English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

It is difficult in five minutes to deal with the many different subjects in Dr. Philip Abelson’s talk. There are at least 25 different areas I could comment on separately. On Ben Lipetz’ paper, I think it would be worth calling to your attention a 1987 paper by Manfred Kochen on how we acknowledge our intellectual debts. (Kochen, 1987). First, Dr. Abelson mentions that many articles are never cited. Indeed, from 1955 through 1987, the Science Citation Index included 11.5 million source items of all types articles, reviews, letters to the editor, short communications, technical notes, and meeting abstracts. Of these, 56% were never cited at all over this 32-year period. However, there are really very little data on citedness. We need to know a lot more about what types of items do or do not get cited, and those that are not expected to be cited. For example, journals such as the Review of Scientific Instruments may have very large numbers of uncited papers because they are there for the record only and may require no future discussion. Also, Dr. Abelson says that the publish or perish syndrome has led to the increasing phenomenon of “least publishable units” -fragmentary and essentially duplicate research articles. As these increase, the number of opportunities for not being cited expands. I could give a rather long discourse on uncitedness and think it is a great dissertation topic for students to think about. Dr. Abelson uses uncitedness to support his point that many journals are not read. I don’t think you can draw that conclusion. If you ask readers, you may find that they read a large number of less cited journals as well as journals like Science. Also, anyone in this room who scans Science regularly is happy to find one or two papers to read in each issue. If you read every article in Science you would never do anything else. But since there are so many readers of journals such as Science and Nature, we assume that all of the material in the big, multidisciplinary journals does get read by someone. That is not necessarily the case. In fact, IS1 data show that not every one of the articles in these journals is cited. Dr. Abelson also indicated that the lay press seems to read only the top five journals. I think we can provide evi-

Response to the panel on evaluation of scientific information and the impact of new information technology