‘Gatekeepers’ and the quality of the journal literature: Findings from a survey of journal editors into the issue of alleged excessive publication in scholarly and scientific journals

Abstract

The findings discussed here are not an exhaustive rendition of all the factors—professional, academic and ethical—surrounding the issue of excessive publication. Instead, they outline a problem of current and growing concern within the professional serials librarian community and are intended to equip serials librarians to deal more effectively with the phenomenon.The occasionally divergent characteristics of excessive publication in the sciences and the social sciences, although only briefly touched upon here, provide an initial indication of what serials librarians and subject specialists should look for in attempting to assess the quality of the journal literature in different disciplines.It may be true that some journal editors regard serials librarians as superfluous to the “gatekeeper” function—a point sadly confirmed by these findings. Such a situation indicates a clear need on the part of the serials librarian community to take a more proactive role in asserting their responsibilities in this area. Many serials librarians will complain that their libraries are a captive audience; that they have little scope to contribute to the debate on excessive publication, and even less to influence directly the quality control role of journal editors and publishers; that they are victims.Chapman and Webster typify the views of many observers when they explicitly single out journal publishers as exploiters of academic libraries: “… it is libraries, pressed by their academic colleagues, which provide the bulk of the circulation for journals and assured profit for the publisher. They are charged exorbitant rates on the grounds that they are read by many people. But can we continue in this way? Are libraries' stacks to bulge with unread journals?.These are important questions which require longterm strategic consideration. What is clear is that the problem of excessive publication is one of many closely inter-linked issues which influence collection evaluation approaches. It is incumbent upon the academic and research library community to base collection management decisions on a thorough consideration of the qualitative aspects of collection development, through a more informed understanding of the issue of journal and article quality.The findings reported here can best be utilized as only one part of an intelligent, planned collection management process. Recommendations from academic and research staff, evidence from user studies, bibliometric analyses, and subscription costs are all important factors in assessing the value of scholarly and scientific journals—but none should be regarded in isolation.