Summon, EBSCO Discovery Service, and Google Scholar: A Comparison of Search Performance Using User Queries

Ciccone, Karen; Vickery, John

doi:10.18438/b86g6q

Cited by 21 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the interviewees, the EDS system provides fewer but better results than Google Scholar. This is supported by the literature; Karen Ciccone and John Vickery from North Carolina State University Libraries [28] found that there was no significant difference in the results between Summon and EDS, for either known item or topical searches. They also found that the higher proficiency of students using EDS leads to higher quality academic resources.…”

Section: First Choice Of Search Toolsupporting

confidence: 58%

EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) Usage in Israeli Academic Libraries

Greenberg¹

2020

Digital Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Awareness to the problem that different search interfaces discourage patrons' use of library information sources has led academic libraries to implement web-scale discovery services. These services offer the user a "Google-like" search experience of library resources. This study aims to explore library professionals' satisfaction, patrons' information behavior, and use of EDS discovery tool service in academic libraries in Israel. Mixed research methods were used in this study: qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative research methods are through content analysis of library directors' interviews, and quantitative research method is through collected library metrics (from Google analytics) data analysis, regarding usage patterns and search session analysis. The study aims to gain insight regarding library implementation and patrons' information behavior of the EDS discovery tool, in Israeli higher education institutions.Keywords: information behavior, academic libraries, Israel, EDS discovery service, search in the library Digital Imaging 2 in the life of all library users. It is the most popular search engine for queries about daily issues and for academic needs. It empowers library visitors to search for their academic information needs, within an easy and popular interface [2]. In libraries, some consider this an obstacle, and some see it as an opportunity for innovations and improvements. One thing is certain: Google redefined the search experience, and libraries should acknowledge this.In 2004, Google launched Google Scholar, a tool for discovering scholarly information. Google Scholar is a search engine for academic articles, theses, books, abstracts, and court opinions from academic publishers, professional societies, online repositories, universities, and other websites. This free resource, with its basic and familiar interface, has the potential to serve as a scholarly metasearch information engine [3,4]. Google Scholar has received mixed receptions from the librarian community. It has some advanced search features, but it provides no interface for refining the results. Users can set preferences such as language, year, author, and periodical title. They can also view an indication of the libraries from which it can access the source, citation export options, and how to cite the source (for many citation styles). The reviews and critiques of Google Scholar have been mixed, at best. Its content, its search engine, its interface, and its citation count have all been criticized. Patrons of libraries who have subscriptions to the digital archives of publishers are the greatest beneficiaries of Google Scholar, as with a single search they are led to the full digital text versions of the articles [4-6]. Google Scholar is very different from library database interfaces and their search options, yet it introduces library users to scholarly articles through a familiar and friendly interface.

show abstract

Section: First Choice Of Search Toolsupporting

confidence: 58%

EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) Usage in Israeli Academic Libraries

Greenberg¹

2020

Digital Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, we used a Google Scholar (GS) interface to quantify the extent to which a given biological control organism features in the global scientific literature (Table 2). Despite considerable variability in the effectiveness of different search interfaces for library resources (Asher et al, 2013), Google Scholar does outperform commercially-available engines (Ciccone & Vickery, 2015). Using similar reasoning as in Correia et al (2016), we employed the number of GS results as a direct measure of the extent to which a given species is covered in scientific documents and thus a proxy of its global scientific attention, or 'scientific salience' (SciS).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global disparity in public awareness of the biological control potential of invertebrates

Wyckhuys

Pozsgai²,

Löveï

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invertebrates make up 97-99% of biodiversity on Earth and contribute to multiple ecosystem services (ES) in both natural and human-dominated systems. One such service, biological control (BC) of herbivorous pests, is a core component of sustainable intensification of agriculture, yet its importance is routinely overlooked. Here we report a macro-scale, cross-cultural assessment of the public visibility (or ‘awareness’) of BC invertebrates, using high-throughput analysis of large bodies of digitized text. Using binomial scientific name frequency as proxy for awareness, we compared the extent to which a given species featured in webpages within either scientific media or the entire worldwide web, and in total search volume at varying spatial scale. For a set of 339 BC invertebrate species, scientific and internet coverage averaged 1,020 and 1,735 webpages, respectively. Substantial variability was recorded among BC taxa with Coleoptera, Hemiptera and Nematoda having comparatively high visibility. Online visibility exhibited large geographical variability ranging from France covering BC invertebrates on average in 1,050 webpages versus USA on just 31. This work represents the first extensive use of culturomics to assess public visibility of insect-mediated ES. As BC uptake is dictated by stakeholders’ access to (agro-ecological) information, our work identifies geographically-delineated areas that are differentially attuned to the concept of invertebrate BC, pinpoints opportunities for focusing education campaigns and awareness-raising, enables real-time tracking of BC public appeal, and informs public policy.

show abstract

“…Comparing EDS, Summon, and Google Scholar on the basis of relevance ranking demonstrate equality between EDS and Summon. And while Google Scholar is equivalent to both for known-item searches, in topical searches Google Scholar excels [6]. A report of a 2018 survey of librarians demonstrates that the search for the best discovery tool to serve all users is elusive: difficulty with combining metadata from multiple sources, rampant lack of interoperability, and balancing the needs of library-centric management with user-centric discovery are just a few of the challenges that persist [7].…”

Section: Competition: the Single Search Boxmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of technology on user-centric discovery

McGeary

2019

ISU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The amount of resources and information available to users seems infinite, but what is actually discoverable and accessible is much less in comparison. Among the many longstanding roles of libraries is guiding users to the resources that they need, and although technology has expanded the possibilities of this service, it has also exposed new risks and challenges. Libraries also have a unique position within the technology-driven marketplace, as both a content consumer and a content provider. They also have conflicting objectives-protecting users while competing for users. This paper explores these dynamics that result from the impact of technology on library user-centric strategy and solutions.

show abstract

Summon, EBSCO Discovery Service, and Google Scholar: A Comparison of Search Performance Using User Queries

Cited by 21 publications

References 4 publications

EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) Usage in Israeli Academic Libraries

EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) Usage in Israeli Academic Libraries

Global disparity in public awareness of the biological control potential of invertebrates

The impact of technology on user-centric discovery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About