2. 考研
  3. New Changes in Academic Journel Publishing It used to be so straightforward. A team of researchers working together in the l

New Changes in Academic Journel Publishing It used to be so straightforward. A team of researchers working together in the l

admin2013-06-05  41
问题                 New Changes in Academic Journel Publishing
    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 Publisher says that there are more than 2000 publishers world-wide specializing in these subjects. They publish more than 1.2 million articles each year in some 16000 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. There 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 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.
Which of the following is TRUE of 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 事实细节题。由题干关键词OECD report定位到第二段的第三至六句。其中关键句包括：describing the far—reaching consequences of this(描述了它的深远影响)，The report…makes heavy reading for publishers(对于出版商而言，这份报告是个沉重的打击)，It signals a change(它发出了变革的信号)等。C中的upsets指make people feel unhappy or worried，与文中的makes heavy reading for publishers语义相符。第二段以No longer开头，与第一段构成鲜明的对比。段落的时态也开始用现在时，表示现在的情形不同于过去，有了变化。作者在第二句暗示了变化的原因，即由于赞助机构的质疑和网络的发展。第三、四句介绍了经合组织报告及其意义。A是对原文who are questioning．．．government-funded research的一种偷梁换柱，受质疑的是commercial publishers而不是government-funded research。B中的introduces和effective两个词表述不正确。在第四段第三句中提及报告确认了三种主要的商业模式(business models)，而不是an effective means of publication(一种有效的出版手段)。D“它使科学研究受益颇多”与经合组织报告指出的“使出版商受益很多”相矛盾。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/kVd4777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)