{"title":"为什么我要评论平庸的书","authors":"Steven E. Gump","doi":"10.3138/jsp.53.1.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Unimpressive books fail to make effective, distinctive, or otherwise substantive contributions. Yet their reviews can be useful to potential readers (as caveats), to publishers (as quality-control checks), to authors working on similar book projects (as models of what to avoid), and even to the reviewers themselves (as exercises for developing connoisseurship within a specific field). By articulating the implications and transferability of evaluative criteria, this essay explores the value and utility of such reviews.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why I Review Unimpressive Books\",\"authors\":\"Steven E. Gump\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/jsp.53.1.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Unimpressive books fail to make effective, distinctive, or otherwise substantive contributions. Yet their reviews can be useful to potential readers (as caveats), to publishers (as quality-control checks), to authors working on similar book projects (as models of what to avoid), and even to the reviewers themselves (as exercises for developing connoisseurship within a specific field). By articulating the implications and transferability of evaluative criteria, this essay explores the value and utility of such reviews.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Scholarly Publishing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Scholarly Publishing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.53.1.04\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp.53.1.04","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:Unimpressive books fail to make effective, distinctive, or otherwise substantive contributions. Yet their reviews can be useful to potential readers (as caveats), to publishers (as quality-control checks), to authors working on similar book projects (as models of what to avoid), and even to the reviewers themselves (as exercises for developing connoisseurship within a specific field). By articulating the implications and transferability of evaluative criteria, this essay explores the value and utility of such reviews.
期刊介绍：
For more than 40 years, the Journal of Scholarly Publishing has been the authoritative voice of academic publishing. The journal combines philosophical analysis with practical advice and aspires to explain, argue, discuss, and question the large collection of new topics that continually arise in the publishing field. JSP has also examined the future of scholarly publishing, scholarship on the web, digitization, copyright, editorial policies, computer applications, marketing, and pricing models. It is the indispensable resource for academics and publishers that addresses the new challenges resulting from changes in technology and funding and from innovations in production and publishing.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
