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

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.

A Review of Business Model Transformation in Transportation Business Post Pandemic

“…Data sources dating back to 2020. Despite criticism for the absence of the paper quality delimitation [10] and its weak performance [11], we opted for Google Scholar due to the lack of topic availability in the tighter database [12]. It is proven in the small amount of literature we found, even in Google Scholar, which database is more comprehensive than others.…”

Placing ChatGPT in the Context of Disruptive Technology in Academic Publishing

“…We can see this in the increased use of Google Scholar instead of traditional library catalogues (Halevi et al, 2017;Schultz et al, 2007). Many librarians still teach that catalogues are better than Google Scholar, but many others realise that this is a losing battle (Luftig & Plungis, 2020). Rather than banning tools, or shaming users, teaching responsible use is a far better approach.…”

Mind the Gap: Understanding Coverage Breaks of Newly Launched Engineering and Computer Science Journals in Core Databases

“…Google Scholar (GS) has also become an essential tool for reference services and teaching. A longitudinal study of OhioLINK consortium libraries and librarians revealed that by 2014 most librarians had accepted GS as a research database, and by 2019 60% of the libraries were providing a GS link on their websites (Luftig & Plungis, 2020). Another study compared users' perceptions of GS and library discovery tools, and reported that users liked GS because of its "ease of use, system quality, and satisfaction" (Oh & Colón-Aguirre, 2019, p. 883).…”