Is the Journal Dead? Possible Futures for Serial Scholarship

Abstract

discusses the pressures on the current models of scholarly communication, as well as some of the major changes in the information environment. He then asks whether journals truly matter in the current information environment, and indicates that journals still serve as important indicators for the credibility and reliability of the articles within. He concludes his presentation with several new models of scholarship now possible in the current information environment, and possible avenues for further exploration for serialists. Anderson's presentation was followed by a short question and answer period.

Opportunities beyond Electronic Resource Management: An Extension of the Core Competencies for Electronic Resources Librarians to Digital Scholarship and Scholarly Communications

“…19 This is exactly the question that informs the final portion of this article and ensures that any suggested new roles will be directly tied to a community need. Robertson and Simser's 2012 presentation, "Managing E-Publishing: Perfect Harmony for Serialists" described several new roles to support library-based publishing.…”

The changed – and changing – landscape of serials publishing: Review of the literature on emerging models

“…The huge amounts of data captured for the purposes of research have historically been lost; the datasets that served as the raw material for producing new knowledge were not curated and archived and certainly not made manipulable and, therefore, could not serve as the basis for further scientific work (Anderson & Moore, ; Guédon, ). No longer however; in the digital world, it is entirely feasible to present manipulable datasets along with their interpretation in the form of a scholarly paper (Cope & Kalantzis, ).…”

The Promise of the Future: A Review of the Serials Literature, 2012–13

“…12 All this focus on article purchasing is no surprise to Anderson, who argues that the journal, while still a useful container, is increasingly less important than the article. 13…”