Search results

This article describes the fastest growing category of machine‐readable data‐bases — full‐text databases. A selection of articles from the literature on full‐text databases was explored and this provides a basis for the information presented here on search strategy, performance measurement, and benefits and limitations of full‐text databases. Various use studies and uses of full‐text databases have also been listed.

Providing convenient access to journals for users in a geographically dispersed university was a challenge for the Pennsylvania State University Libraries’ Full‐Text Implementation Group. The group established and implemented procedures for providing full‐text access to general interest periodicals to all Penn State users, both in the libraries and remotely. This paper discusses the formation of the group, addresses the decisions made about providing full‐text, the procedures established to implement and promote full‐text, the problems encountered during implementation, and the future of full‐text access at Penn State.

This article discusses full‐text source lists used by full‐text finding tools, such as serials management systems, OpenURL link resolvers, and imported e‐journal MARC records. Although the vendors of full‐text finding tools claim that they frequently update their full‐text source lists with changes in full‐text titles, ISSNs, coverage dates, and other information, they actually rely on content providers to offer title lists and coverage information. Not all content providers offer accurate and updated full‐text source lists in terms of full‐text titles included, coverage dates and embargo periods, and formats and file types. As a result, librarians and users using serials management systems, OpenURL link resolvers, or OPACs for finding full‐text periodicals are sometimes taken to dead ends. Vendors of both full‐text finding tools and full‐text content need to improve the accuracy and currency of their services.

Complete texts of many journals are now available for online searching. Most of these full text databases have been made available on the same or similar search systems that provide access to bibliographic information. The systems use inverted files that retain limited context information (e.g., paragraphs and location of words within paragraphs). The retrieval techniques used are simply those that were developed earlier for bibliographic databases. Retrieval relies on Boolean logic, word stem searching with truncation, and word proximity specification. Minor adjustments have been made for the display of full text databases, allowing words resulting in retrieval to be displayed in context; but changes have not been made in retrieval techniques. This is due to the reliance on search systems that provide access to many types of databases, all of which are by‐products of improved techniques for creating printed publications.

With the rise of alternate discovery services, such as Google Scholar, in conjunction with the increase in open access content, researchers have the option to bypass academic libraries when they search for and retrieve scholarly information. This state of affairs implies that academic libraries exist in competition with these alternate services and with the patrons who use them, and as a result, may be disintermediated from the scholarly information seeking and retrieval process. Drawing from decision and game theory, bounded rationality, information seeking theory, citation theory, and social computing theory, this study investigates how academic librarians are responding as competitors to changing scholarly information seeking and collecting practices. Bibliographic data was collected in 2010 from a systematic random sample of references on CiteULike.org and analyzed with three years of bibliometric data collected from Google Scholar. Findings suggest that although scholars may choose to bypass libraries when they seek scholarly information, academic libraries continue to provide a majority of scholarly documentation needs through open access and institutional repositories. Overall, the results indicate that academic librarians are playing the scholarly communication game competitively.

One of the themes of this paper is the clamour for full text. As of today, the three basic models of full text that seemed to be lining up a year ago have become a reality. These are publisher‐supplied full text; third‐party, or aggregator‐supplied full text; and distributed, “linked” full text ‐ in which a bibliographic database provider links to (usually) publisher‐supplied full text. This paper looks at each model in detail, with particular emphasis on the challenges they face.

During the 1980s, database vendors mounted more full text primary literature online. Users, however, have not adopted these files for use at the same rate. There are several reasons for the slow adoption of full text primary files: one is the lack of full, complete online files, a second is that full text online files compete with many other better‐known sources of information. Full text files are often isolated, and not linked with bibliographic retrieval files. Finally, the files may be positioned to appeal to end users, but end users may not be adopting online searching as eagerly as the information intermediaries have. The future of online full text information will depend on producers developing the technology necessary to mount complete files economically, and the ability of producers and vendors to make this kind of retrieval attractive to users. Enhancements for users may take the form of artificial intelligence interfaces, integrated searching and inclusion of graphics.

The purpose of this research is to analyze the volume of full‐text coverage for 50 marketing‐focused and marketing‐related serial sources in the Ebsco Business Source Premier (BSP) and ProQuest ABI/INFORM Global (ABI) databases, focusing on the significant differences in the full‐text availability of 21 journals which are common in the two databases.

The target serials were the ones rated –in response to a large scale, very well‐designed and implemented research project (Hult et al.)– by more than 600 marketing specialists, working at the marketing departments of universities around the world (the Hult050 set).

The test searches found that BSP had full‐text coverage for 29, and ABI for 34 sources. BSP had 70,740 and ABI had 63,405 full‐text items. However, the detailed analysis at the individual source level of the Hult‐50 set revealed anomalies in the reported volume of full‐text coverage for several top tier marketing journals in ABI, such as single year and even decade‐long gaps and inflated hit counts.

The paper provides empirical evidence for anomalies, which should be considered in comparing the real volume and value of full‐text availability when making licensing decisions.

Researchers are now increasingly able to identify and retrieve information without the need to move from their own PC, bypassing the library and its staff. The number of full text databases on‐line is also increasing, providing instant access to newspapers and newswires, popular magazines and scholarly journals, financial and directory sources, and reference books. These files appear on all the major time‐sharing systems, some of which are modifying their search software to attract this growing market. This paper explores the relationship between the end user and primary full text databases. It looks at full text databases generically, rather than at individual systems, databases, or searching techniques. It identifies roles that information professionals can play in maximizing the benefits of full text databases for end users.

The purpose of this paper is to explore a topic where blind participants expressed significant concern: obtaining full text and accessible full text.

This qualitative study includes 18 open-ended telephone interviews with blind academic library users in the USA. The study uses the viewpoint that understanding blind peoples’ perspectives is essential for equal accessibility.

Locating full text via link resolvers seemed problematic. Inaccessible articles and complications and delays creating accessible versions of print books limited participants’ use of materials. Enabling technologies and services were highlighted.

Caution should be used when generalizing from this study due to its sample size and methodology. The study is not a web accessibility test, which would analyze coding, nor a usability test, which would observe users. Additional research would be ideal; however, libraries should not wait to attend to accessibility.

In addition to improving digital accessibility, to address difficulty obtaining full text, libraries could offer to locate full text for blind users and implement SmartLinking and single sign on authentication. To deal with inaccessible full text, libraries could work with disability offices to obtain accessible materials and to convert materials to accessible format. DRM free HTML or EPUB e-books can have accessibility advantages. Outsourcing conversion to accessible format can also help. Libraries could offer reader service to assist blind users locating relevant sections of books to convert.

Compared to previous studies, this study includes a larger number of blind screen reader users; describes some unique issues; and includes blind users’ own interpretations.