A study of graduate student end‐users’ use and perception of electronic journals
| Pages | 302-315 |
| Published date | 01 August 2000 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520010350650 |
| Date | 01 August 2000 |
| Author | Chern Li Liew,Schubert Foo,K.R. Chennupati |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
A study of graduate
student end-users' use
and perception of
electronic journals
Chern Li Liew
Schubert Foo and
K.R. Chennupati
Introduction
Paper and computer monitors work very
differently. Information displayed on a monitor
cannot substitute for papers, both in terms of
utility and convenience (Valauskas, 1994).
Paper can hold up to 50 times more
information for a given space than a monitor
(Tufte, 1991, p. 3). One study of the use of
19,000 pages of online text indicated that
readers tolerated only limited amounts of
electronic text, information that satisfied a
specific need and did not require a great deal of
scrolling through monitors (Girill et al., 1988).
Perhaps some day, electronic journals
(e-journals) will be as easy to read as their
paper antecedents. Advances in display
technology could make monitors nearly as
pleasing to the eyes as print and paper. Until
that happens, however, many have already
begun to realise and accept that, if there are
indeed large differences in the ways in which
paper-based information and computer-
displayed information are used, e-journals
may never be directly comparable to their
print counterparts. Each serves unique
functions for multiple audiences. While
reading e-journals is not the same as reading a
print copy, many are beginning to
acknowledge the possibility of these electronic
documents (e-documents) offering users
advanced features and novel forms of
functionality beyond what is possible in print.
Whether or not the paradigm change will
affect the whole scientific publishing process
immediately and to what extent may be
disputable (Harnad, 1997; Rowland, 1997;
Sosteric, 1996). However, this new
communication channel does exist and more
and more scientists and end-users will want to
use it. Indeed, people involved in e-journals
believe very strongly that they represent the
pattern for the future (Harnad, 1996, 1992;
Odlyzko, 1996). The increasing number of
e-journals also seems to confirm that we are
facing a general change of the scientific
communication process (Boyce and Dalterio,
1996). Having this in mind, it is important to
look into end-users' use and perception of
currently available journals and their
expectations for future e-journals. The
information will be useful for the design of
future e-journals to better meet user needs.
The authors
Chern Li Liew is currently a PhD candidate in the Division
of Information Studies, Schubert Foo is Associate
Professor and Head of the Division of Information Studies
and K.R. Chennupati is Assistant Professor in the
Division of Information Studies, all at Nanyang
Technological University, Singapore.
Keywords
Puiblishing, Documents, Interaction, User studies,
Library users
Abstract
The growth and diversity of electronic journals (e-journals)
in the past five years has led many to predict the
extinction of print journals and that a new paradigm is
sweeping scholarship. Some others, however, believe that
future electronic scholarly journals will be different from
their print antecedents and fill a different niche, and will
be necessary for the growth of knowledge. This paper
considers the future of e-journals in the light of the use
and perception of graduate student end-users, and their
expectations of future e-journals. Some results from a
recent user study presenting significant implications for
the design of future e-journals are reported. The results
show a significantly high acceptance of e-journals by this
category of users. Generally, e-journals are expected to be
different from print journals, with novel forms of
functionality not possible in their print counterparts.
Electronic access
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is
available at
http://www.emerald-library.com
Refereed article received 5 July 2000
Approved for publication 13 July 2000
302
Online Information Review
Volume 24 .Number 4 .2000 .pp. 302±315
#MCB University Press .ISSN 1468-4527
To continue reading
Request your trial