OhioLINK librarians and Google Scholar over time: a longitudinal analysis of attitudes and uses

IF 1.3 4区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Reference Services Review Pub Date : 2020-10-26 DOI:10.1108/rsr-04-2020-0031
David Luftig, Joan Plungis
{"title":"OhioLINK librarians and Google Scholar over time: a longitudinal analysis of attitudes and uses","authors":"David Luftig, Joan Plungis","doi":"10.1108/rsr-04-2020-0031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to focus on how librarians use and promote Google Scholar (GS) within their library instruction sessions. This study also examines how Google Scholar and the Google Scholar discovery layer, library links, is promoted on library websites. This information is then analyzed across the three date ranges.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis study provides a longitudinal analysis of the opinions and uses of Google Scholar by the Ohio consortium of libraries, OhioLINK. This study uses survey data that was collected in 2007, 2014 and 2019 via the OhioLINK Listserv and builds off of co-author’s previous study (2008), which examined the attitudes of OhioLINK librarians as it related to Google Scholar.\n\n\nFindings\nThe results of this research suggested that there were significant changes in use and opinions of Google Scholar between 2007 and 2014 with more normalization of uses and opinions occurring between 2014 and 2019.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nRespondents were not asked for the type of library where they work or to identify their position within their libraries, which necessarily limits the conclusions that can be drawn from the survey responses. In retrospect, limiting the sample to instruction librarians or faculty librarians might have yielded more meaningful results. Additionally, this project did not evaluate the uses and opinions of librarians using GS at the reference desk. By providing this information, it would be easier to truly glean the uses and opinions of librarians with regard to GS.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThis research will assist librarians contextualize how one of the most popular research resources has been used and promoted by those within the field and how those opinions have changed over time. This study will provide context into how Google Scholar became one of the most popular research tools and how attitudes of this unprecedented, and controversial, resource came to be accepted by librarians over the past 15 years.\n\n\nSocial implications\nThis study will help librarians better contextualize how other librarians use and promote Google Scholar. Furthermore, it demonstrates how a controversial information research tool became accepted by those in the field over time.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nAccording to the authors’ knowledge, this research is the only study to provide a longitudinal analysis of the librarian opinions of Google Scholar. It targeted the same audience in identical surveys in a way no other Google Scholar research has done. It builds off of the co-author’s (2008) work, which is a well-cited study regarding librarian attitudes of Google Scholar. This research was done on the 15th year anniversary of Google Scholar.\n","PeriodicalId":46478,"journal":{"name":"Reference Services Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/rsr-04-2020-0031","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reference Services Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/rsr-04-2020-0031","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to focus on how librarians use and promote Google Scholar (GS) within their library instruction sessions. This study also examines how Google Scholar and the Google Scholar discovery layer, library links, is promoted on library websites. This information is then analyzed across the three date ranges. Design/methodology/approach This study provides a longitudinal analysis of the opinions and uses of Google Scholar by the Ohio consortium of libraries, OhioLINK. This study uses survey data that was collected in 2007, 2014 and 2019 via the OhioLINK Listserv and builds off of co-author’s previous study (2008), which examined the attitudes of OhioLINK librarians as it related to Google Scholar. Findings The results of this research suggested that there were significant changes in use and opinions of Google Scholar between 2007 and 2014 with more normalization of uses and opinions occurring between 2014 and 2019. Research limitations/implications Respondents were not asked for the type of library where they work or to identify their position within their libraries, which necessarily limits the conclusions that can be drawn from the survey responses. In retrospect, limiting the sample to instruction librarians or faculty librarians might have yielded more meaningful results. Additionally, this project did not evaluate the uses and opinions of librarians using GS at the reference desk. By providing this information, it would be easier to truly glean the uses and opinions of librarians with regard to GS. Practical implications This research will assist librarians contextualize how one of the most popular research resources has been used and promoted by those within the field and how those opinions have changed over time. This study will provide context into how Google Scholar became one of the most popular research tools and how attitudes of this unprecedented, and controversial, resource came to be accepted by librarians over the past 15 years. Social implications This study will help librarians better contextualize how other librarians use and promote Google Scholar. Furthermore, it demonstrates how a controversial information research tool became accepted by those in the field over time. Originality/value According to the authors’ knowledge, this research is the only study to provide a longitudinal analysis of the librarian opinions of Google Scholar. It targeted the same audience in identical surveys in a way no other Google Scholar research has done. It builds off of the co-author’s (2008) work, which is a well-cited study regarding librarian attitudes of Google Scholar. This research was done on the 15th year anniversary of Google Scholar.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
随着时间的推移,OhioLINK图书馆员和谷歌学者:态度和使用的纵向分析
目的本研究旨在关注图书馆员如何在图书馆教学中使用和推广谷歌学者(GS)。这项研究还考察了谷歌学者和谷歌学者发现层,即图书馆链接,是如何在图书馆网站上推广的。然后在三个日期范围内分析这些信息。设计/方法论/方法本研究对俄亥俄州图书馆联盟OhioLINK对谷歌学者的观点和使用进行了纵向分析。这项研究使用了2007年、2014年和2019年通过OhioLINK Listserv收集的调查数据,并建立在合著者之前的研究(2008年)的基础上,该研究考察了OhioLINK图书馆员对谷歌学者的态度。发现这项研究的结果表明,2007年至2014年间,谷歌学者的使用和意见发生了重大变化,2014年至2019年间,使用和意见更加规范。研究的局限性/含义受访者没有被要求了解他们工作的图书馆类型,也没有被要求确定他们在图书馆中的位置,这必然限制了可以从调查回复中得出的结论。回顾过去,将样本限制在教学图书馆员或教员图书馆员可能会产生更有意义的结果。此外,该项目没有评估图书馆员在咨询台使用GS的用途和意见。通过提供这些信息,将更容易真正收集图书馆员对GS的使用和意见。实际含义这项研究将帮助图书馆员了解最受欢迎的研究资源之一是如何被该领域的人使用和推广的,以及这些意见是如何随时间变化的。这项研究将为谷歌学者如何成为最受欢迎的研究工具之一,以及在过去15年中,图书馆员如何接受这种前所未有、充满争议的资源的态度提供背景。社会含义这项研究将帮助图书馆员更好地了解其他图书馆员如何使用和推广谷歌学者。此外,它还展示了一种有争议的信息研究工具是如何随着时间的推移而被该领域的人所接受的。原创性/价值据作者所知,本研究是唯一一项对谷歌学者图书馆员意见进行纵向分析的研究。它以其他谷歌学者研究所没有的方式,在相同的调查中针对相同的受众。它建立在合著者(2008年)的工作基础上,这是一项被广泛引用的关于谷歌学者图书馆员态度的研究。这项研究是在谷歌学者成立15周年之际进行的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Reference Services Review
Reference Services Review INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Reference Services Review (RSR ) is a quarterly, refereed journal dedicated to the enrichment of reference knowledge and the advancement of reference services. RSR covers all aspects of reference functions, including automation of reference services, evaluation and assessment of reference functions and sources, models for delivering quality reference services in all types and sizes of libraries, development and management of teaching/learning activities, promotion of information literacy programs, and partnerships with other entities to achieve reference goals and objectives. RSR prepares its readers to understand and embrace current and emerging technologies affecting reference functions, instructional services and information needs of library users.
期刊最新文献
Onboarding for liaison librarians: building community and practice Campus entrepreneurs’ research habits and needs: a five-year study Affective dimensions of academic librarians’ experiences during the Covid-19 pandemic: experiences and lessons learned for information literacy The framing of authority in the ACRL framework on information literacy: multidisciplinary perspectives on truth, authority, expertise and belief Starting in-house copyright education programs: commonalities and conclusions from two southeastern US academic libraries
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1