A Review of: Ritchie, S. M., Young, L. M., & Sigman, J. (2018). A comparison of selected bibliographic database subject overlap for agricultural information. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, 89. http://doi.org/10.5062/F49Z9340 Abstract Objective – To determine the most comprehensive database(s) for agricultural literature searching. Design – Data collection and analysis was conducted using a modified version of the bibliography method, overlap analysis, chi square tests, and data visualization methods. Setting – An academic library in the U.S. Subjects – Eight commonly used bibliographic databases, including comprehensive agricultural indexes (AGRICOLA, AGRIS, and CAB Abstracts), specialized databases (BIOSIS Previews and FSTA), and multidisciplinary databases (Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science). Methods – The researchers selected three review articles that represented sub-topics within the field of agriculture. Sources listed in the bibliographies of the three review articles were used to build a bibliographic citation set for analysis. Using a modified version of the bibliography method, 90 citations were randomly selected from the above-mentioned citation set. Researchers then turned to the 8 selected databases and searched for all 90 citations in each platform. Search queries were crafted in two ways: unique title strings in quotation marks and combinations of terms entered into the “title”, “keyword”, “journal source”, and “author” fields. Citations were considered to be covered in a database if the full bibliographic record was located using the above-mentioned search strategy. Next, chi square tests were used to evaluate if the expected number of citations from the sample group were found in each database or if the frequency differed between the eight databases. The overlap analysis method provided numerical representation of the degree of similarity and difference across the eight databases. Finally, data visualizations created in Excel and Gephi enhanced comparisons between the eight databases and highlighted differences that were not obvious based solely on the analysis of numerical data. Main Results – Researchers found that comprehensive databases (AGRICOLA, AGRIS, and CAB Abstracts) were not in fact comprehensive in their coverage of agricultural literature. However, the results suggested that CAB Abstracts was more comprehensive than AGRICOLA or AGRIS, particularly in regard to its coverage of the sub-topics “agronomy” and “meat sciences”. However, coverage of the sub-topic “sustainable diets” lagged behind multidisciplinary databases, which may be explained by the fact that the topic is interdisciplinary in nature. The superior coverage of CAB Abstracts over other comprehensive databases is consistent with findings reported by Kawasaki (2004). The analysis of specialized databases (BIOSIS Previews and FSTA) suggested that citations within the scope of the database were covered very well, while those out of scope were not. For instance, the sub-topics “sustainable diets” and “meat science” are out of scope of the biological sciences and thus, were not well covered in BIOSIS. The multidisciplinary databases (Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science) provided the most comprehensive coverage agricultural literature. All three databases covered most citations included in the data set. However, researchers noted that all three databases provided weak coverage of trade published items, books, or older journals. Conclusion – The study found that multidisciplinary databases provide close to full coverage of agricultural literature. In addition, they provide the best access to content that is interdisciplinary in nature. Specialized and comprehensive databases are recommended when research topics are within the scope of the database. Also, they best support in-depth projects such as bibliographies or comprehensive review articles.
Purpose -Over the past decade, as the electronic book (e-book) collection continues to grow, Columbia University Libraries has been gathering information to develop policies related to e-book acquisition, discovery, and access. The purpose of this paper is to investigate users' e-book search behavior and information needs across different disciplines. Design/methodology/approach -The research method utilizes text data from two sources: users' e-book search queries that were entered into the libraries discovery tool called CLIO and e-book title words provided by the Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources (COUNTER) usage reports. The analysis involves identifying and quantifying certain words from users' search queries with the purpose of examining the contexts within which these words were used. Findings -The prominence of topical words such as "history," "social," and "politics" in the list was an interesting reflection on the kinds of works users were looking for, as were the terms "handbook," "guide," and "manual." The high frequency of these words imply that users were searching for broad topics, reference works, or other collections of instructions, all of which are intended to provide ready reference. Originality/value -Running search queries and e-book title words through a text analysis tool revealed new ideas related to what types of materials users search for and use. Text analysis of search terms and title words provided insight into the nature of e-book use, including broad topic (e.g. history), academic level of use (e.g. introductory), and genre/type (e.g. reference). While it is challenging to deduce reader intent from word frequency analysis, as text data remain widely open for interpretation, the methodology has significant strengths that drive us to continue to use in future studies.
Abstract:Over the past four years Columbia University Libraries (CUL) has seen exponential growth in electronic book (e-book) purchasing. These purchases have not only increased the depth and breadth of the collection, but they have also created new opportunities for remote learning and instant information access. In turn, this new push for purchasing electronic has created new demands in assessment to understand the true benefit of these resources, most notably in regards to annual e-book subscriptions.In 2013, a new position aimed at developing an e-book strategy for CUL was devised. Shortly thereafter, a position was created in the Science and Engineering Library Division (SEL) that focused on assessment. These two positions fall in line with CUL's mission to support research and learning through evidence based decision making. This paper explains an assessment methodology used within the library system at CUL to evaluate the cost-benefit of e-book subscriptions. By appraising several databases, we were able to analyze cost and usage to determine the actual value of these resources. The findings yielded a savings of approximately $60,000 for the 2015 fiscal year. This is an ongoing initiative that will help us document the e-book landscape and build data sets that will inform collection development decisions. Part 1: IntroductionThe dawning of the Digital Age revolutionized the way information and knowledge are created, produced, and disseminated in the academic community. The rapid integration of technologies with research, teaching, and learning activities has changed both information and access needs of user communities. A new reliance on electronic content coupled with the pressure of reduced stack space for print collections are factors that contributed to a new focus on electronic book (ebooks) acquisition initiatives in academic libraries. Librarians now face the challenge of assessing and evaluating this new format in regards to the value it offers to users.Columbia University Libraries (CUL) is one of the top five academic research library systems in North America and serves a community of over 3,750 faculty members and 26,000 full-time students at the Morningside Campus and Medical Center. The collections are housed across twenty-one campus libraries and include over twelve million volumes, 160,000 current journals and serials, and an extensive collection of manuscripts, rare books, microforms, maps, and audiovisual materials. In 2004, CUL began purchasing e-books in an experimental capacity. Due to positive reception by faculty and students, CUL began expanding e-book collections to support research, teaching, and learning activities across campus. Currently, CUL provides
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.