Comparing published scientific journal articles to their pre-print versions
Comparing published scientific journal articles to their pre-print versions
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00799-018-0234-1
复制
发表时间：
2019-12-01
影响因子：
1.5
通讯作者：
Grappone, Todd
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Klein, Martin;Broadwell, Peter;Grappone, Todd
学术出版商声称，他们通过协调评论以及在出版期间贡献和增强文本来增加学术交流的价值。这些贡献付出了相当大的代价：仅在2008年，美国大学图书馆就为连续订阅支付了17亿美元。相比之下，图书馆的预算是持平的，无法跟上连续的价格上涨。我们通过对两个不同的科学、技术和医学语料库的印刷前论文及其最终出版的同行进行比较研究，调查了出版商的价值主张。这种比较有两个有效的假设：(1)如果出版商的论点是有效的，预印论文的文本应该与其相应的最终出版版本有可测量的差异，(2)通过应用标准的相似性度量，我们应该能够发现并量化这种差异。我们的分析表明，从预印本到最终出版版本，科技论文的文本内容通常变化很小。这些发现有助于对商业出版商附加值的讨论提供经验指标，因此应该影响图书馆关于获取学术出版物的经济决策。
Academic publishers claim that they add value to scholarly communications by coordinating reviews and contributing and enhancing text during publication. These contributions come at a considerable cost: US academic libraries paid $1.7 billion for serial subscriptions in 2008 alone. Library budgets, in contrast, are flat and not able to keep pace with serial price inflation. We have investigated the publishers' value proposition by conducting a comparative study of pre-print papers from two distinct science, technology, and medicine corpora and their final published counterparts. This comparison had two working assumptions: (1) If the publishers' argument is valid, the text of a pre-print paper should vary measurably from its corresponding final published version, and (2) by applying standard similarity measures, we should be able to detect and quantify such differences. Our analysis revealed that the text contents of the scientific papers generally changed very little from their pre-print to final published versions. These findings contribute empirical indicators to discussions of the added value of commercial publishers and therefore should influence libraries' economic decisions regarding access to scholarly publications.