tool.

Who, on the scientific research team, is most likely to do the literature searching? If most researchers use the "pearl fishing" technique, who uses the expensive abstracting and indexing services?

Abstracts

Abstracting services add abstracts to the bibliographic data typically found in an index. The abstracts may be taken from the article or prepared by the abstracting service itself. As more publishers require an abstract, the service is less likely to create the abstract. In many cases, the abstract may serve as a substitute for reading the article. Certainly, the abstract makes it easier for the prospective user to decide if the content is relevant.

The abstract is an "abbreviated, accurate representation" of the original document. The abstract condenses the document content into a few words, usually less than 250 words. Abstracts may be informative, including information about the purpose of the study and major findings, or indicative, includes information about the project without the findings.

Discussion Lists and Blogs

Discussion lists and blogs often provide an informal sort of hit or miss bibliographic control when new works or older ones are mentioned by those on the list. If a conversation is started, a new item may be brought to the attention of many who were unaware of it. If those who lead opinion or contribute to it mention new items, an audience may be created quickly.

Access Issues

Intellectual Access [finding the right item]

Traditionally, the major access problem [being able to find new research findings of interest] was a matter of bibliographic control. Much research was conducted outside of university laboratories. Government agencies were not always good about creating and maintaining comprehensive bibliographic control tools, although there was much improvement after WW II. Some government research related to military application was placed beyond security curtains. Research done by for-profit firms may also be "secret." The bibliographic record for some research reports was incomplete and time lag was often a problem. While secrecy remains a notable problem, the quality of intellectual access, especially for research conducted in the North Atlantic countries, has become very good. The work done by OSTI in nearby Oak Ridge is a good example.

Physical Access [putting that item in your hand]

Physical access has improved greatly in the past few years, especially with the advent of the Internet and the World-Wide Web. Full-text data bases allow easy desktop access to a substantial and growing proportion of the most important and useful scientific literature. In many cases, time lag between when the article or report is published and when it is indexed, abstracted, and made available digitally has been dramatically reduced.

The major problem is financial or economic. STM periodicals, many owned by profitable foreign publishers, raise their subscription cost on a yearly basis. The cost increases exceed the ability of libraries to pay. Thus, libraries engage in serials cancellation projects as well as co-operative purchasing which somewhat reduces subscription costs. Thus, the scientist in a well-funded institution may have easy access to both bibliographic information and the content. The scientist in a less well-funded institution may lack access to both. While this issue impacts all academic disciplines and professions, STM periodicals are by far the most expensive. As publishers note, STM publication, including the editorial work, is expensive and the number of papers published continues to increase each year. Still, it is clear that without some notable change, scientific communication will be degraded. Most major publishers are taking steps to make access, especially for those in less developed countries easier, as well as providing authors with more rights. Still, costs continue to increase.

Internet As Resource For Science News and Information

While at some distance from scholarly communication, the Internet has and is having a considerable impact on the popularization of science and the development of science awareness in the general population. The Internet allows considerable STM research in its original and popularized form to be widely accessible, especially to those who lack access to a research library or to a popular library with a good collection of consumer science.

The Pew Internet & American Life Project reports [2006]:

• After television, the web is the second most popular source for news about science, especially with younger broadband users
• Internet is the first source when information is needed on a specific scientific topic
• 70% of Internet users use it to find the meaning of a scientific concept/term with 68% using it for information about scientific concept or theory, and 65% to learn more about a science story
• Those who seek science information on the Internet more likely to believe in the benefits of science and report a higher understanding of science
• Half of all Internet users have been to a scientific website.

If the WWW is frequently used for science fair projects, so what for real science?

The Union of Concerned Science reports that ExxonMobil spent about $16 million to create a network of 43 advocacy organizations to create doubt about global warming research while advocating "sound science."

How might this impact the course of scientific research and science communication. What does it say about science communication in the 21st Century?

Preservation

Historically, preservation was primarily a library responsibility. Publishers focused on preserving content that continued to sell, but were not actively involved in preserving comprehensive back files. With the sales potential of complete digital back files, publishers have become more actively involved in creating and preserving back files. There are certainly questions about the quality of the preservation initiatives and future availability, especially if sales decline. At the same time, site license agreements eliminate the preservation opportunities for libraries since first sale rights are eliminated.

Author

Depending on the whether the research was work for hire and the agreement signed by the author as a condition of publication, the author may have the right to preserve and provide access to a copy of the research on a website or by sharing post-print copies. Typically, there is a time delay condition by the publisher is this is done.

Institution

Work for hire laws and court decisions mean that research conducted on site and with employer resources belongs to the employer. This has been the case for government agencies and for-profit firms for some time. Universities ordinarily claim work for hire when research yields intellectual property with substantial earnings potential. Thus, research yielding patents is work for hire. The same may be true for some computer software. However, articles and books have not usually been claimed and remain the property of the researcher.

The serials pricing crisis has been especially severe for STM publications and universities are beginning to consider making research publications a university resource and then providing intellectual access via some sort of open access initiative. The key ingredient is the ability to continue with a rigorous peer-review process while changing the present model where the university gives away intellectual content and then buys it back [expensively] from the publishers.

Institutional Repositories

University libraries play a major role in establishing and managing institutional repositories. Here, the intellectual property created by faculty and staff are preserved in a digital format with world-wide access provided via added metadata and a website. The repository would include both the research report and the data collected as well as other artifacts of the research process. The key to success is the degree to which university tenure and promotion committees are willing to accept something beyond being published in the usual for-profit or society journals as primary or first disclosure.

Faculty and staff are encouraged to participate, but are not required to do so. So far, faculty participation is relatively low. Since libraries are the principal victim of continually escalating serial subscription costs, they are enthusiastic about a new way of sharing STM research findings.

How might you increase faculty participation in the institutional repository?