The electronic journal: An examination of its viability as a channel for formal scholarly communication as demonstrated by receipt of rewards and recognition

This research project examines the electronic journal as a channel of formal scholarly communication and questions whether sociological theories regarding the viability of scholarly communication channels and the accumulation of rewards for scholarly publication hold true within the electronic channel. The electronic journal is defined as one which publishes peer-reviewed scholarly research-based writing and which utilizes electronic networks as its primary distribution channel.; Ten electronic journals from science and social science disciplines were examined to assess whether they met seven criteria of viability identified through the sociology of science. These criteria include expectations that the scholarly communication channel will: convey knowledge certified through peer review, establish priority claims to new knowledge, serve as exclusive channel for initial dissemination, be intellectually accessible to the scholarly community, be retrievable by that community, contribute to further scholarly dialogue, and be known and respected by the scholarly community.; Data was collected between 1993 and 1995 through interviews with journal editors, examination of journal archives, citation analysis of journal contents, and distribution of two surveys, one to contributors and one to users of the journals. Findings suggest that receipt of informal recognition (feedback, new professional contacts, citation) is strong for electronic journal contributors, however, data is inconclusive regarding receipt of more formal rewards (tenure, rank advancement, honors). Contributors have not been penalized for involvement with electronic journals, but there is a widespread perception that electronic publication is less significant than print publication.; Although findings show the electronic journal to be adequate in a majority of measures, other measures reveal major inadequacies. Measures in which the electronic journal is judged inadequate are attributable either to the youth of the journals (high acceptance rates, non-inclusion in premiere indexes, and inconclusive data regarding receipt of formal rewards) or to the nature of the electronic channel (retrieval difficulties and archival concerns). Additionally, measures which suggest that the electronic channel enhances the scholarly communication process are attributable to the nature of the channel (timeliness of publication, rapid receipt of feedback, and immediacy of citation).