figshare
Browse
Intentionally_Left_Blank__final.pdf (1.21 MB)

This Study is Intentionally Left Blank - A systematic literature review of blank pages in academic publishing

Download (0 kB)
Version 6 2014-11-06, 22:06
Version 5 2014-11-06, 22:06
Version 4 2014-11-06, 22:05
Version 3 2014-11-06, 20:32
Version 2 2014-11-06, 20:18
Version 1 2014-11-06, 17:19
journal contribution
posted on 2014-11-06, 17:19 authored by Glen WrightGlen Wright, FX Coudert, Martin Bentley, Sylvain Deville, Graham SteelGraham Steel

Common in all areas of publishing, the phrase “This Page is Intentionally Left Blank” has been found in peer-reviewed academic articles costing $30 to access. To the best of our knowledge, this paper represents the first known review of Intentionally Blank Pages (IBPs). We provide an analysis of the IBPs available in the literature and develop a means of quantifying the amount of blankness on such pages, using a new metric, the “Blankness Defect Rate” (BDR). We posit some possible explanations for this phenomenon, including “editor’s block”, a creative impairment similar to the well-known “writer’s block”. Finally, we offer some alternatives to the traditional IBP paradigm and identify avenues for future research.

This is V. 3

History

Usage metrics

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC