2. 职称英语
  3. It used to be so straightforward. A team of researchers working together in

It used to be so straightforward. A team of researchers working together in

游客2023-09-05  63
问题     It used to be so straightforward. A team of researchers working together in the laboratory would submit the results of their research to a journal. A journal editor would then remove the authors’ names and affiliations from the paper and send it to their peers for review. Depending on the comments received, the editor would accept the paper for publication or decline it. Copyright rested with the journal publisher, and researchers seeking knowledge of the results would have to subscribe to the journal.
    No longer. The Internet — and pressure from funding agencies, who are questioning why commercial publishers are making money from government-funded research by restricting access to it — is making access to scientific results a reality. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has just issued a report describing the far-reaching consequences of this. The report, by John Houghton of Victoria University in Australia and Graham Vickery of the OECD, makes heavy reading for publishers who have, so far, made handsome profits. But it goes further than that. It signals a change in what has, until now, been a key element of scientific endeavor.
    The value of knowledge and the return on the public investment in research depends, in part, upon wide distribution and ready access. It is big business. In America, the core scientific publishing market is estimated at between $7 billion and $11 billion. The International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers says that there are more than 2,000 publishers worldwide specializing in these subjects. They publish more than 1.2 million articles each year in some 16,000 journals.
    This is now changing. According to the OECD report, some 75% of scholarly journals are now online. Entirely new business models are emerging; three main ones were identified by the report’s authors. This is the so-called big deal, where institutional subscribers pay for access to a collection of online journal titles through site-licensing agreements. There is open-access publishing, typically supported by asking the author (or his employer) to pay for the paper to be published. Finally, there are open-access archives, where organizations such as universities or international laboratories support institutional repositories. Other models exist that are hybrids (混合物) of these three, such as delayed open-access, where journals allow only subscribers to read a paper for the first six months, before making it freely available to everyone who wishes to see it. All this could change the traditional form of the peer-review process, at least for the publication of papers. [br] What is said about the OECD report?
选项 A、It criticizes government-funded research.
B、It introduces an effective means of publication.
C、It upsets profit-making journal publishers.
D、It benefits scientific research considerably.
答案 C
解析 根据题干中的the OECD report将本题出处定位到第二段。该段第三、四句提到，OECD公布了一个报告，这个报告让获取巨大利润的出版商们读起来很费劲(makes heavy reading)。结合第二句第一个破折号后提到的“资助研究项目的机构质问为什么商业出版机构通过限制公众获得研究结果，从政府资助的研究中赚钱”可知，这个报告所报道的互联网使人们能够获取科学成果的深远的影响实际上击中了获取巨大利润的出版商们的要害，故答案为C)“它使获取利润的刊物出版商感到不安”。结合前面的分析可知，该报告针对的是获取巨大利润的出版商，而不是政府资助的研究，故排除A)。OECD的报告介绍了互联网引发的一种新的出版方式的影响，而不是这种新的出版方式，故排除B)。文中未提及OECD的报告会给科学研究带来巨大好处，故排除D)。
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/2988182.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)