The relationship between university presses, e-book vendors, and academic libraries: A platform theory analysis

University presses, as one of the major content providers in the scholarly e-book market, especially in humanities and social sciences (HSS), play a critical role in the production and distribution of new knowledge and culture. We investigate the relations among university presses, academic librarie...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of librarianship and information science 2024-12, Vol.56 (4), p.1016-1027
Hauptverfasser: Zhang, Mei, Eschenfelder, Kristin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1027
container_issue 4
container_start_page 1016
container_title Journal of librarianship and information science
container_volume 56
creator Zhang, Mei
Eschenfelder, Kristin
description University presses, as one of the major content providers in the scholarly e-book market, especially in humanities and social sciences (HSS), play a critical role in the production and distribution of new knowledge and culture. We investigate the relations among university presses, academic libraries, and e-book vendors, by examining university presses’ perceptions of academic libraries and e-book vendors, and presses’ perceptions of themselves and the university press community. Findings are drawn from one-on-one interviews with 19 participants from 18 different university presses in the United States during 2020–2021. We observe a market structure for HSS e-books where most presses were satisfied with Big Four e-book vendors, including Project MUSE, EBSCO, ProQuest, and JSTOR, and lacked strong incentives to search for new e-book vendors. We find that most presses often treat libraries, including the one from the same institution, as their customers with limited interactions; findings also show university presses’ varied self-imaging, along with a shared perception about the collegiality of the university press community. We then explore the question of why the market is dominated by the Big Four through the theoretical lens developed in platform literature, and further examine the factors contributing to the low communication between university presses and academic libraries related to e-book distribution.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/09610006231185883
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3127696369</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_09610006231185883</sage_id><sourcerecordid>3127696369</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-342d161685565f5fd63287fcf9aa2c19a34a5eeb02b46c2aad4fd8793c41e59d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wFvAq1vzsZtsvJXiFxS81POSTSY2dbtZk21l_71bKngQT8Mwz_MyvAhdUzKjVMo7ogQlhAjGKS2LsuQnaEJlTjORS3mKJod7dgDO0UVKG0IY5UpOUFitAUdodO9Dm9a-wzX0XwAt3rV-DzH5fsBdhJQg3WLI6hA-8B5aG-K469ZibbSFrTe48XXU0UO6x3PcjYkuxC3u1xDiMJK6GZJPl-jM6SbB1c-corfHh9XiOVu-Pr0s5svMcCL7jOfMUkFFWRSicIWzgrNSOuOU1sxQpXmuC4CasDoXhmltc2dLqbjJKRTK8im6OeZ2MXzuIPXVJuzi-ESqOGVSKMGFGil6pEwMKUVwVRf9VsehoqQ69Fr96XV0Zkcn6Xf4Tf1f-Abd1XkH</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3127696369</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The relationship between university presses, e-book vendors, and academic libraries: A platform theory analysis</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><creator>Zhang, Mei ; Eschenfelder, Kristin</creator><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Mei ; Eschenfelder, Kristin</creatorcontrib><description>University presses, as one of the major content providers in the scholarly e-book market, especially in humanities and social sciences (HSS), play a critical role in the production and distribution of new knowledge and culture. We investigate the relations among university presses, academic libraries, and e-book vendors, by examining university presses’ perceptions of academic libraries and e-book vendors, and presses’ perceptions of themselves and the university press community. Findings are drawn from one-on-one interviews with 19 participants from 18 different university presses in the United States during 2020–2021. We observe a market structure for HSS e-books where most presses were satisfied with Big Four e-book vendors, including Project MUSE, EBSCO, ProQuest, and JSTOR, and lacked strong incentives to search for new e-book vendors. We find that most presses often treat libraries, including the one from the same institution, as their customers with limited interactions; findings also show university presses’ varied self-imaging, along with a shared perception about the collegiality of the university press community. We then explore the question of why the market is dominated by the Big Four through the theoretical lens developed in platform literature, and further examine the factors contributing to the low communication between university presses and academic libraries related to e-book distribution.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0961-0006</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-6477</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/09610006231185883</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Academic libraries ; E-books ; Humanities ; Social sciences ; University presses</subject><ispartof>Journal of librarianship and information science, 2024-12, Vol.56 (4), p.1016-1027</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-342d161685565f5fd63287fcf9aa2c19a34a5eeb02b46c2aad4fd8793c41e59d3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3066-1988</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/09610006231185883$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09610006231185883$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,43621,43622</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Mei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eschenfelder, Kristin</creatorcontrib><title>The relationship between university presses, e-book vendors, and academic libraries: A platform theory analysis</title><title>Journal of librarianship and information science</title><description>University presses, as one of the major content providers in the scholarly e-book market, especially in humanities and social sciences (HSS), play a critical role in the production and distribution of new knowledge and culture. We investigate the relations among university presses, academic libraries, and e-book vendors, by examining university presses’ perceptions of academic libraries and e-book vendors, and presses’ perceptions of themselves and the university press community. Findings are drawn from one-on-one interviews with 19 participants from 18 different university presses in the United States during 2020–2021. We observe a market structure for HSS e-books where most presses were satisfied with Big Four e-book vendors, including Project MUSE, EBSCO, ProQuest, and JSTOR, and lacked strong incentives to search for new e-book vendors. We find that most presses often treat libraries, including the one from the same institution, as their customers with limited interactions; findings also show university presses’ varied self-imaging, along with a shared perception about the collegiality of the university press community. We then explore the question of why the market is dominated by the Big Four through the theoretical lens developed in platform literature, and further examine the factors contributing to the low communication between university presses and academic libraries related to e-book distribution.</description><subject>Academic libraries</subject><subject>E-books</subject><subject>Humanities</subject><subject>Social sciences</subject><subject>University presses</subject><issn>0961-0006</issn><issn>1741-6477</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wFvAq1vzsZtsvJXiFxS81POSTSY2dbtZk21l_71bKngQT8Mwz_MyvAhdUzKjVMo7ogQlhAjGKS2LsuQnaEJlTjORS3mKJod7dgDO0UVKG0IY5UpOUFitAUdodO9Dm9a-wzX0XwAt3rV-DzH5fsBdhJQg3WLI6hA-8B5aG-K469ZibbSFrTe48XXU0UO6x3PcjYkuxC3u1xDiMJK6GZJPl-jM6SbB1c-corfHh9XiOVu-Pr0s5svMcCL7jOfMUkFFWRSicIWzgrNSOuOU1sxQpXmuC4CasDoXhmltc2dLqbjJKRTK8im6OeZ2MXzuIPXVJuzi-ESqOGVSKMGFGil6pEwMKUVwVRf9VsehoqQ69Fr96XV0Zkcn6Xf4Tf1f-Abd1XkH</recordid><startdate>20241201</startdate><enddate>20241201</enddate><creator>Zhang, Mei</creator><creator>Eschenfelder, Kristin</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>E3H</scope><scope>F2A</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3066-1988</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241201</creationdate><title>The relationship between university presses, e-book vendors, and academic libraries: A platform theory analysis</title><author>Zhang, Mei ; Eschenfelder, Kristin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-342d161685565f5fd63287fcf9aa2c19a34a5eeb02b46c2aad4fd8793c41e59d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Academic libraries</topic><topic>E-books</topic><topic>Humanities</topic><topic>Social sciences</topic><topic>University presses</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Mei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eschenfelder, Kristin</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Library &amp; Information Sciences Abstracts (LISA)</collection><collection>Library &amp; Information Science Abstracts (LISA)</collection><jtitle>Journal of librarianship and information science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zhang, Mei</au><au>Eschenfelder, Kristin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The relationship between university presses, e-book vendors, and academic libraries: A platform theory analysis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of librarianship and information science</jtitle><date>2024-12-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>56</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1016</spage><epage>1027</epage><pages>1016-1027</pages><issn>0961-0006</issn><eissn>1741-6477</eissn><abstract>University presses, as one of the major content providers in the scholarly e-book market, especially in humanities and social sciences (HSS), play a critical role in the production and distribution of new knowledge and culture. We investigate the relations among university presses, academic libraries, and e-book vendors, by examining university presses’ perceptions of academic libraries and e-book vendors, and presses’ perceptions of themselves and the university press community. Findings are drawn from one-on-one interviews with 19 participants from 18 different university presses in the United States during 2020–2021. We observe a market structure for HSS e-books where most presses were satisfied with Big Four e-book vendors, including Project MUSE, EBSCO, ProQuest, and JSTOR, and lacked strong incentives to search for new e-book vendors. We find that most presses often treat libraries, including the one from the same institution, as their customers with limited interactions; findings also show university presses’ varied self-imaging, along with a shared perception about the collegiality of the university press community. We then explore the question of why the market is dominated by the Big Four through the theoretical lens developed in platform literature, and further examine the factors contributing to the low communication between university presses and academic libraries related to e-book distribution.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/09610006231185883</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3066-1988</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0961-0006
ispartof Journal of librarianship and information science, 2024-12, Vol.56 (4), p.1016-1027
issn 0961-0006
1741-6477
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_3127696369
source Access via SAGE
subjects Academic libraries
E-books
Humanities
Social sciences
University presses
title The relationship between university presses, e-book vendors, and academic libraries: A platform theory analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T23%3A13%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20relationship%20between%20university%20presses,%20e-book%20vendors,%20and%20academic%20libraries:%20A%20platform%20theory%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20librarianship%20and%20information%20science&rft.au=Zhang,%20Mei&rft.date=2024-12-01&rft.volume=56&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1016&rft.epage=1027&rft.pages=1016-1027&rft.issn=0961-0006&rft.eissn=1741-6477&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/09610006231185883&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3127696369%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3127696369&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_09610006231185883&rfr_iscdi=true