Search results

Citation content in academic papers and academic monographs promotes the knowledge flow among different publications. However, existing citation content analysis (CCA) focuses on academic papers and monographs have not received much research attention. We want to know if monographs are appropriate objects of CCA and whether existing methods of analyzing citation in papers are suitable for citation in monographs. Therefore, this paper aims to learn more about features of cited references and citation content in monographs and compare the characteristic of citation pattern between monographs and papers.

The authors manually annotate the references and syntactic citation content in academic monographs published by Morgan & Claypool and automatically extracted the references and citation content from academic papers published by Public Library of Science. Five features in two types citation pattern, namely, pattern of cited reference (including year, source and mention frequency of reference) and pattern of citation content (including location, length of citation content) are used to examine similarities and differences between monographs and papers.

The results indicate that between monographs and papers, differences are shown in location, length of citation content and year, source of reference, whereas frequency of mention of reference is similar.

Previous studies have explored the patter of citation content in academic papers. However, none of the existing literature, as far as the authors know, has considered the citation content in academic monographs and the similarities or differences among academic documents when studying the citation pattern.

The purpose of this paper is to report on a project undertaken at University College London (UCL) examining the role and value of the academic monograph – considering continuing decline in sales and usage – and its possible survival in the digital age.

A qualitative approach was adopted, in which 17 arts and humanities academics were interviewed in‐depth on their experiences and views.

The monograph continues to be of great value in the arts and humanities field, and is seen as essential for career progression. Much concern was expressed about the decline in quality of this and other forms of writing, with pressures of the university Research Assessment Exercise foremost in contributing to this decline. Reservations were expressed about moving towards digital versions of the monograph, although print‐on‐demand was considered to be a viable option to enable the continuing publication of specialist works.

This is the first in‐depth study of the role, value and future of the monograph from the viewpoint of the scholar, and so gives a unique insight into the scholarly communication behaviour of arts and humanities researchers.

Looks at the implications of electronic scholarly monograph publishing for authors, publishers and readers. It stems from original research undertaken by the authors in 1998 as part of the JISC Electronic Libraries Programme (eLib). Since the formal completion of the work both authors have remained active in the area and have monitored new developments. The project included a comprehensive literature search and review; a survey of UK and international publishers of electronic monographs by means of an interrogation of their Web sites, and case studies conducted with selected UK publishers. A separate investigation of the publishers of national bibliographical sources and services was also undertaken, and UK university libraries were surveyed by means of an e‐mail questionnaire. Offers a description of the structure of electronic monograph publishing, including the roles of the various parties involved in the publishing process, and addresses such issues as provision, costing, authoring and editorial responsibilities and challenges. An analysis of the issues associated with the characteristics of Web monographs is provided, together with a delineation of the nature of narrative content, added value components, subject orientations and quality control. Concludes with a brief consideration of some of the challenges that confront the user of electronic scholarly monographs, including issues of access.

The purpose of this case study was to complement existing weeding and retention criteria beyond the most used methods in academic libraries and to consider citation counts in the identification of important scholarly works.

Using a small sample of items chosen for withdrawal from a small liberal arts college library, this case study looks at the use of Google Scholar citation counts as a metric for identification of notable monographs in the social sciences and mathematics.

Google Scholar citation counts are a quick indicator of classic, foundational or discursive monographs in a particular field and should be given more consideration in weeding and retention analysis decisions that impact scholarly collections. Higher citation counts can be an indicator of higher circulation counts.

The authors found little indication in the literature that Google Scholar citation counts are being used as a metric for identification of notable works or for retention of monographs in academic libraries.

The purpose of this paper is to determine how the I‐Share collection serves its members, focusing on the state‐wide use of I‐Share domestic monographs (2003‐2008) by subject, collection overlap (number of copies owned), publisher, and how frequently books by subject are being used and to make recommendations for future selection criteria.

Illinois is fortunate to have the College and Research Libraries in Illinois (CARLI) consortium which manages “I‐Share,” a 76‐member shared online catalog equipped with patron‐initiated borrowing using the Voyager system. I‐Share successfully circulates hundreds of thousands of books annually among these libraries, dramatically broadening the scope of each member's collection. Data from CARLI's Voyager catalog databases were analyzed via Excel spreadsheets using 20 datafields.

Results found that numbers of copies purchased by I‐Share and use/circulation fell into three categories: high overlap with a corresponding high use, low overlap with a corresponding low use, and a middle area with a high number of copies with low to middle use. Additional analyses by publisher and Library of Congress subject classification were also conducted. The study also allowed for a comparison of what was purchased versus what was available for purchase as represented by the database of a large monograph vendor.

A number of recommendations are made that should improve the effectiveness of monograph selection in the CARLI libraries.

The paper documents an important and thorough study which may be of help to other library consortia in managing more effectively their monograph spend.

This study aims to investigate how the transition from print to electronic scholarly communication has affected faculty’s information behaviour and their perception of academic libraries.

An online survey was distributed among academics affiliated to the member universities of the Consortium of University Services of Catalonia. A total of 2,230 replies were received.

Journal articles are the most relevant information resource used for research and teaching purposes. Databases are the preferred starting point for bibliographic searches, although a significant proportion of scholars rely on Internet search engines. The main source for gaining access to documents is libraries, followed by free materials available online. Scholarly journals are the preferred channel for disseminating research outputs, with the open access being a factor of marginal interest when deciding where to publish.

The results of this study should be useful to guide policies regarding scientific information and research and, more specifically, policies regarding academic libraries.

Methodologies for determining patron preferences for monographs are a neglected area in library literature. This article describes a method for determining faculty preferences for monographs using subject headings from a print bibliography. Faculty members from the colleges of business at three public universities in Iowa (Iowa State University, University of Iowa and the University of Northern Iowa) were asked to rank 100 subject areas in business administration based on their perceived importance to programs of study within their colleges or departments. A total of 58 percent of the surveys were returned and 46 percent were included in the analysis. Faculties were grouped by department, and subject areas were grouped into categories by discipline. The survey results show that, with some exceptions, faculty ranked subject groups corresponding to their departments higher than other areas. The implications of this study for collection development librarians are noted.

What is it about academia anyway? We profess to hate it, spend endless amounts of time complaining about it, and yet we in academia will do practically anything to stay. The pay may be low, job security elusive, and in the end, it's not the glamorous work we envisioned it would be. Yet, it still holds fascination and interest for us. This is an article about American academic fiction. By academic fiction, I mean novels whosemain characters are professors, college students, and those individuals associated with academia. These works reveal many truths about the higher education experience not readily available elsewhere. We learn about ourselves and the university community in which we work.

The purpose of this paper is to nuance the perception about professional documentation (a.k.a. “grey literature”), assuming perception of documentation being a cultural aspect of accessibility.

The study explores variations within the archaeological report genre through a bibliometric analysis of source use. Source characteristics are explored as well as correlations between report authors and source originators. Statistical frequency distribution is complemented by a correspondence analysis and a k-means cluster analysis to explore patterns. The patterns are interpreted as “frames of references” and related to circumstances for archaeological work. The study also discusses source representations.

The source use patterns reveal a latent variation, not visible in the general analysis: a professional/academic frame of reference (mainly among authors affiliated with incorporated businesses and sole proprietorships) and an administrative frame of reference (mainly among authors affiliated with government agencies, foundations, and member associations) emerge.

The study focuses on Swedish field evaluation reports. Future research could test the results in relation to other types of reports and go beyond the document perspective to explore source use in documentation practices.

The results on variations in frames of references among report writers have implication for report readers and user. The results should also be considered in archaeology management and policy-making. On the level of source representation the results call for clarifications of vague representations and possibly omitted sources.

This study contextualizes archaeological information use and focuses on variations in professional archaeology which has received little previous research attention. The bibliometric approach complements previous qualitative studies of archaeological information.