바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science

  • P-ISSN1225-598X
  • E-ISSN2982-6292

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.50 No.3

Citation Share

A Quantitative Analysis of Scholarly Monograph Publishing by University Presses in Korea

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science / Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, (P)1225-598X; (E)2982-6292
2016, v.50 no.3, pp.309-327
https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2016.50.3.309



& (2016). A Quantitative Analysis of Scholarly Monograph Publishing by University Presses in Korea. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 50(3), 309-327, https://doi.org/10.4275/KSLIS.2016.50.3.309

Abstract

Scholarly monographs have been a main vehicle for knowledge representation and transfer as well as an important research outcome. University presses have long been considered as the last bastion for scholarly monographs that have low commercial prospect. Until now there has not been a systematic data analysis regarding scholarly monograph production by university presses in Korea. In this paper, we collected bibliographic records of university presses’ monograph publications between 1950 and 2015 using the National Library of Korea’s online catalog system. A total of 21,015 records were used in the analysis. In particular, for monographs published between 2001 and 2015, we categorized them into scholarly monographs and non-scholarly monographs. University presses’ publishing showed sharp increase during the 1990’s but is in decline after its peak in 2005. University presses seem to have engaged in publishing more non-scholarly monographs than scholarly monographs by a ratio of 6:4. Large university presses in size seem to produce higher proportions of scholarly monographs than smaller presses. In terms of authoring types, single authorship accounts for the highest proportion and on the increase. However, edited books are losing ground as translated books seem to hold steady. Monographs in social sciences have been published more frequently than any other subject areas as there seem to be significant discrepancies among subject areas in terms of the scholarly monograph proportion.

keywords
University Press, Scholarly Monograph, Scholarly Communication, Quantitative Analysis, 대학출판부, 학술단행본, 학술커뮤니케이션, 양적분석

Reference

1.

국립중앙도서관. 국립중앙도서관 홈페이지. 서울: 국립중앙도서관. [online] [cited 2016. 4. 1.]<http://www.nl.go.kr>

2.

권영자. 2012. 한․일 대학출판부 출판 활동의 실증적 비교 연구. 한국출판학연구, 38(1), 5-31.

3.

출판전문가 중심으로 재편… 한국대학출판협회 역할 확대해야. 2015. 교수신문. 10월 6일. [online] [cited 2016. 5. 18.]<http://www.kyosu.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=31545>

4.

대한출판문화협회. 1998. 국내 9개 대학출판부의 출판 활동. 출판저널, 240, 10-11.

5.

박명희. 2006. 한국 대학 출판부의 역할과 기능에 관한 연구. 석사학위논문, 건국대학교 언론홍보대학원.

6.

박용두, 홍이현. 2005. 대학출판부, 그 새로운 출발을 위하여. 출판저널, 352, 36-38.

7.

송정숙. 1998. 학술정보전달시스템으로서 대학출판부의 활성화 방안: 부산대학교 출판부를 중심으로. 한국도서관․정보학회지, 28, 137-170.

8.

이영자. 1981. 학술정보 커뮤니케이션 시스템으로서의 대학출판부. 한국도서관․정보학회지, 8:155-184.

9.

인문학 연구성과 저술 중심으로 평가하자. 2014. 교수신문. 5월 12일. [online] [cited 2016. 5. 18.] <http://www.kyosu.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=28887>

10.

정연경, 최윤경. 2011. 인문․사회과학 분야 교수의 연구업적물 평가에 관한 연구. 정보관리연구, 42(3), 211-233.

11.

한국대학출판부협회. 2011. 2010 대학출판부 연감 / 신간도서목록. 서울: 한국대학출판부협회.

12.

한국연구재단. 2014. 인문학분야 학술성과 평가의 표준모델에 관한 연구. 대전: 한국연구재단, 정책연구-2013-013-인문학.

13.

Borgman, C. L. 2007. Scholarship in the Digital Age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

14.

Brown, L. et al. 2007. University Publishing in a Digital Age. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 10(3), 1-69.

15.

Campbell, R., Pentz, E., and Borthwick, I. 2012. Academic and Professional Publishing. Burlington:Elsevier.

16.

Duke University. 2015. Duke University Books & Journals: Fall & Winter 2015. [online][cited 2016. 6. 5.]<https://issuu.com/dukeuniversitypress/docs/fall_15_catalog_final?e=9530093/12818148>

17.

Griffiths, R. J., and Rascoff, M. 2005. The Evolving Environment for Scholarly Electronic Monographs. New York: Ithaka S+R. [online] [cited 2016. 6. 19.]<http://www.sr.ithaka.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/4.3.1.pdf>

18.

Gould, C. C. 1988. Information Needs in the Humanities: An Assessment. CA: Research Libraries Group.

19.

Kivistö, S., and Kihlström, S. 2015. The　Monograph. Helsingfors: University of Helsinki. [online] [cited 2016. 4. 5.]<http://www.helsinki.fi/collegium/events/monografia/monografia.pdf>

20.

Schonfeld, R. C., Housewright, R., and Wulfson, K. 2012. Ithaka S+R US Faculty Survey 2012. New York: Ithaka S+R. [online] [cited 2016. 6. 5.] <http://j.mp/14477fF>

21.

Schonfeld, R. C. 2013. Stop the Presses: Is the Monograph Headed toward an E-Only Future. New York: Ithaka S+R. [online] [cited 2016. 5. 18.]<http://www.sr.ithaka.org/wp-content/mig/files/SR_BriefingPaper_Presses_120913.pdf>

22.

Steele, C. 2008. Scholarly Monograph Publishing in the 21st Century: The Future More than Ever Should Be an Open Book. Journal of Electronic Publishing, 11(2). [online] [cited 2016. 4. 5.] doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0011.201.

23.

University College London. 2008. Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future. [online] [cited 2016. 4. 18.] <http://www.publishing.ucl.ac.uk/behaviour.html>

24.

Withey, L. et al. 2011. Sustaining Scholarly Publishing: New Business Models for University Presses: A Report of the AAUP Task Force on Economic Models for Scholarly Publishing.Journal of Scholarly Publishing, 42(4), 397-441.

Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science

e-Submission OA Policy