Search results

Scholarly identity refers to endeavors by scholars to promote their reputation, work and networks using online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Twitter. This exploratory research investigates benefits and drawbacks of scholarly identity efforts and avenues for potential library support.

Data from 30 semi-structured phone interviews with faculty, doctoral students and academic librarians were qualitatively analyzed using the constant comparisons method (Charmaz, 2014) and Goffman’s (1959, 1967) theoretical concept of impression management.

Results reveal that use of online platforms enables academics to connect with others and disseminate their research. scholarly identity platforms have benefits, opportunities and offer possibilities for developing academic library support. They are also fraught with drawbacks/concerns, especially related to confusion, for-profit models and reputational risk.

This exploratory study involves analysis of a small number of interviews (30) with self-selected social scientists from one discipline (communication) and librarians. It lacks gender, race/ethnicity and geographical diversity and focuses exclusively on individuals who use social networking sites for their scholarly identity practices.

Results highlight benefits and risks of scholarly identity work and the potential for adopting practices that consider ethical dilemmas inherent in maintaining an online social media presence. They suggest continuing to develop library support that provides strategic guidance and information on legal responsibilities regarding copyright.

This research aims to understand the benefits and drawbacks of Scholarly Identity platforms and explore what support academic libraries might offer. It is among the first to investigate these topics comparing perspectives of faculty, doctoral students and librarians.

Despite some skepticism about the adoption of electronic books (e‐books) in libraries, there has been substantial growth in e‐book acquisitions and usage. The e‐book task force for the University of California digital library identified eight elements that are important to the evaluation of academic e‐book usage. The elements are: content, software and hardware standards and protocols, digital rights management, access, archiving, privacy, the market and pricing, and enhancements and ideal e‐book features. There are currently several e‐book models available to libraries that can be assessed and described in relation to the above‐mentioned elements or criteria. Using these elements, the netLibrary e‐book model will be described.

Highlights the power that electronic books (e‐books) give traditional libraries to more effectively use their resources to serve their patrons by improving the quality of their collections and access, while saving on the expense of maintaining paper‐based books and monographs. Argues that library professionals should embrace the opportunities offered by electronic libraries and thereby gain control of their collections and their future.

This paper seeks to understand how users know when to stop searching for more information when the information space is so saturated that there is no certainty that the relevant information has been identified.

Faculty, undergraduate and graduate students participated in focus group interviews to investigate what leads them to satisfice their information needs.

Academic library users describe both qualitative and quantitative criteria, which lead them to make rational choices determining when “enough” information satisfices their need. The situational context of both the participants' specific information need and their role in academic society affects every stage of their search – from the selection of the first resource, to ongoing search strategies, to decisions on how much information is enough.

These findings broaden the scope of earlier user research, which tends to focus on the more static views of habitual information‐seeking and ‐searching behavior, by applying theoretical frameworks for a richer understanding of the users' experiences.

Moves towards more interactive services on the web have led libraries to add an increasing range of functionality to their OPACS. Given the prevalence of recommender systems on the wider web, especially in e‐commerce environments, this paper aims to review current research in this area that is of particular relevance to the library community. It attempts to gauge the uptake of recommender systems in exiting OPAC services, and identify issues that might be responsible for inhibiting wider uptake.

This paper draws on an extensive literature review, as well as original research comparing the functionality of 211 public and 118 university library OPACs in the UK. Examining current recommender systems research, it outlines the most significant recommendation models and reviews research in two key areas of recommender systems design: data acquisition, and the explanation of recommendations. It discusses three existing library recommendation systems: BibTip, LibraryThing for Libraries and the in‐house system at the University of Huddersfield.

The authors' analysis indicates that the incorporation of recommender systems into library services is extremely low, with only 2 per cent of public libraries and 11 per cent of university libraries in the UK offering the feature. While system limitations and budget constraints are perhaps partly to blame, it is suggested that library professionals have perhaps yet to be persuaded that the value of recommendations to library users is great enough to warrant their inclusion becoming a priority.

This paper represents the first study of UK library OPACs to focus on the prevalence of recommender systems.

The term “library management” covers many different aspects of the way that a library is operated and conjures up different concepts in the minds of different people, depending on their own interests, agendas and requirements. Research into the subject is even more difficult to define because the application of research in one field can be vital to the development of another. Some researchers would not consider their research central to library matters at all, whereas the practising librarian might well see it as casting new light on a difficult area of understanding or development.

To identify levels of awareness and patterns of usage of electronic books by scholars in the humanities.

A survey of the University of Denver community assessed knowledge about and usage of electronic books. The results for humanists are presented here.

Scholars in the humanities have a higher level of awareness of e‐books than their colleagues across campus but use e‐books at the same rate. Their patterns of use are different, with humanists using less of the e‐book than do other groups. Humanists still prefer printed books to electronic texts at a higher rate than do other groups and care less about added features, such as searchability, than they do about content.

Humanists conduct research differently than do most other scholars, using the library catalog and browsing as primary means of finding information, and valuing the book more than other resources. No previous research has assessed whether humanists have similarly unique patterns of usage for electronic books.

To report on the annual Charleston Conference, held November 3‐6, 2004 in Charleston, South Carolina.

A summary of the main points of the conference.

Addresses questions and topics such as: how useful core book lists can be in 2004; new publishing models; a study of circulation data, ILL requests and WorldCat holdings of University of Colorado monographs; whether there is still funding for electronic full‐text resources in the humanities and fine arts; the usage of print journals in the electronic age; citation data in the sciences regarding books; and the e‐journal project at Drexel.

This report is of interest to library and information management professionals.