The Impact of the Monographs Crisis on the Field of Communication

This study replicates and extends Yates and Chapman's [(2007), Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 26(1), 39–51] study of references from Communication Monographs, Communication Research, and Journal of Communication for the years 2010 and 2015 to draw further conclusions on the use of monographs in journal literature in the field of communication. Results show that the use of monographs in these journals has been outpaced by references to journal articles by a ratio of 5 to 1. The references were further analyzed by date and publisher. The authors then selected a random sample of the monographs cited in the journals to explore the availability of these monographs in electronic format and found that many are available as ebooks, particularly the more recent titles. The authors also examined the references from a collection of scholarly books in communication from 2005, 2010, and 2015 and found that the use of monographs may be declining slightly. The most notable trend in these references was the increase in the number of references to items in other formats such as film, television, comic books, and websites. The authors conclude that the monographs crisis is indeed affecting citation patterns in the field of communication.     

西文图书出版年的著录探讨

通过学习AACR2和美国国会图书馆条例解释LCRIs,结合多年的工作经验,对西文图书出版日期信息的比较和著录项进行了总结,以寻求西文编目工作的规范化和标准化。     

No citation advantage for monograph-based collaborations?

It is widely believed that collaboration is advantageous in science, for example, with collaboratively written articles tending to attract more citations than solo articles and strong arguments for the value of interdisciplinary collaboration. Nevertheless, it is not known whether the same is true for research that produces books. This article tests whether co-authored scholarly monographs attract more citations than solo monographs using books published before 2011 from 30 categories in the Web of Science. The results show that solo monographs numerically dominate collaborative monographs, but give no evidence of a citation advantage for collaboration on monographs. In contrast, for nearly all these subjects (28 out of 30) there was a citation advantage for collaboratively produced journal articles. As a result, research managers and funders should not incentivise collaborative research in book-based subjects or in research that aims to produce monographs, but should allow the researchers themselves to freely decide whether to collaborate or not.     

Barycenter representation of book publishing internationalization in the Social Sciences and Humanities

This paper introduces a novel application in bibliometrics of the barycenter method. Using places of publication barycenters, we measure internationalization of book publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities. Based on 2002–2011 data for Flanders, Belgium, we demonstrate how the geographic center of weight of book publishing is different for the Social Sciences than for the Humanities. Whereas the latter still rely predominantly on domestic Flemish and continental European publishers, the former are firmly Anglo-Saxon oriented. The Humanities, however, show a more pronounced evolution toward further internationalization. For the already largely internationally oriented Social Sciences, in most recent years, the share of British publishers has grown. The barycenter method proves to be a valuable tool in the representation of research internationalization of book publications. This is especially the case when applied non-Anglophone countries.     

Russian Publishers,the Media,and Government Interference in 2002: A Report to the Slavic Librarians' Workshop,University of Illinois,July 2003

ABSTRACT

During 2002 the Russian publishing industry and news media were under intense scrutiny, sometimes verging on assault, by government and pro-government groups. A new 20% value-added tax was an additional blow, although it was reduced to 10% in the middle of the year. Russian publishing appears to be healthy in spite of those problems, although statistics from the Russian Book Chamber (Rossiiskaia knizhnaia palata) are notoriously unreliable. Statistics on books carried by Russian Press Service give an approximate picture of scholarly book publishing.     

从典型著述看国外舆论研究——以10种舆论专著和最近5年的《舆论季刊》为例

本文从研究主题、具体研究方法和研究所涉及的国家和地区三个方面对最近5年的23期《舆论季刊》进行内容分析,同时对国外有代表性的10种舆论研究专著进行了文献综述式的归纳和分析,提炼出其研究重点和主要内容。笔者意图通过学术期刊和研究专著两个维度,大致勾画出国外舆论研究的基本现状,为我国的舆论研究提供一个参照系。