Jadranka,

Difficult to tell. In the current climate, the prevailing system seems the 'default'. I speak regularly to marketers/promoters of large publishing houses i.e. Elsevier. They are all acutely aware of the intense competition in the publishing space and always looking to diversify/keep up in terms of the latest 'digital' trend. That said, they have to be mindful of what the customer wants; soppy and demand. Take, for instance, a popular text to I co-edit/co-author - currently in its 6th edition. If I look at sales - only a very small proportion are e-sales. The vast majority are still hard copy sales. If this is a general trend then, to me, people still prefer 'traditional' formats and, even if they do change, might we come back to the same in the future - as is currently the case with the reemergence of the popularity of vinyl records?

In this climate - it's hard to predict where the exact future of publishing will lead.

Jadranka,

Difficult to tell. In the current climate, the prevailing system seems the 'default'. I speak regularly to marketers/promoters of large publishing houses i.e. Elsevier. They are all acutely aware of the intense competition in the publishing space and always looking to diversify/keep up in terms of the latest 'digital' trend. That said, they have to be mindful of what the customer wants; soppy and demand. Take, for instance, a popular text to I co-edit/co-author - currently in its 6th edition. If I look at sales - only a very small proportion are e-sales. The vast majority are still hard copy sales. If this is a general trend then, to me, people still prefer 'traditional' formats and, even if they do change, might we come back to the same in the future - as is currently the case with the reemergence of the popularity of vinyl records?

In this climate - it's hard to predict where the exact future of publishing will lead.

Extensive production of scientific papers is driven to a considerable extent by the necessity of being able to demonstrate an extensive publication list to obtain tenure and funding. Another driving force, however, is the publishing houses themselves, as they seem to be of the opinion that a continual augmentation in the number of pages and papers on offer represents increased value to the institutions purchasing their journals. Ask any researcher whether they read the literature in their field, and the response is likely to be that they try stay up to date with the major advances, they probably read the majority of their closest colleagues and competitors' papers, but that the days of reading the literature in its entirety have gone. (I remember the days of going to the library and reading the paper copy of the latest journal when it arrived, these journals have expanded beyond recognition, as research has been salami to multiply the typical output.) At some stage the production of more and more papers will have to cease, offering an opportunity to bring about a transition in reporting advances. This could be gloriously disruptive, nevertheless I do wonder how we will manage to identify relevant and stimulating research, and how we will then be able to guarantee that the appropriate credit is given. There is a further thought, which is that we will need to develop different skills sets to report results or be prepared to employ specialists to assist us.