figshare
Browse
Intentionally Left Blank, final.pdf (470.02 kB)

This Study is Intentionally Left Blank: a systematic literature review of blank pages in academic publishing

Download (0 kB)
Version 4 2014-11-06, 23:45
Version 3 2014-11-06, 23:45
Version 2 2014-11-06, 23:39
Version 1 2014-11-06, 21:51
journal contribution
posted on 2014-11-06, 21:51 authored by Glen WrightGlen Wright, FX Coudert, Martin Bentley, Graham SteelGraham Steel, Sylvain DevilleSylvain Deville

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 looked at the variations in samples from the existing literature, and quantified the amount of blankness on such pages using a new metric, the “Blankness Defect Rate” (BDR). After showing that most blank pages are defective, we suggest a number of alternatives, factually correct or less ambiguous. Finally, we offer some possible explanations for this phenomenon, including “editor’s block”, a creative impairment similar to the well-known “writer’s block”, and identify avenues for future research on this critical topic.

History

Usage metrics

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC