NEWS RELEASE


Media Contact:
Bob Campbell, Publishing Research Consortium
Tel: +44 (0)1865 476118
bcampbel@wiley.com

                                          June 2011


JAM today: the PRC Study on Journal Article Mining [1]

If you have too much to read, or too much information to digest, could a
machine do it for you? That is the essence of the motivation behind
content mining, here including both text and data mining, examined in the
latest Publishing Research Consortium (PRC) [2] study.

Headline findings in the report, which draw upon expert interviews and a
survey of opinion are:
•	Content mining is about to accelerate, will expand into new areas and
develop further into automated information extraction and relationship
analysis
•	The focus is shifting from the traditional life sciences (especially
drug discovery) to the social sciences, humanities, business, marketing
and even law
•	A majority of respondents to the survey supported three common solutions
for facilitating content mining
o	More content standardization for mining-friendly formats
o	A shared content mining platform across publishers
o	Commonly agreed rules for the granting of mining permissions
•	Third-party mining requests are received by most publishers (77% of all,
88% of large ones) but at a very low level (less than 10 per annum); most
mining requests come from abstracting and indexing services followed by
corporate R&D organisations.
•	Over 90 % of publisher respondents grant research-focused mining
requests, nearly 60 % of these in all or the majority of cases. The
request will be granted by 60% of publisher respondents in most or all
cases if it creates traffic drivers to their sites but just over half of
these publishers (51%) will refuse in all or most cases if the results of
the mining would compete with their own services
•	A majority of publishers do not see Open Access as a prerequisite for
content mining
 Eefke Smit, who carried out the research with Maurits van der Graaf, said
“ We found  a lot of optimism for new opportunities in mining scholarly
content among all stakeholder groups. Publishers expressed a clear intent
to invest more in mining and new services that will reveal deeper levels
of information. We can expect many more exciting developments in this
area in the near future.”

Bob Campbell (Chairman of the PRC Steering Group ) added:  “This
comprehensive study shows that publishers understand the potential of text
and data mining.  It demonstrates that many publishers grant permission
for mining for research purposes.  It is also understandable that many
publishers are reluctant to allow mining if the outcome could replace or
compete with their own services which can involve a considerable
investment.”

The report focuses on the state of content mining in the arena of academic
and professional publications, journal articles in particular. Academic
and professional publishers frequently receive requests from parties
wishing to mine their content and face uncontrolled downloads or crawling.
More and more publishers undertake content mining on their own journal
content. This PRC study aims to provide more insight into practices,
policies for permission requests, publishers’ plans and possibilities to
facilitate better content mining.
In early 2011 the authors conducted 29 interviews with people involved in
content mining projects and permission handling. During March and April of
2011 a survey was mailed to all publishers on the mailing lists of
CrossRef and the International Association of STM Publishers. The report
analysis is based on 190 responses.

[1] Journal Article Mining, PRC Study. Freely available on the PRC site
(http://www.publishingresearch.net/documents/PRCSmitJAMreport20June2011VersionofRecord.pdf
)

[2]About The Publishing Research Consortium (PRC):

The PRC is a group representing publishers and associations supporting
global research into scholarly communication in order to enable
evidence-based discussion and objective analysis
(http://www.publishingresearch.net). PRC’s objective is to support work
that is scientific and pro-scholarship, in order to promote an
understanding of the role of publishing and its impact on research and
teaching.

[This message is cross-posted.  Please pardon the duplication.]

CORRECTION: Chinese Journal of Chemical Physics


Melville, New York, June 24, 2011 -- AIP Publishing, a division of the American Institute of Physics, issued a correction today to its previous announcement regarding the Chinese Journal of Chemical Physics (CJCP) (April 19, 2011. The Institute of Physics Publishing (IOP) will continue to manage the hosting, sales, marketing, and distribution of CJCP. All customers are encouraged to speak with their IOP representative should they have any questions or need further information regarding this title.


About AIP
The American Institute of Physics is an organization of 10 physical science societies, representing more than 135,000 scientists, engineers, and educators and is one of the world's largest publishers of scientific information in physics. AIP pursues innovation in electronic publishing of scholarly journals and offers full-solution publishing services for its Member Societies. AIP publishes 13 journals; two magazines, including its flagship publication Physics Today; and the AIP Conference Proceedings series. 

For more information:
Lori Carlin
Director, Fulfillment & Marketing
American Institute of Physics
Phone: +1-516-576-2279
Email: lscarlin@aip.org