共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 93 毫秒
1.
Lorraine Busby 《期刊图书馆员》2013,64(2):128-135
2.
Anthony Pearce 《Learned Publishing》1993,6(4):13-16
Considers a pricing policy for the conventional printed journal and how such policies may be devised for electronic publications, and suggests factors which will influence the economics of journal publishing and pricing in the future. 相似文献
3.
The article processing charge (APC) is currently the primary method of funding professionally published open access (OA) peer‐reviewed journals. The pricing principles of 77 OA publishers publishing over 1,000 journals using APCs were studied and classified. The most commonly used pricing method is a single fixed fee, which can either be the same for all of a publisher's journals or individually determined for each journal. Fees are usually only levied for publication of accepted papers, but there are some journals that also charge submission fees. Instead of fixed prices, many publishers charge by the page or have multi‐tiered fees depending on the length of articles. The country of origin of the author can also influence the pricing, in order to facilitate publishing for authors from developing countries. 相似文献
4.
《Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services》2000,24(2):239-250
The scholarly journal has remained largely unchanged in purpose and structure during its three-century evolution. Current forces within the publishing industry, technology sector, the academy, and the related research environment are prompting rapid change in scholarly communication. Economic models for journals reflect both the unique challenges of the publisher as well as these broader environmental forces. Several constructs are described, followed by a preliminary report on an experimental project, PEAK (Pricing Electronic Access to Knowledge), which explores models for journal pricing and products. PEAK and other innovative projects that challenge traditional journal models may serve as both catalysts for change as well as prototypes for the scholarly journals of the early 21st century. 相似文献
5.
Mary Waltham 《Learned Publishing》2006,19(1):15-30
A summary of the findings of a study which included an in‐depth exploration of journal business and pricing models of nine learned societies in the context of their requirements and of the open access (OA) business model. Detailed information on current trends in revenue costs and surplus is included. The article considers whether and how OA can be adopted by the representative sample of STM publishers. 相似文献
6.
7.
《Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship》2013,18(1):13-26
Abstract The continual escalation in academic journal prices threatens the quality and future of academic library collections. This situation arises from market forces that react to, and take advantage of, the unique characteristics of academic libraries and scholarly publishing. These characteristics include the unique role of academic libraries, in their mission of serving as accessible repositories of knowledge, and the unique activity of scholarly publishing, in which every journal title is unique without a close substitute. The combination of these of factors leads to the lowest price elasticity of demand for the libraries and the highest degree of product differentiation for each journal title. While some solutions being offered to alter the dilemma hold promise, the unique characteristics of the market appear to discourage more equitable pricing without a radical restructuring of the industry or of the relationships between the consumers and the producers of academic journals. 相似文献
8.
Jenica P. Rogers made headlines in the library world in late 2012 when she announced that State University of New York (SUNY) Potsdam, where she is director of libraries, would not be renewing the American Chemical Society online journal package for 2013 because of their pricing model. In this vision session, she detailed the kind of background work that has to take place first in order to make that kind of hard decision possible. 相似文献
9.
10.
11.
影响国际学术期刊库绩效分析的问题主要有出版发行模式、营销定价模式、用户使用方式、使用统计标准、效益评价理论与方法等,这些问题都需了解、重视,才能增强绩效分析的准确度,推动绩效分析方法的改进。 相似文献
12.
13.
Bernard Naylor 《Learned Publishing》1997,10(3):199-204
The electronic learned journal of tomorrow is likely to be substantially different from today's print-on-paper precursor. The emphasis will be on accessibility for the individual user and the objective should be to combine the convenience of the local library collection with the organisation and support services typical of a large general collection. Publishers too will need to adopt access and pricing policies which give priority to the convenience of scholars and which acknowledge value-for-money arguments. Extrapolation from some present day trends may be a useful guide to the future. Parallel publishing itself is likely to be a temporary phenomenon, preceding exclusively electronic scholarly publication in many fields. 相似文献
14.
15.
16.
以西方国家公共信息资源开发利用中的定价问题为研究对象,分析公共信息资源定价问题的形成和复杂性,梳理人们支持或反对公共信息资源定价的理由,对影响信息定价的因素和如何进行定价进行总结。同时,从资金支持、市场激励、效益发挥和用户获取等视角深入探讨成本回收定价与边际成本定价的利弊,进而从不同定价模式的实践效果比较中,指出边际成本定价或免费正在成为当前公共信息资源定价的首要选择。 相似文献
17.
期刊质量、发行量、广告三者的关系--《蜜蜂杂志》办刊实践 总被引：7，自引：5，他引：2
质量是期刊永恒的主题.期刊质量直接影响到期刊的发行量,发行量又制约着发布广告的数量,广告数量对期刊质量又有影响,三者互为因果关系.正确处理好三者的关系,就能为期刊社创造良好的社会效益和经济效益,使期刊走上自我发展的良性循环道路. 相似文献
18.
《吴医汇讲》:中国第一份中文期刊 总被引：2，自引：2，他引：0
为了澄清究竟哪本期刊是中国第一份中文期刊,我们通过追根溯源,梳理中国期刊发端的史实,否定了某些人宣称的200年前由外国传教士在马来西亚创办的《察世俗每月统记传》为中国第一份中文期刊的主张,以雄辩的史料确认:223年前由国人在苏州创办的《吴医汇讲》才是名副其实的中国第一份中文期刊. 相似文献
19.
Journal weighted impact factor: A proposal 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
The impact factor of a journal reflects the frequency with which the journal's articles are cited. It is the best available measure of journal quality. For calculation of impact factor, we just count the number of citations, no matter how prestigious the citing journal is. We think that impact factor as a measure of journal quality, may be improved if in its calculation, we not only take into account the number of citations, but also incorporate a factor reflecting the prestige of the citing journals relative to the cited journal. In calculation of this proposed “weighted impact factor,” each citation has a coefficient (weight) the value of which is 1 if the citing journal is as prestigious as the cited journal; is >1 if the citing journal is more prestigious than the cited journal; and is <1 if the citing journal has a lower standing than the cited journal. In this way, journals receiving many citations from prestigious journals are considered prestigious themselves and those cited by low-status journals seek little credit. By considering both the number of citations and the prestige of the citing journals, we expect the weighted impact factor be a better scientometrics measure of journal quality. 相似文献
20.
《Journal of Informetrics》2023,17(3):101429
Despite the recent moving towards open access trend in the academic community, both restricted and open access journals continue to coexist. New journals need to choose their journal types (open versus restricted access), while the incumbent journals may change their journal types. To better understand how the academic community is shaped by journals’ choices of journal types, we constructed a game-theoretical model of journal competition with endogenous journal qualities and journal types. We found that journals’ equilibrium quality and types vary by article processing charge (APC) and journals’ preference for quality. Compared to the case that both journals are open access, a competition among journals of different types leads to higher journal quality standards chosen in equilibrium when APC is modest. Therefore, in the academic community where the research quality is measured by the highest quality of the journals therein, journals of different types guarantee a good degree of knowledge diffusion with a high quality. 相似文献