Abstract
ABSTRACTA follow-up to an earlier article published in this same journal in 2013, this article repeats an analysis of five Big Deal journal packages to which Hofstra University's Axinn Library subscribes. Improvements over the last study include more years of data, the removal of open access and archival content from the calculations, and a subject analysis. Results confirm the original findings that four of the Big Deals are good deals, but expand on these outcomes with a discussion of the subject breakdown of each package, the cost of individual title subscriptions, and the dangers of overreliance on usage statistics.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
