INTRODUCTION Since the 2000s, interest in research data management (RDM) has grown considerably. As a result, a large body of literature has discussed a broad variety of aspects related to data management. But, few studies have examined and also interpreted from visual perception the intellectual structure and progressive development of the existing literature on RDM. METHODS Guided by five research questions, this study employed bibliometric techniques and a visualization tool (CiteSpace) to identify and analyze the patterns of the scholarly publications about RDM. RESULTS Through CiteSpace’s modeling and computing, the knowledge (or network) structures, significant studies, notable topics, and development trends in the literature of RDM were revealed. DISCUSSION The majority of the literature pertinent to RDM was published after 2002. Major research clusters within this interdisciplinary field include “scientific collaboration,” “research support service,” and “data literacy,” while the “scientific collaboration” research cluster was the most active. Topics such as “digital curation” and “information processing” appeared most frequently in the RDM literature. Additionally, there was a sharp increase in several specific topics, such as “digital library,” “big data,” and “data sharing.” CONCLUSION By looking into the “profile” of the literature on RDM, in terms of knowledge structure, evolving trends, and important topics in the domain, this work will add new information to current discussions about RDM, new service development, and future research focuses in this area.
{"title":"Mapping the Scholarly Literature Found in Scopus on “Research Data Management”: A Bibliometric and Data Visualization Approach","authors":"Li Zhang, Nickoal Eichmann-Kalwara","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2266","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2266","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION Since the 2000s, interest in research data management (RDM) has grown considerably. As a result, a large body of literature has discussed a broad variety of aspects related to data management. But, few studies have examined and also interpreted from visual perception the intellectual structure and progressive development of the existing literature on RDM. METHODS Guided by five research questions, this study employed bibliometric techniques and a visualization tool (CiteSpace) to identify and analyze the patterns of the scholarly publications about RDM. RESULTS Through CiteSpace’s modeling and computing, the knowledge (or network) structures, significant studies, notable topics, and development trends in the literature of RDM were revealed. DISCUSSION The majority of the literature pertinent to RDM was published after 2002. Major research clusters within this interdisciplinary field include “scientific collaboration,” “research support service,” and “data literacy,” while the “scientific collaboration” research cluster was the most active. Topics such as “digital curation” and “information processing” appeared most frequently in the RDM literature. Additionally, there was a sharp increase in several specific topics, such as “digital library,” “big data,” and “data sharing.” CONCLUSION By looking into the “profile” of the literature on RDM, in terms of knowledge structure, evolving trends, and important topics in the domain, this work will add new information to current discussions about RDM, new service development, and future research focuses in this area.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42116353","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
INTRODUCTION Looking for ways to increase deposits into their institutional repository (IR), researchers at one institution started to mine academic social networks (ASNs) (namely, ResearchGate and Academia.edu) to discover which researchers might already be predisposed to providing open access to their work. METHODS Researchers compared the numbers of institutionally affiliated faculty members appearing in the ASNs to those appearing in their institutional repositories. They also looked at how these numbers compared to overall faculty numbers. RESULTS Faculty were much more likely to have deposited their work in an ASN than in the IR. However, the number of researchers who deposited in both the IR and at least one ASN exceeded that of those who deposited their research solely in an ASN. Unexpected findings occurred as well, such as numerous false or unverified accounts claiming affiliation with the institution. ResearchGate was found to be the favored ASN at this particular institution. DISCUSSION The results of this study confirm earlier studies’ findings indicating that those researchers who are willing to make their research open access are more disposed to do so over multiple channels, showing that those who already self-archive elsewhere are prime targets for inclusion in the IR. CONCLUSION Rather than seeing ASNs as a threat to IRs, they may be seen as a potential site of identifying likely contributors to the IR.
{"title":"Whose Research is it Anyway? Academic Social Networks Versus Institutional Repositories","authors":"N. Eva, Tara A. Wiebe","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2243","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2243","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION Looking for ways to increase deposits into their institutional repository (IR), researchers at one institution started to mine academic social networks (ASNs) (namely, ResearchGate and Academia.edu) to discover which researchers might already be predisposed to providing open access to their work. METHODS Researchers compared the numbers of institutionally affiliated faculty members appearing in the ASNs to those appearing in their institutional repositories. They also looked at how these numbers compared to overall faculty numbers. RESULTS Faculty were much more likely to have deposited their work in an ASN than in the IR. However, the number of researchers who deposited in both the IR and at least one ASN exceeded that of those who deposited their research solely in an ASN. Unexpected findings occurred as well, such as numerous false or unverified accounts claiming affiliation with the institution. ResearchGate was found to be the favored ASN at this particular institution. DISCUSSION The results of this study confirm earlier studies’ findings indicating that those researchers who are willing to make their research open access are more disposed to do so over multiple channels, showing that those who already self-archive elsewhere are prime targets for inclusion in the IR. CONCLUSION Rather than seeing ASNs as a threat to IRs, they may be seen as a potential site of identifying likely contributors to the IR.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44435592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In Dynamic Research Support for Academic Libraries, editor Starr Hoffman demonstrates how academic librarians are well-positioned to provide much-needed guidance and practical support to researchers working in different disciplines and at various career stages.
{"title":"Dynamic Research Support for Academic Libraries [Book Review]","authors":"Lucinda May","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2307","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2307","url":null,"abstract":"In Dynamic Research Support for Academic Libraries, editor Starr Hoffman demonstrates how academic librarians are well-positioned to provide much-needed guidance and practical support to researchers working in different disciplines and at various career stages.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49670092","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"CopyrightX [Course Review]","authors":"Jill Cirasella","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2297","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2297","url":null,"abstract":"Review of the free online course CopyrightX.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71378789","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
INTRODUCTION Institutional repository managers are continuously looking for new ways to demonstrate the value of their repositories. One way to do this is to create a more inclusive repository that provides reliable information about the research output produced by faculty affiliated with the institution. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM This article details two pilot projects that evaluated how their repositories could track faculty research output through the inclusion of metadata-only (no full-text) records. The purpose of each pilot project was to determine the feasibility and provide an assessment of the long-term impact on the repository’s mission statement, staffing, and collection development policies. NEXT STEPS This article shares the results of the pilot project and explores the impact for faculty and end users as well as the implications for repositories.
{"title":"Opening Up Open Access Institutional Repositories to Demonstrate Value: Two Universities’ Pilots on Including Metadata-Only Records","authors":"Karen Bjork, Rebel Cummings-Sauls, Ryan Otto","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2220","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2220","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION Institutional repository managers are continuously looking for new ways to demonstrate the value of their repositories. One way to do this is to create a more inclusive repository that provides reliable information about the research output produced by faculty affiliated with the institution. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM This article details two pilot projects that evaluated how their repositories could track faculty research output through the inclusion of metadata-only (no full-text) records. The purpose of each pilot project was to determine the feasibility and provide an assessment of the long-term impact on the repository’s mission statement, staffing, and collection development policies. NEXT STEPS This article shares the results of the pilot project and explores the impact for faculty and end users as well as the implications for repositories.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43554822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
R. Sewell, Sarah Potvin, Pauline Melgoza, James S. Creel, Jeremy M. Huff, Gregory T. Bailey, John T. Bondurant, S. Buckner, A. duPlessis, Lisa Furubotten, Julie A. Mosbo Ballestro, Ian W. Muise, Brian J. Wright
INTRODUCTION Our library’s digital asset management system (DAMS) was no longer meeting digital asset management requirements or expanding scholarly communication needs. We formed a multiunit task force (TF) to (1) survey and identify existing and emerging institutional needs; (2) research available DAMS (open source and proprietary) and assess their potential fit; and (3) deploy software locally for in-depth testing and evaluation. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM We winnowed a field of 25 potential DAMS down to 5 for deployment and evaluation. The process included selection and identification of test collections and the creation of a multipart task based rubric based on library and campus needs assessments. Time constraints and DAMS deployment limitations prompted a move toward a new evaluation iteration: a shorter criteria-based rubric. LESSONS LEARNED We discovered that no single DAMS was “just right,” nor was any single DAMS a static product. Changing and expanding scholarly communication and digital needs could only be met by the more flexible approach offered by a multicomponent digital asset management ecosystem (DAME), described in this study. We encountered obstacles related to testing complex, rapidly evolving software available in a range of configurations and flavors (including tiers of vendor-hosted functionality) and time and capacity constraints curtailed in-depth testing. While we anticipate long-term benefits from “going further together” by including university-wide representation in the task force, there were trade-offs in distributing responsibilities and diffusing priorities. NEXT STEPS Shifts in scholarly communication at multiple levels—institutional, regional, consortial, national, and international—have already necessitated continual review and adjustment of our digital systems.
{"title":"When a Repository Is Not Enough: Redesigning a Digital Ecosystem to Serve Scholarly Communication","authors":"R. Sewell, Sarah Potvin, Pauline Melgoza, James S. Creel, Jeremy M. Huff, Gregory T. Bailey, John T. Bondurant, S. Buckner, A. duPlessis, Lisa Furubotten, Julie A. Mosbo Ballestro, Ian W. Muise, Brian J. Wright","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2225","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2225","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION Our library’s digital asset management system (DAMS) was no longer meeting digital asset management requirements or expanding scholarly communication needs. We formed a multiunit task force (TF) to (1) survey and identify existing and emerging institutional needs; (2) research available DAMS (open source and proprietary) and assess their potential fit; and (3) deploy software locally for in-depth testing and evaluation. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM We winnowed a field of 25 potential DAMS down to 5 for deployment and evaluation. The process included selection and identification of test collections and the creation of a multipart task based rubric based on library and campus needs assessments. Time constraints and DAMS deployment limitations prompted a move toward a new evaluation iteration: a shorter criteria-based rubric. LESSONS LEARNED We discovered that no single DAMS was “just right,” nor was any single DAMS a static product. Changing and expanding scholarly communication and digital needs could only be met by the more flexible approach offered by a multicomponent digital asset management ecosystem (DAME), described in this study. We encountered obstacles related to testing complex, rapidly evolving software available in a range of configurations and flavors (including tiers of vendor-hosted functionality) and time and capacity constraints curtailed in-depth testing. While we anticipate long-term benefits from “going further together” by including university-wide representation in the task force, there were trade-offs in distributing responsibilities and diffusing priorities. NEXT STEPS Shifts in scholarly communication at multiple levels—institutional, regional, consortial, national, and international—have already necessitated continual review and adjustment of our digital systems.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42758901","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
INTRODUCTION Data handling in library learning analytics plays a pivotal role in protecting patron privacy, yet the landscape of data management by librarians is poorly understood. METHODS This critical review examines data-handling practices from 54 learning analytics studies in academic libraries and compares them against the NISO Consensus Principles on User’s Digital Privacy in Library, Publisher, and Software-Provider Systems and data management best practices. RESULTS A number of the published research projects demonstrate inadequate data protection practices including incomplete anonymization, prolonged data retention, collection of a broad scope of sensitive information, lack of informed consent, and sharing of patron-identified information. DISCUSSION As with researchers more generally, libraries should improve their data management practices. No studies aligned with the NISO Principles in all evaluated areas, but several studies provide specific exemplars of good practice. CONCLUSION Libraries can better protect patron privacy by improving data management practices in learning analytics research.
{"title":"Data Management Practices in Academic Library Learning Analytics: A Critical Review","authors":"Kristin A. Briney","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2268","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2268","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION Data handling in library learning analytics plays a pivotal role in protecting patron privacy, yet the landscape of data management by librarians is poorly understood. METHODS This critical review examines data-handling practices from 54 learning analytics studies in academic libraries and compares them against the NISO Consensus Principles on User’s Digital Privacy in Library, Publisher, and Software-Provider Systems and data management best practices. RESULTS A number of the published research projects demonstrate inadequate data protection practices including incomplete anonymization, prolonged data retention, collection of a broad scope of sensitive information, lack of informed consent, and sharing of patron-identified information. DISCUSSION As with researchers more generally, libraries should improve their data management practices. No studies aligned with the NISO Principles in all evaluated areas, but several studies provide specific exemplars of good practice. CONCLUSION Libraries can better protect patron privacy by improving data management practices in learning analytics research.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44595157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
INTRODUCTION Open educational resources (OER) are gaining traction in higher education and becoming accepted by academics as a viable means for delivering course content. However, these resources can be difficult to find and use, both due to low visibility and confusion about licensing. This article describes one university’s work with faculty members to identify barriers in their search process when they are looking to adopt OER. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM A scholarly communication librarian and science librarian partnered to collect faculty and instructor reactions to a particular OER search tool, with the intention of better understanding the difficulties encountered during the search process. Eight interviews were conducted as participants were asked about their preferences when it comes to locating OER, understanding licensing information, and adopting materials for class. NEXT STEPS From these interviews, the librarians identified practical recommendations for instruction/liaison librarians and technical services/systems librarians as they continue working to support faculty and instructors through the OER discovery and selection process. These recommendations relate to four themes uncovered in interviews with faculty and instructors: the need for increased transparency in search tools, the importance of intuitive narrowing and broadening features in search tools, the need for detailed and consistent metadata in OER records, and the need for clarity in intellectual property statements. The librarians note that these recommendations might best be pursued through wide-scale collaboration across library units and, more generally, between libraries, consortia, and institutions.
{"title":"Strategies for Supporting OER Adoption through Faculty and Instructor Use of a Federated Search Tool","authors":"Talea Anderson, Chelsea Leachman","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2279","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2279","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION Open educational resources (OER) are gaining traction in higher education and becoming accepted by academics as a viable means for delivering course content. However, these resources can be difficult to find and use, both due to low visibility and confusion about licensing. This article describes one university’s work with faculty members to identify barriers in their search process when they are looking to adopt OER. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM A scholarly communication librarian and science librarian partnered to collect faculty and instructor reactions to a particular OER search tool, with the intention of better understanding the difficulties encountered during the search process. Eight interviews were conducted as participants were asked about their preferences when it comes to locating OER, understanding licensing information, and adopting materials for class. NEXT STEPS From these interviews, the librarians identified practical recommendations for instruction/liaison librarians and technical services/systems librarians as they continue working to support faculty and instructors through the OER discovery and selection process. These recommendations relate to four themes uncovered in interviews with faculty and instructors: the need for increased transparency in search tools, the importance of intuitive narrowing and broadening features in search tools, the need for detailed and consistent metadata in OER records, and the need for clarity in intellectual property statements. The librarians note that these recommendations might best be pursued through wide-scale collaboration across library units and, more generally, between libraries, consortia, and institutions.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46524650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Review of the book Meaningful Metrics: A 21st Century Librarian's Guide to Bibliometrics, Altmetrics, and Research Impact.
《有意义的度量：21世纪图书馆员参考书目、Altmetrics和研究影响指南》一书综述。
{"title":"Meaningful Metrics: A 21st Century Librarian's Guide to Bibliometrics, Altmetrics, and Research Impact [Book Review]","authors":"L. González","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2290","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2290","url":null,"abstract":"Review of the book Meaningful Metrics: A 21st Century Librarian's Guide to Bibliometrics, Altmetrics, and Research Impact.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44014712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
INTRODUCTION This paper investigates factors, including fears of cybercrime, that may affect researchers’ willingness to share research in institutional repositories in Ghana. METHODS Qualitative research was conducted to understand more about the experiences of Ghanaian researchers when sharing research in institutional repositories. Interviews were conducted with 25 participants, documents related to policy and infrastructure in Ghana were examined, and observations were held in meetings of information technology committees. FINDINGS The findings indicate that researchers are specifically concerned about three areas when sharing research online: fraud, plagiarism, and identity theft. DISCUSSION This paper adds to research that examines barriers toward using institutional repositories, and highlights the lack of basic preventative strategies in Ghana—such as training, security, and infrastructure that are commonplace in developed countries. CONCLUSION This study draws on findings from Bossaller and Atiso (2015) that identified fears of cybercrime as one of the major barriers to sharing research online for Ghanaian researchers. While several other studies have found that fear of identity theft or plagiarism are barriers toward sharing work in the institutional repository, this is the first study that looks specifically at the experiences researchers have had with cybercrime to understand this barrier more fully.
{"title":"Online Safety and Academic Scholarship: Exploring Researchers’ Concerns from Ghana","authors":"Kodjo Atiso, Jenna Kammer","doi":"10.7710/2162-3309.2263","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2263","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION This paper investigates factors, including fears of cybercrime, that may affect researchers’ willingness to share research in institutional repositories in Ghana. METHODS Qualitative research was conducted to understand more about the experiences of Ghanaian researchers when sharing research in institutional repositories. Interviews were conducted with 25 participants, documents related to policy and infrastructure in Ghana were examined, and observations were held in meetings of information technology committees. FINDINGS The findings indicate that researchers are specifically concerned about three areas when sharing research online: fraud, plagiarism, and identity theft. DISCUSSION This paper adds to research that examines barriers toward using institutional repositories, and highlights the lack of basic preventative strategies in Ghana—such as training, security, and infrastructure that are commonplace in developed countries. CONCLUSION This study draws on findings from Bossaller and Atiso (2015) that identified fears of cybercrime as one of the major barriers to sharing research online for Ghanaian researchers. While several other studies have found that fear of identity theft or plagiarism are barriers toward sharing work in the institutional repository, this is the first study that looks specifically at the experiences researchers have had with cybercrime to understand this barrier more fully.","PeriodicalId":91322,"journal":{"name":"Journal of librarianship and scholarly communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48984337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：