The Case against the Conventional Publication of Academic and Scientific Books

Willamette University Faculty Research Website (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An essay that weighs the main factors that lead authors of academic and scientific books to consider conventional publication of their work, with realistic and practical recommendations for these authors so they may avoid the contractual “imprisonment” of their books after the period of initial active sales has passed.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Peer Review — An Insult to the Reader and to Society: Milton's View.Steven James Bartlett - 2017 - Willamette University Faculty Research Website.
A Code of Conduct for Peer Reviewers and Editors.Steven James Bartlett - 2019 - Willamette University Faculty Research Website.
Reviewing academic books: are there ethical issues?Edmund F. Byrne - 2002 - Journal of Information Ethics 11 (1):57-65.
Social Media and the Politics of Small Data: Post Publication Peer Review and Academic Value.Lisa Blackman - 2016 - Theory, Culture and Society 33 (4):3-26.
Management Excellence in Academic Publishing.Antonio Sandu - 2012 - Postmodern Openings 3 (1):7-27.
Academic Publishing and Scientific Integrity: Case Studies of Editorial Interference by Taylor & Francis.Leemon McHenry, Bart Kahr & Mark D. Hollingsworth - 2019 - Journal of Scientific Practice and Integrity 1 (1):1-10.
Ankara University School of Medicine Basic Science Research Assistants' Opinions about Research and Publication Ethics Challenges and Self-Sufficiency.Fatih Namal, Mehmet Demirci & Şükrü Keleş - 2017 - Türkiye Biyoetik Dergisi 4 (2):52-73.
Open Access Publishing — “so Near and yet so Far”.Sham Santhanam & Mohit Goyal - 2023 - Central Asian Journal of Medical Hypotheses and Ethics 3 (4):257-262.
It Is Time to Re-Evaluate the Peer Review Process for Preclinical Research.Rajat Bhattacharya & Lee M. Ellis - 2018 - Bioessays 40 (1):1700185.
A model of scholarly publishing with hybrid academic journals.Damien Besancenot & Radu Vranceanu - 2017 - Theory and Decision 82 (1):131-150.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-06-28

Downloads
642 (#32,491)

6 months
103 (#66,053)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Steven James Bartlett
Willamette University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references