Scientific publishing is rapidly shifting from a paper-based system to one of predominantly electronic distribution, in which universities purchase site licenses for online access to journal contents. Will these changes necessarily benefit the scientific community? By using basic microeconomics and elementary statistical theory, we address this question and find a surprising answer. If a journal is priced to maximize the publisher’s profits, scholars on average are likely to be worse off when universities purchase site licenses than they would be if access were by individual subscriptions only. However, site licenses are not always disadvantageous. Journals issued by professional societies and university presses are often priced so as to maximize subscriptions while recovering average costs. When such journals are sustained by institutional site licenses, the net benefits to the scientific community are larger than if these journals are sold only by individual subscriptions.

The theory of parent-offspring conflict predicts that mothers and their offspring may not agree about how resources should be allocated among family members. A kid, for example, may favor a later weaning date than does its mother. Despite the mother's physical superiority, it may be that the kid is able to manipulate her behavior. In this paper, we investigate a two-locus population genetic model of weaning conflict in which offspring can attempt to extort resources from their parents by reducing their own chances of survival if their demands are not met. We find that the frequency of recombination between the genes controlling parental behavior and those controlling juvenile behavior determines the evolutionaryoutcome of this genetic conflict. When these genes are tightly linked, the offspring is likely to act so as to further the parents' reproductive interests. When they are not, offspring can successfully "blackmail" their parents into providing additional resources.

Scientific publishing is rapidly shifting from a paper-based system to one of predominantly electronic distribution, in which universities purchase site licenses for online access to journal contents. Will these changes necessarily benefit the scientific community? By using basic microeconomics and elementary statistical theory, we address this question and find a surprising answer. If a journal is priced to maximize the publisher s profits, scholars on average are likely to be worse off when universities purchase site licenses than they would be if access were by individual subscriptions only. However, site licenses are not always disadvantageous. Journals issued by professional societies and university presses are often priced so as to maximize subscriptions while recovering average costs. When such journals are sustained by institutional site licenses, the net benefits to the scientific community are larger than if these journals are sold only by individual subscriptions.

When academic journals were distributed only as paper editions, the obvious way for scholars to share a journal was to use the copy found on the shelves of their own university library. With the arrival of electronic access, the logistics of journal-sharing has changed radically. Physical proximity, which once made libraries the natural venue for shared access, is no longer important. Despite this change, university libraries have continued to act as publishers' revenue collectors and gatekeepers, by purchasing site licenses that entitle their faculty and students to access journals electronically. Since there is no compelling logistic reason for university libraries to do so, we ask whether university-wide site licenses perform a fiscal function that benefits the academic community. We and a surprising answer. If a journal is priced to maximize the publisher's pro�ts, scholars on average are likely to be worse of when universities purchase site licenses than they would be if access were by individual subscriptions only. But site-licenses are not always disadvantageous. Journals published by professional societies and university presses are often priced as if their objective is to achieve the largest possible circulation consistent with recovery of their costs. When such journals are sustained by institutional site licenses, the net benefits to the scientific community are larger than if these journals are sold only by individual subscriptions.

We provide simple formulas that can be used to calculate ideal bootstrap or exact recombination estimates of group statistics from experimental data.

Limited time and budgets have created a legitimate need for quantitative measures of scholarly work. The well-known journal impact factor is the leading measure of this sort; here we describe an alternative approach based on the full structure of the scholarly citation network. The Eigenfactor and Article Influence Score use an iterative ranking scheme similar to Google's PageRank algorithm. With this approach, citations from top journals are weighted more heavily than citations from lower-tier publications. We describe these metrics and the rankings that they provide.

The impact factor of an academic journal for any year is the number of times the average article published in that journal in the previous two years are cited in that year. From 1994-2005, the average impact factor of journals listed by the ISI has been increasing by an average of 2.6 percent per year. This paper documents this growth and explores its causes.