The Predictive Value of Disruptive Technology Theory for Digital Publishing in the Traditional Publishing Environment: A South African Case Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Digital technologies such as e-books are predicted to have a profound effect on publishing, but they are yet to have a serious impact on the industry. This paper considers the implications of digitization and digital publishing for the trade book publishing industry in South Africa. Through surveys and interviews with South African trade publishers, a picture was developed of the current state of digital publishing. This state is evaluated using the context and predictive value of disruptive technology theory. In this case, digital technology is seen as a disruptive technology in the traditional print publishing environment. As the paper shows, the problems that publishers are experiencing are characteristic of industries faced with disruptive technology. The principles of disruptive technology can therefore be applied to develop recommendations and suggest strategies for publishers planning to venture into digital publishing. Although the focus of the research was on South African trade publishers, the results and recommendations that emerged from the research can be applied to different sectors of publishing as well as to the wider international publishing industry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.132 | 0.248 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it