IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jamest/v49y1998i4p364-374.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Use of scholarly book reviews: Implications for electronic publishing and scholarly communication

Author

Listed:
  • Amanda Spink
  • David Robins
  • Linda Schamber

Abstract

Studies examining the use of printed materials by scholars are necessary precursors to the development of scholarly electronic journals and the development of the field of electronic publishing. Electronic publishing of journals is important in scholarship, where the timeliness and relevance of publications are crucial to the advancement of knowledge. Although considerable space is devoted to book reviews in scholarly journals, few previous studies have examined or provided detailed data on the utility or importance of book reviews to scholars. In addition, book reviews have generally not been included in models of scholarly communication. This article results from a survey of science and technology faculty, and the humanities and social science faculty at the University of North Texas. The survey sought to determine: (1) Whether faculty read book reviews in scholarly journals; (2) the sources, importance, and utility of book reviews for faculty research and teaching; and (3) faculty criteria for useful book reviews. Findings show that most faculty read book reviews, however, a dichotomy exists as to the usefulness of book reviews for faculty research and teaching. Different book review formats were also preferred by humanities and social sciences faculty, and science and technology faculty. Based on these findings, an extension of Garvey and Griffith's (1971) scholarly communication model is proposed that includes book reviews and various feedback loops as part of the scholarly communication process. Findings from this study hold implications for the content and access to electronically published book reviews, and further research. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Suggested Citation

  • Amanda Spink & David Robins & Linda Schamber, 1998. "Use of scholarly book reviews: Implications for electronic publishing and scholarly communication," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 49(4), pages 364-374.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jamest:v:49:y:1998:i:4:p:364-374
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(19980401)49:43.0.CO;2-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(19980401)49:43.0.CO;2-3
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(19980401)49:43.0.CO;2-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. P�ivi Oinas & Samuli Lepp�l�, 2013. "Views on Book Reviews," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(10), pages 1785-1789, November.
    2. Alesia Zuccala & Thed van Leeuwen, 2011. "Book reviews in humanities research evaluations," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 62(10), pages 1979-1991, October.
    3. Yaoyu Wei & Weiwei Fan, 2018. "A study of book reviews in SCI-Expanded, SSCI, and A&HCI journals by researchers from five countries: 2006–2015," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(2), pages 637-654, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jamest:v:49:y:1998:i:4:p:364-374. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.