The cultural shaping of scholarly communication: Explaining e‐journal use within and across academic fields

J Fry, S Talja - Proceedings of the American society for …, 2004 - Wiley Online Library
J Fry, S Talja
Proceedings of the American society for information science and …, 2004Wiley Online Library
Current research on e‐journal usage patterns focuses more on measuring levels of use and
measuring changes in reading patterns than developing theoretical models that enable the
explanation and prediction of patterns in the adoption and uptake of e‐journals across
scientific fields. Typically, studies either focus on single disciplines or attempt to reach an
overview of disciplinary differences by using broad disciplinary groupings, such as physical
sciences, health sciences, applied technologies, social sciences, or humanities. We argue …
Abstract
Current research on e‐journal usage patterns focuses more on measuring levels of use and measuring changes in reading patterns than developing theoretical models that enable the explanation and prediction of patterns in the adoption and uptake of e‐journals across scientific fields. Typically, studies either focus on single disciplines or attempt to reach an overview of disciplinary differences by using broad disciplinary groupings, such as physical sciences, health sciences, applied technologies, social sciences, or humanities. We argue that there is a need for extending the domain analytic approach to incorporate a fuller understanding of the cultural characteristics of scientific specialisms, which include both epistemological and social considerations. To this end we suggest that Whitley's theory of the social organization of scholarly fields can be effectively used as an explanatory model of e‐journal use across scientific fields. By using Whitley's theory we also illustrate the limitation of current approaches to the explanation of information practices and e‐journal use that use the administrative unit of the discipline, or base comparison on coarse‐grained aggregations as the unit of analysis, rather than the specialism.
Wiley Online Library