Search results

Bobbie Scull's bibliography of federal government bibliographies was begun in 1971 as an annual informational publication primarily intended for the faculty at Louisiana State University. Later she distributed it to libraries all over the state of Louisiana. In 1973 RSR began to publish these lists on an annual basis. This is the fourth such appearance. In the meantime these bibliographies were cumulated and published in two volumes: Bibliography of U.S. Government Bibliographies 1968–73 and 1974–76. (Pierian Press, 1975, 1979). RSR is proud to continue the annual supplements which are now computer produced at LSU. Although this supplement appears in Volume 8:1 (1980) in the future they will appear in the final issue of the year.

This annotated listing of 131 United States Government bibliographies with 1973 imprints partially represents the broad scope of Federal interest. THE MONTHLY CATALOG OF U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS was the primary index searched in locating these documents, though other conventional and unconventional methods were used. Since the search cut‐off date was the February 1974 MONTHLY CATALOG, a number of 1973 bibliographies may not be listed here. However, it is the compiler's objective to include all 1973 bibliographies in a forthcoming Pierian Press publication, BIBLIOGRAPHY OF UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BIBLIOGRAPHIES 1968–1973.

THE Reference Department of Paisley Central Library today occupies the room which was the original Public Library built in 1870 and opened to the public in April 1871. Since that date two extensions to the building have taken place. The first, in 1882, provided a separate room for both Reference and Lending libraries; the second, opened in 1938, provided a new Children's Department. Together with the original cost of the building, these extensions were entirely financed by Sir Peter Coats, James Coats of Auchendrane and Daniel Coats respectively. The people of Paisley indeed owe much to this one family, whose generosity was great. They not only provided the capital required but continued to donate many useful and often extremely valuable works of reference over the many years that followed. In 1975 Paisley Library was incorporated in the new Renfrew District library service.

This compilation of over 500 United States Government bibliographies is the second annual supplement to BIBLIOGRAPHY OF UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BIBLIOGRAPHIES 1968–1973 (Pierian Press). Due to the Government Printing Office backlog during 1974, many 1973 and 1974 titles are included in this 1975 Supplement, which should have appeared earlier.

The following classified, annotated list of titles is intended to provide reference librarians with a current checklist of new reference books, and is designed to supplement the RSR review column, “Recent Reference Books,” by Frances Neel Cheney. “Reference Books in Print” includes all additional books received prior to the inclusion deadline established for this issue. Appearance in this column does not preclude a later review in RSR. Publishers are urged to send a copy of all new reference books directly to RSR as soon as published, for immediate listing in “Reference Books in Print.” Reference books with imprints older than two years will not be included (with the exception of current reprints or older books newly acquired for distribution by another publisher). The column shall also occasionally include library science or other library related publications of other than a reference character.

This study aims to explore the link creating behaviour of European highly cited scientists based upon their online lists of publications and their institutional personal websites.

A total of 1,525 highly cited scientists working at European institutions were first identified. Outlinks from their online lists of publications and their personal websites pointing to a pre-defined collection of popular academic websites and file types were then gathered by a personal web crawler.

Perhaps surprisingly, a larger proportion of social scientists provided at least one outlink compared to the other disciplines investigated. By far the most linked-to file type was PDF and the most linked-to type of target website was scholarly databases, especially the Digital Object Identifier website. Health science and life science researchers mainly linked to scholarly databases, while scientists from engineering, hard sciences and social sciences linked to a wider range of target websites. Both book sites and social network sites were rarely linked to, especially the former. Hence, whilst successful researchers frequently use the Web to point to online copies of their articles, there are major disciplinary and other differences in how they do this.

This is the first study to analyse the outlinking patterns of highly cited researchers' institutional web presences in order to identify which web resources they use to provide access to their publications.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to compare the lists of publishers in SPI (Spain) and the lists of VIRTA (Finland), in order to determine some of the potential uses of a merged list, such as complementing each other; and, second, to assess the effects of cross-field variability in the SPI rankings on the potential uses identified in the previous objective.

VIRTA and SPI lists were matched and compared in terms of level and number of submissions (VIRTA) and prestige (SPI).

There is a set of international publishers common to both information systems, but most publishers are nationally oriented. This type of publisher is still highly relevant for scholars. Consequently, a merge of national lists would provide useful information for all stakeholders involved in terms of grounding information for the rating of foreign, non-international publishers. Nevertheless, several issues should be considered in an eventual merging process, such as the decisions related to the use of field-specific rankings or general rankings.

If merged, ratings ought to be kept separately. Ratings of national publishers can be imputed in other systems’ evaluation process, thus making the merging process potentially useful.

This research explores obstacles and opportunities for merging scholarly publishers’ lists from an empirical perspective. It provides groundwork for future efforts toward supra-national combinations of publishers’ lists.

With over 3,000 academic journals in the fields of Business and Economics, most academics face a hard time selecting an adequate journal to submit their work to. In today's demanding academic environment and with the presence of different journal ranking lists (JRLs), the selection becomes more difficult when considering employment, promotion and funding. The purpose of this paper is to explore key differences among multiple JRLs pertinent to the latter common objectives. An extensive analysis is conducted to compare the content of journals in the Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality list, Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) in the fields of Business and Economics. Then, a case of a university with medium research output is considered where scholarly performance evaluation is based on the ABDC Journal Quality List.

After ranking journals in the fields of Business and Economics based on SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) indicator, JCR's Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and JCR's Eigenfactor (EF), a methodology is proposed to categorize journals in the three JRLs into the same categorization adopted by ABDC. The latter establishes a way to compare the four JRLs under consideration and serves as a basis to compare and analyze the content of journals in the ABDC Journal Quality list, Scopus and WoS. As a proxy impact metric, a normalized citation count is associated with each article based on Google Scholar. The publications of the considered university are then evaluated from the perspective of the four JRLs in terms of citation-based impact and quality while considering the exposure to popular world university ranking tables.

For journals classified under fourth tier by ABDC, over 53 and 59% are not indexed by Scopus and WoS, respectively. In this case study, over 42% of the publications appear in journals that are not listed in JCR despite the fact that over 94% of them are listed by the SJR list. Generally, publications that appear in journals listed by JCR achieve, on a yearly average, significantly higher citation rates when compared to those that appear in journals listed in ABDC and SJR Lists.

A four-tier mapping is proposed for consistent comparison among JRLs. Normalized citation count associated with each article based on Google Scholar is employed for evaluation. The findings provide recommendations for scholars, administrators and global universities, including Euro-Med Universities, on which JRL can be more influential for both faculty development and positioning of the university.

In writing about reference books it is difficult to recommend one rather than another unless one knows the exact purpose for which it is needed. This article, therefore, is a survey of the contents and scope of some important catalogues, union lists, and bibliographies of periodicals, and does not attempt to say that one is better or more useful than another. Each librarian can only decide that for himself.

The purpose of this paper is to show how the coverage of publications is represented in information services. Academic citation databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar) and scientific social media (Mendeley, CiteULike, BibSonomy) were analyzed by applying a new method: the use of personal publication lists of scientists.

Personal publication lists of scientists of the field of information science were analyzed. All data were taken in collaboration with the scientists in order to guarantee complete publication lists.

The demonstrated calibration parameter shows the coverage of information services in the field of information science. None of the investigated databases reached a coverage of 100 percent. However Google Scholar covers a greater amount of publications than other academic citation databases and scientific social media.

Results were limited to the publications of scientists working at an information science department from 2003 to 2012 at German-speaking universities.

Scientists of the field of information science are encouraged to review their publication strategy in case of quality and quantity.

The paper confirms the usefulness of personal publication lists as a calibration parameter for measuring coverage of information services.