Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Radford, M.L."
  • × theme_ss:"Informationsdienstleistungen"
  1. Radford, M.L.; Connaway, L.S.; Mikitish, S.; Alpert, M.; Shah, C.; Cooke, N.A.: Shared values, new vision : collaboration and communities of practice in virtual reference and SQA (2017) 0.01 
    0.014386819 = product of:
  0.057547275 = sum of:
    0.057547275 = weight(_text_:social in 3352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057547275 = score(doc=3352,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046325076 = queryNorm
        0.3115296 = fieldWeight in 3352, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3352)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This investigation of new approaches to improving collaboration, user/librarian experiences, and sustainability for virtual reference services (VRS) reports findings from a grant project titled "Cyber Synergy: Seeking Sustainability between Virtual Reference and Social Q&A Sites" (Radford, Connaway, & Shah, 2011-2014). In-depth telephone interviews with 50 VRS librarians included questions on collaboration, referral practices, and attitudes toward Social Question and Answer (SQA) services using the Critical Incident Technique (Flanagan, 1954). The Community of Practice (CoP) (Wenger, 1998; Davies, 2005) framework was found to be a useful conceptualization for understanding VRS professionals' approaches to their work. Findings indicate that participants usually refer questions from outside of their area of expertise to other librarians, but occasionally refer them to nonlibrarian experts. These referrals are made possible because participants believe that other VRS librarians are qualified and willing collaborators. Barriers to collaboration include not knowing appropriate librarians/experts for referral, inability to verify credentials, and perceived unwillingness to collaborate. Facilitators to collaboration include knowledge of appropriate collaborators who are qualified and willingness to refer. Answers from SQA services were perceived as less objective and authoritative, but participants were open to collaborating with nonlibrarian experts with confirmation of professional expertise or extensive knowledge.
  2. Radford, M.L.: Encountering virtual users : a qualitative investigation of interpersonal communication in chat reference (2006) 0.01 
    0.0065351077 = product of:
  0.026140431 = sum of:
    0.026140431 = product of:
      0.052280862 = sum of:
        0.052280862 = weight(_text_:aspects in 5110) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052280862 = score(doc=5110,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 5110, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5110)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Synchronous chat reference services have emerged as viable alternatives to the traditional face-to-face (FtF) library reference encounter. Research in virtual reference service (VRS) and client-librarian behavior is just beginning with a primary focus on task issues of accuracy and efficiency. This study is among the first to apply communication theory to an exploration of relational (socioemotional) aspects of VRS. It reports results from a pilot study that analyzed 44 transcripts nominated for the LSSI Samuel Swett Green Award (Library Systems and Services, Germantown, MD) for Exemplary Virtual Reference followed by an analysis of 245 randomly selected anonymous transcripts from Maryland AskUsNow! statewide chat reference service. Transcripts underwent in-depth qualitative content analysis. Results revealed that interpersonal skills important to FtF reference success are present (although modified) in VRS. These include techniques for rapport building, compensation for lack of nonverbal cues, strategies for relationship development, evidence of deference and respect, facesaving tactics, greeting and closing rituals. Results also identified interpersonal communication dynamics present in the chat reference environment, differences in client versus librarian patterns, and compensation strategies for lack of nonverbal communication.
  3. Radford, M.L.: Approach or avoidance? : The role of nonverbal communication in the academic library user's decision to initiate a reference encounter (1998) 0.00 
    0.004707306 = product of:
  0.018829225 = sum of:
    0.018829225 = product of:
      0.03765845 = sum of:
        0.03765845 = weight(_text_:22 in 3050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03765845 = score(doc=3050,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16222252 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3050, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3050)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    22. 2.1999 19:39:57

Authors

Years