Re: Ebsco Full-Text Databases Post

[David Goodman <dgoodman@Princeton.EDU>]

Since Marg cited me, I'd like to further explain what I meant:

In most scientific journals that are published as a paper journal and also
in electronic form, either the two are identical or the electronic form
has enriched content, as videos and the like, and should be regarded as
the version of record, as more and more publishers are doing.

There are two types of cases where the opposite occurs, and the paper
version is more complete:
 
a. There are some journals which provide the complete electronic version
only to individual subscribers, and a truncated or partially embargoed
electronic version to libraries: Nature is the most noteworthy, but
Sciences's "Science Express" preprints are another example.
 
b. many articles in the Gale and Ebsco databases are not complete. Full
text is meaningless: it can mean either: The full article, as contrasted
to an abstract, with the full article including the figures and so on --
I've heard it suggested we switch to the term "full page images" for
these.  Or the full text, in the sense of ascii text, without the figures
etc. I think we should call these "ascii text only" or "full ascii text
only". I would suggest that the aggregator vendors such as Ebsco and Gale
consider selling a databases made up of ONLY those journals for which they
have full page images. Maybe they even do now, and I just haven't figured
it out among their many choices.

With respect to reading and scanning ease, my experience is that most
really rapid readers, a group including university faculty, find it much
faster to read on paper than on the screen. Even they prefer e-journals;
they just print a copy, and read it.

Scanning is a problem. I have yet to see an electronic version of a
journal whose table of contents is as usable as the print version. Much
experimentation and ingenuity is needed here.  Discovering relevant items
by accident is probably the least efficient way of doing so; surely
semi-random search algorithms will be developed.

Princeton switched to electronic only for almost all the Academic Press
journals and has had no complaints at all.

--
David Goodman
Biology Librarian
and Co-chair, Electronic Journals Task force
Princeton University Library
Princeton, NJ 08544-0001
phone: 609-258-3235
fax: 609-258-2627
e-mail: dgoodman@princeton.edu

___________________________________________


"Hunter, Karen (ELS-US)" wrote:
> 
> Marg,
> 
> I am intrigued by your statement that "our users obtain better access to
> information via the paper copy."  That runs counter to what we are
> hearing. Could you elaborate on what you meant, please.
> 
> Karen Hunter
> Senior Vice President
> Elsevier Science
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marg Walker
> To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
> Sent: 3/27/01 6:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Ebsco Full-Text Databases Post
> 
> The demand for electronic access within our user group is such that we
> will be considering cancelling our paper subscriptions in favour of
> electronic copies.  We would expect to pay a fair subscription for this,
> but we can't afford two subscriptions for the same journal.
> 
> FACTORS IN OUR USER DEMAND FOR ELECTRONIC One factor in the demand for
> electronic is the reverse of the situation stated by David Goodman, who
> noted that the electronic copy often had less content than the paper
> version and no graphic material.  On the contrary we find that medical
> publishers are sometimes providing additional material in the electronic
> copy. The graphic material is also now appearing as a pdf download.
> 
> Other factors in the move to electronic are the currency (paper journals
> take ages to reach the antipodes), and the immediacy (medics don't like to
> walk to the library).  We won't be rushing to move to electronic for every
> journal however, because even though the demand is high our perception is
> that our users obtain better access to information via the paper copy.
> 
> JOURNAL BUDGETS AND THE MOVE TO ELECTRONIC Our budget is shrinking in
> buying power each year.  We have been forced to cancel over one third of
> our subscriptions in the last few years since the New Zealand Dollar has
> dropped in value.  I know we are only a small player but it sounds as
> though libraries world wide have less journal buying power.
> 
> All of the journals we purchase are considered essential by our users so
> usage is important in deciding what to retain.  Journals which are
> available online and which also have good usage will be the last to go.
> 
> We would definitely have cancelled the American Journal of Medical
> Genetics last year if it hadn't gone electronic and offered us an
> advantageous subscription deal.  The cost per issue is appalling, even
> though usage is high and the user group tell us the journal is essential.
> 
> Electronic journals are an administrative nightmare from our point of view
> and society publishers are very difficult to deal with (they rarely answer
> any communication). Aggregated online services are the only way to go and
> we will deal with them wherever possible.  Non-aggregated services which
> don't try to ensure that specific journals will remain with the service
> aren't of any interest to us.
> 
> DOCUMENT DELIVERY VS PURCHASE Once we cancel a journal it is very
> difficult for our users to obtain access to the journal since the cost of
> interloans is prohibitive and most do not have the budget allowance to
> interloan.  It would be wonderful if publishers could eventually find a
> model where individual articles could be delivered at a reasonable cost.
> 
> Somehow I feel that there must be a way to exploit this market while
> maintaining income for the publisher.  Come on entrepreneurial publishers
> - there must be a wunderkind who can make the technology work for us with
> single view articles or some such?
> 
> That being said it must be difficult being a publisher out there at
> present.
> 
> Regards
> Marg Walker