Tom 19 Nr 1
Artykuły

The Role of Academic Libraries in Scholarly Communication. A Meta-Analysis of Research

Anna Mierzecka
Uniwersytet Warszawski
Opublikowane 2019-03-13
Słowa kluczowe
  • academics,
  • academic libraries,
  • information needs,
  • scholarly communication
Jak cytować
Mierzecka, A. (2019). The Role of Academic Libraries in Scholarly Communication. A Meta-Analysis of Research. Studia Medioznawcze, 19(1), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.33077/uw.24511617.ms.2019.1.85

Streszczenie

The wide expansion of digital technologies has influenced research in all fields of science as well as educational activities. Scientific objective: The purpose of this article is to examine critical areas of academic library activity, in a significant or requiring far-reaching changes in all aspects, in the context of needs of the scientific community. Research methods: It was decided that the method that will allow to outline the situation in this area will be qualitative content analysis texts from leading journals. For this purpose, the main databases of Web of Science articles have been searched: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), and Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI), using the instruction TS = (“academic library” OR “academic libraries” OR “university library” OR “university libraries”) AND TS = (scholars or scientists or faculty or researchers or academics). The query limited to the last five years yielded gave as results 170 articles, of which 51 were deemed relevant to the issues discussed. Results and conclusions: In the light of qualitative content analysis of those texts, it is possible to distinguish following areas as important: general approach of scholars and librarians to cooperation, practices of research support, access to information resources adapted to scholars’ needs, data curation support, publication strategies support. On this basis, conclusions have been drawn about the role and type of support that academic libraries may provide in the process of scholarly communication. Cognitive value: This study has contributed to the research into the evaluation of academic library’s support services in the process of scholarly communication.

Bibliografia

  1. Ahmad, P., & Brogan, M. (2016). E-Book User Behaviour in Academic Libraries: The Role of User Agents in Perception and Satisfaction. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 21(3), 95–109.
  2. Al-Shboul, M. K., & Abrizah, A. (2014). Information Needs: Developing Personas of Humanities Scholars. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(5), 500-509. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2014.05.016
  3. Amante, M. J., Extremeño, A. I., & da Costa, A. F. (2012). Modelling Variables That Contribute to Faculty Willingness to Collaborate with Librarians: The Case of the University Institute of Lisbon (Iscte-Iul), Portugal. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 45(2), 91–102. doi:10.1177/0961000612457105
  4. Antell, K., Foote, J. B., Turner, J., & Shults, B. (2014). Dealing with Data: Science Librarians’ Participation in Data Management at Association of Research Libraries Institutions. College & Research Libraries, 75(4), 557-574. doi:10.5860/crl.75.4.557
  5. Ashokbhai Bhatt, A. (2014). Information Needs, Perceptions and Quests of Law Faculty in the Digital Era. The Electronic Library, 32(5), 659-669. doi:10.1108/el-11-2012-0152
  6. Bedi, S., & Walde, C. (2017). Transforming Roles: Canadian Academic Librarians Embedded in Faculty Research Projects. College & Research Libraries, 78(3), 314-327. doi:10.5860/crl.78.3.314
  7. Cain, T. J., Cheek, F. M., Kupsco, J., Hartel, L. J., & Getselman, A. (2016). Health Sciences Libraries Forecasting Information Service Trends for Researchers: Models Applicable to All Academic Libraries. College & Research Libraries, 77(5), 595-613. doi:10.5860/crl.77.5.595
  8. Cobblah, M.-A., & van der Walt, T. (2016). The Contribution of Effective Library and Information Services to Academic Achievements at Some Selected Universities in Ghana. Libri, 66(4), 275–289. doi:10.1515/ libri-2016-0035
  9. Cox, A. M., Kennan, M. A., Lyon, L., & Pinfi eld, S. (2017). Developments in Research Data Management in Academic Libraries: Towards an Understanding of Research Data Service Maturity. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(9), 2182-2200. doi:10.1002/asi.23781
  10. Creaser, C., & Spezi, V. (2013). Improving Perceptions of Value to Teaching and Research Staff: The Next Challenge for Academic Libraries. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 46(3), 191–206. doi:10.1177/0961000613477678
  11. Dadzie, P., & van der Walt, T. (2015). Access and Use of Digital Resources: A Survey of Their Value for Faculty in Three Ghanaian Universities. Libri, 65(1), 57-70. doi:10.1515/libri-2014-1026
  12. Dahl, C. (2013). Pda and the Humanities. The Electronic Library, 31(6), 745–752. doi:10.1108/el-05-2012-0051 de Jager, K., Nassimbeni, M., & Crowster, N. (2014). Developing a New Librarian. Information Development, 32(3), 285-292. doi:10.1177/0266666914542032
  13. Demšar, F., & Južnič, P. (2013). Transparency of Research Policy and the Role of Librarians. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 46(2), 139–147. doi:10.1177/0961000613503002
  14. Diekema, A. R., Wesolek, A., & Walters, C. D. (2014). The Nsf/Nih Effect: Surveying the Effect of Data Management Requirements on Faculty, Sponsored Programs, and Institutional Repositories. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(3–4), 322–331. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2014.04.010
  15. Falciani-White, N. (2016). Understanding the “Complexity of Experience”: Modeling Faculty Research Practices. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(2), 118–126. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2016.01.003
  16. Farrell, S., Neeser, A., & Bishoff, C. (2017). Academic Uses of Video Games: A Qualitative Assessment of Research and Teaching Needs at a Large Research University. College & Research Libraries, 78(5), 675-705. doi:10.5860/crl.78.5.675
  17. Feng, J., & Zhao, N. (2015). A New Role of Chinese Academic Librarians—the Development of Embedded Patent Information Services at Nanjing Technology University Library, China. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(3), 292-300. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2015.03.010
  18. Gorraiz, J., Wieland, M., & Gumpenberger, C. (2016). Individual Bibliometric Assessment at University of Vienna: From Numbers to Multidimensional Profi les. El Profesional de la Información, 25(6), 901– 914. doi:10.3145/epi.2016.nov.07
  19. Grigas, V., Juzeniene, S., & Velickaite, J. (2017). ‘Just Google It’ – the Scope of Freely Available Information Sources for Doctoral Thesis Writing. Information Research-an International Electronic Journal, 22(1), 18.
  20. Hall, L. W. (2014). Changing the Workplace Culture at Flinders University Library: From Pragmatism to Professional Refl ection. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 46(1), 29–38. doi:10.1080/00048623.2014.985773
  21. Hall, L. W., & McBain, I. (2014). Practitioner Research in an Academic Library: Evaluating the Impact of a Support Group. The Australian Library Journal, 63(2), 129-143. doi:10.1080/00049670.2014.898238
  22. Hansson, J., & Johannesson, K. (2013). Librarians’ Views of Academic Library Support for Scholarly Publishing: An Every-Day Perspective. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 39(3), 232–240. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2013.02.002
  23. Jones, D. R. (2013). Locked Collections: Copyright and the Future of Research Support. Law Library Journal, 105(4), 425–460.
  24. Kaatrakoski, H., & Lahikainen, J. (2016). “What We Do Every Day Is Impossible”: Managing Change by Developing a Knotworking Culture in an Academic Library. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(5), 515–521. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2016.06.001
  25. Kerby, E. E. (2016). Research Data Services in Veterinary Medicine Libraries. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 104(4), 305–308. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.010
  26. Kim, J. (2017). Data Sharing from the Perspective of Faculty in Korea. Libri, 67(3), 179–192. doi:10.1515/ libri-2016-0116
  27. Klain-Gabbay, L., & Shoham, S. (2016). Scholarly Communication and Academic Librarians. Library & Information Science Research, 38(2), 170–179. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2016.04.004
  28. Knight, N. (2013). Enhancing Access to Library Resources at Northern Caribbean University through an E-Library Initiative. The Electronic Library, 31(6), 753-769. doi:10.1108/el-01-2012-0001
  29. Ko, Y. M., Shim, W., & Pyo, S.-H. (2016). Factors Affecting Users’ Assessment of the Economic Value of University Library Services. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 48(3), 223–235. doi:10.1177/0961000614566338
  30. Lafia, S., Jablonski, J., Kuhn, W., Cooley, S., & Medrano, F. A. (2016). Spatial Discovery and the Research Library. Transactions in GIS, 20(3), 399–412. doi:10.1111/tgis.12235
  31. Liu, X., & Ding, N. (2016). Research Data Management in Universities of Central China. The Electronic Library, 34(5), 808–822. doi:10.1108/el-04-2015-0063
  32. Maceviciute, E. (2014). Research Libraries in a Modern Environment. Journal of Documentation, 70(2), 282–302. doi:10.1108/jd-04-2013-0044
  33. Mammo, Y., & Ngulube, P. (2013). Academics’ Use and Attitude Towards Open Access in Selected Higher Learning Institutions of Ethiopia. Information Development, 31(1), 13–26. doi:10.1177/0266666913500977 Mangiafi co, P., & Smith, K. L. (2014). Reason, Risk, and Reward: Models for Libraries and Other Stakeholders in an Evolving Scholarly Publishing Ecosystem. Cultural Anthropology, 29(2), 216–235.
  34. Martin, K., & Quan-Haase, A. (2016). The Role of Agency in Historians’ Experiences of Serendipity in Physical and Digital Information Environments. Journal of Documentation, 72(6), 1008–1026. doi:10.1108/jd-11-2015-0144
  35. Mattern, E., Andrew Cox, D., Jeng, W., He, D., Lyon, L., & Brenner, A. (2015). Using Participatory Design and Visual Narrative Inquiry to Investigate Researchers’ Data Challenges and Recommendations for Library Research Data Services. Program, 49(4), 408-423. doi:10.1108/prog-01-2015-0012
  36. Matysek, A., & Pulikowski, A. (2018). Strategie wyboru źródeł informacji naukowej. Katowice, 29–30 listopada 2018: Prezentacja z konferencji „Zarządzanie informacją w nauce”. http://hdl.handle. net/20.500.12128/7765
  37. McLure, M., Level, A. V., Cranston, C. L., Oehlerts, B., & Culbertson, M. (2014). Data Curation: A Study of Researcher Practices and Needs. Portal-Libraries and the Academy, 14(2), 139–164.
  38. Mierzecka, A. (2018). Students’ Information Needs and Digital Technologies in Academic Libraries. Przegląd Biblioteczny, 86(4), 509–530.
  39. Naum, A. (2014). Research Data Storage and Management: Library Staff Participation in Showcasing Research Data at the University of Adelaide. The Australian Library Journal, 63(1), 35–44. doi:10.1080/00049670.2014.890019
  40. Nazari, F., Khosravi, F., & Babalhavaeji, F. (2013). Applying Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation Theory to the Acceptance of Online Databases at University Zone of Iran. Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 18(3), 25–38.
  41. Nel, M. A., & Fourie, I. (2016). Information Behavior and Expectations of Veterinary Researchers and Their Requirements for Academic Library Services. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(1), 44–54. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2015.10.007
  42. Principles and Strategies for the Reform of Scholarly Communication 1, (2006).
  43. Reynolds, L. M., Smith, S. E., & D’Silva, M. U. (2013). The Search for Elusive Social Media Data: An Evolving Librarian–Faculty Collaboration. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 39(5), 378–384. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2013.02.007
  44. Rodríguez-Bravo, B., & Alvite-Díez, M. L. (2013). Impact of the Consumption of Electronic Contents on Research Productivity in the Universities of Castile and Leon. Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services, 37(3–4), 85–106. doi:10.1016/j.lcats.2013.09.007
  45. Serrano-Vicente, R., Melero, R., & Abadal, E. (2016). Open Access Awareness and Perceptions in an Institutional Landscape. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(5), 595–603. doi:10.1016/j. acalib.2016.07.002
  46. Shimizu Wilson, C., D’Ambra, J., & Drummond, R. (2014). Exploring the Fit of E-Books to the Needs of Medical Academics in Australia. The Electronic Library, 32(3), 403–422. doi:10.1108/el-09-2012-0118
  47. Suiter, A. M., & Moulaison, H. L. (2015). Supporting Scholars: An Analysis of Academic Library Websites’ Documentation on Metrics and Impact. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(6), 814–820. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2015.09.004
  48. Swanson, J., & Rinehart, A. K. (2016). Data in Context: Using Case Studies to Generate a Common Understanding of Data in Academic Libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(1), 97–101. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2015.11.005
  49. Tahir, M., Mahmood, K., & Shafi que, F. (2010). Use of Electronic Information Resources and Facilities by Humanities Scholars. The Electronic Library, 28(1), 122–136.
  50. Thomas, C. M., & Clyde, J. (2013). Game as Book: Selecting Video Games for Academic Libraries Based on Discipline Specifi c Knowledge. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 39(6), 522–527. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2013.07.002
  51. Toms, E., & O’Brien, H. L. (2008). Understanding the Information and Communication Technology Needs of the E-Humanist. Journal of Documentation, 64(1), 102–130.
  52. Volentine, R., & Tenopir, C. (2013). Value of Academic Reading and Value of the Library in Academics’ Own Words. Aslib Proceedings, 65(4), 425–440. doi:10.1108/ap-03-2012-0025
  53. Wang, M. (2013). Supporting the Research Process through Expanded Library Data Services. Program, 47(3), 282–303. doi:10.1108/prog-04-2012-0010
  54. Weller, T., & Monroe-Gulick, A. (2014). Understanding Methodological and Disciplinary Differences in the Data Practices of Academic Researchers. Library Hi Tech, 32(3), 467–482. doi:10.1108/lht-02- 2014-0021
  55. Zha, X., Zhang, J., & Yan, Y. (2014). Exploring the Effect of Individual Differences on User Perceptions of Print and Electronic Resources. Library Hi Tech, 32(2), 346–367. doi:10.1108/LHT-07-2013-0099
Ta witryna używa ciasteczek (cookies) do przechowywania danych o sesji użytkownika. OK