Transcript PowerPoint pristatymas

“I DIDN’T USE THE LIBRARY, I GOOGLED
IT”: USING CITATION ANALYSIS TO
IDENTIFY THE USE OF LIBRARY
RESOURCES
Simona Juzėnienė, PhD
Vincas Grigas, PhD
Vilnius university library
PREHISTORY. THIS IS ARŪNAS AND HIS
DISSERTATION...
UNOFFICIAL RESEARCH QUESTION: CAN IT BE TRUE,
THAT THE ACADEMIC LIBRARY AND IT’S RESOURCES ARE
WORTHLESS FOR PHD STUDENTS?
Small pilot research:
• Analysis of bibliographical references
lists;
• 4 librarians, 4 science fields (Humanities
is still in process);
• 12 randomly chosen dissertations,
defended in 2014;
• Analysis scheme and instruction.
DATA GATHERING EXAMPLE
RESULTS (1)
Number of
dissertations
analysed
Humanities
Social Sciences
Physical Sciences
Biomedical Sciences
Technological
Sciences
In total:
0
3
3
3
Total no. in
2014
16
39
34
35
3
12
6
130
Average number of information
resources in dissertations
250
200
150
100
50
0
Average
Social
Sciences
212
Physical
Sciences
145
Biomedical
Sciences
223
Technologica
l Sciences
116
RESULTS (2). TYPES OF
INFORMATION RESOURCES
Social Sciences
Other
40%
Printed
books
18%
Journal
articles
37%
Electronic books
5%
RESULTS (3). TYPES OF
INFORMATION RESOURCES
Physical Sciences
Other
18%
Printed books
23%
Journal articles
58%
Electronic books
1%
RESULTS (4). TYPES OF
INFORMATION RESOURCES
Biomedical Sciences
Printed books
1%
Other
5%
Electronic books
0%
Journal articles
94%
RESULTS (5). TYPES OF
INFORMATION RESOURCES
Technological Sciences
Printed
books
18%
Electronic books
1%
Other
49%
Journal articles
32%
RESULTS (6). TYPES OF
INFORMATION RESOURCES
Comments:
• Physical sciences need more printed books than
social sciences?
• Why are electronic books so unpopular?
• Category “other” is quite big, so we should pay
more attention to various conference proceedings,
reports, legal documents, even maps..
• Biomedical scientists do not need books, they
need lots of journals.
RESULTS (7). WAYS TO GET
INFORMATION RESOURCES
1200
1000
800
Unknown ways
600
Open Access
VUL subscribed databases
VUL e-catalogue
400
200
0
Social S.
Physical S.
Biomedical S. Technological
S.
RESULTS (8). WAYS TO GET
INFORMATION RESOURCES
Comments:
• Open Access was checked via Sherpa/Romeo. Either the journal
was listed in DOAJ or a paid OA option was available, no matter
green, yellow or blue archiving policies – it was considered as an
open access journal. And there was at least a little possibility to find
needed articles somewhere online.
RESULTS (9). CORE JOURNALS. WEB OF
SCIENCE JOURNAL CITATION REPORTS
Biomedical Sciences
Journal of Pineal Research
Radiology
American Journal of Roentgenology
Journal of Neuroimmunology
European Radiology
European Journal of Radiology
FASEB Journal
Science
Gut
Journal of Biological Chemistry
The Journal of Immunology
The New England Journal of Medicine
Times cited
46
19
13
10
10
9
8
8
8
7
7
7
WoS Quartile Impact Factor
Q1
8
Q1
6.214
Q2
2.744
Q2
2.786
Q1
4.338
Q2
2.160
Q1
5.480
Q1
31.477
Q1
13.319
Q1
4.600
Q1
5.362
Q1
54.420
RESULTS (10). CORE JOURNALS. WEB OF
SCIENCE JOURNAL CITATION REPORTS
Technological Sciences
Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery
Data & Knowledge Engineering
Expert Systems with Applications
International Journal of HumanComputer Studies
Electronics and Electrical Engineering
Times cited
6
5
4
4
3
Social Sciences
Times cited
Journal of Knowledge Management
33
Informacijos mokslai
13
European Journal of Innovation Management 9
International Migration
9
Harvard Business Review
5
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies
5
WoS Quartile Impact Factor
Q1
1.743
Q2
1.489
Q1
1.965
Q2
Q4
1.165
0.445
WoS Quartile Impact Factor
Q2
1.257
Q3
Q2
Q2
0.839
1.831
0.933
RESULTS (11). CORE JOURNALS. WEB OF
SCIENCE JOURNAL CITATION REPORTS
Physical Sciences
Times cited WoS Quartile Impact Factor
Nucleic Acids Research
22
Q1
8.808
Journal of Virology
14
Q1
4.648
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
12 of the USA Q1
9.809
Journal of Biological Chemistry
11
Q1
4.600
Bioinformatics
7
Q1
4.621
Journal of Molecular Biology
7
Q2
3.959
Boreas
6
Q2
2.383
Quaternary Science Reviews
6
Q1
4.571
Sedimentology
6
Q1
2.741
CONCLUSIONS. DISCUSSION.
• Citation analysis helps to identify usage of
physical and electronic library resources among
PhD students.
• When doing analysis, a very specific instruction
has to be made for librarians who collect data, so
they understand everything the same.
• Such research can show the need for evidence
based information literacy or scientometrics
courses for students from different science fields.
CONCLUSIONS. DISCUSSION. (2)
• Academic libraries have to rethink resource
collection and development. Maybe all that we
need are only textbooks for BA and MA students?
• Open access articles and other freely available
resources online are the core resources for
dissertations. How can academic libraries still
remain important for PhD students?
• Can open access be seen as a threat for academic
libraries and their information resources
provider‘s role?