Search (14 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Tenopir, C."
  1. Tenopir, C.; Levine, K.; Allard, S.; Christian, L.; Volentine, R.; Boehm, R.; Nichols, F.; Nicholas, D.; Jamali, H.R.; Herman, E.; Watkinson, A.: Trustworthiness and authority of scholarly information in a digital age : results of an international questionnaire (2016) 0.07
    0.069549836 = product of:
      0.13909967 = sum of:
        0.10839584 = weight(_text_:open in 3113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10839584 = score(doc=3113,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.20964009 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046553567 = queryNorm
            0.5170568 = fieldWeight in 3113, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.5032015 = idf(docFreq=1330, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3113)
        0.03070384 = product of:
          0.06140768 = sum of:
            0.06140768 = weight(_text_:access in 3113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06140768 = score(doc=3113,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.38917357 = fieldWeight in 3113, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3113)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    An international survey of over 3,600 researchers examined how trustworthiness and quality are determined for making decisions on scholarly reading, citing, and publishing and how scholars perceive changes in trust with new forms of scholarly communication. Although differences in determining trustworthiness and authority of scholarly resources exist among age groups and fields of study, traditional methods and criteria remain important across the board. Peer review is considered the most important factor for determining the quality and trustworthiness of research. Researchers continue to read abstracts, check content for sound arguments and credible data, and rely on journal rankings when deciding whether to trust scholarly resources in reading, citing, or publishing. Social media outlets and open access publications are still often not trusted, although many researchers believe that open access has positive implications for research, especially if the open access journals are peer reviewed.
  2. Tenopir, C.; Ennis, L.: ¬The digital reference work of academic libraries (1998) 0.03
    0.02595061 = product of:
      0.10380244 = sum of:
        0.10380244 = sum of:
          0.0413627 = weight(_text_:access in 5170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0413627 = score(doc=5170,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046553567 = queryNorm
              0.2621377 = fieldWeight in 5170, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5170)
          0.06243974 = weight(_text_:22 in 5170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06243974 = score(doc=5170,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046553567 = queryNorm
              0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 5170, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5170)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Reports a survey of all academic members of the Association of Research Libraries in the 4th quarter of 1997 which examined how academic libraries incorporate electronic information sources into their reference activities and the effects on libraries services. There was a response rate of 68 per cent, Compares results surveys carried out in 1991 and 1994. The survey covered: numbers of computers access options (intermediary, end user online, CD-ROM locally loaded databases or those accessible through the library catalogue and the Internet. There is a trend away from print resources, particularly indexing and abstracting materials, and away from CD-ROM LANs and local loading of databases towards remote online resources
    Source
    Online. 22(1998) no.4, S.22-28
  3. Tenopir, C.: Reference services from RLG (1995) 0.02
    0.024432644 = product of:
      0.09773058 = sum of:
        0.09773058 = sum of:
          0.047271654 = weight(_text_:access in 2612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.047271654 = score(doc=2612,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046553567 = queryNorm
              0.29958594 = fieldWeight in 2612, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2612)
          0.050458927 = weight(_text_:22 in 2612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.050458927 = score(doc=2612,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046553567 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2612, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2612)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Describes the variety of search services supporting library reference functions offered by the RLG in the USA. The best known of these is RLIN, the massive bibliographic database and related services originally developed for shared cataloguing. In the last few years RLG has added CitaDel, an online search system that provides access to indexing/abstracting databases; and Zephyr, a Z39.50 server that amkes the RLIN and CitaDel databases searchable through a library's online catalogue. RLG also offers document delivery connections, including Ariel and Internet based document delivery software, for a full complement of online reference support for academic and public libraries
    Date
    25.11.1995 19:22:01
  4. Tenopir, C.: Integrating electronic reference (1995) 0.02
    0.024432644 = product of:
      0.09773058 = sum of:
        0.09773058 = sum of:
          0.047271654 = weight(_text_:access in 2616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.047271654 = score(doc=2616,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046553567 = queryNorm
              0.29958594 = fieldWeight in 2616, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2616)
          0.050458927 = weight(_text_:22 in 2616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.050458927 = score(doc=2616,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046553567 = queryNorm
              0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2616, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2616)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Reports on a survey of ARL (Ass. of Research Libraries) members in the USA in 1994, which sought to find out the electronic reference services that are offered by these libraries and how the services affect reference staff, the expectations of users, and user instruction. The services covered include CD-ROM, intermediary online searching, end user online (e.g. FirstSearch), tape loaded databases and user access to the Internet, including electronic mail facilities. Highlights the additional workload the provision of these services involves, and the sometimes unrealistic expectations of users especially with regard to Internet resources
    Date
    25.11.1995 19:22:01
  5. Tenopir, C.: Moving to the information village (1996) 0.01
    0.0073119607 = product of:
      0.029247843 = sum of:
        0.029247843 = product of:
          0.058495685 = sum of:
            0.058495685 = weight(_text_:access in 4944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.058495685 = score(doc=4944,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.3707187 = fieldWeight in 4944, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4944)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the familiar problem of users are now confronted with the needs to impose order on myriad sources of information and to present them in an integrated way to users. Describes an attempt to provide such integration in the engineering field, Engineering Information Village, or Ei Village, produced by Engineering Information Inc. It resembles a WWW site, and integrates a traditional online abstracting and indexing service with access to WWW sites in the engineering field, contacts to engineering consultants, and access to other sources of interest to engineers. Explains how the metaphor of the village is carried though in the service and stresses the vetting process which seeks to guarantee that sources provided are authoritative. Also details the pricing of the service
  6. Tenopir, C.; King, D.W.; Boyce, P.; Grayson, M.; Paulson, K.-L.: Relying an electronic journals : reading patterns of astronomers (2005) 0.01
    0.006267395 = product of:
      0.02506958 = sum of:
        0.02506958 = product of:
          0.05013916 = sum of:
            0.05013916 = weight(_text_:access in 3558) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05013916 = score(doc=3558,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.31775886 = fieldWeight in 3558, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3558)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Surveys of the members of the American Astronomical Society identify how astronomers use journals and what features and formats they prefer. While every work field is distinct, the patterns of use by astronomers may provide a glimpse of what to expect of journal patterns and use by other scientists. Astronomers, like other scientists, continue to invest a large amount of their time in reading articles and place a high level of importance an journal articles. They use a wide variety of formats and means to get access to materials that are essential to their work in teaching, service, and research. They select access means that are convenient-whether those means be print, electronic, or both. The availability of a mature electronic journals system from their primary professional society has surely influenced their early adoption of e-journals.
  7. Tenopir, C.; Hover, K.: When is the same database not the same : database differences among systems (1993) 0.01
    0.0059089568 = product of:
      0.023635827 = sum of:
        0.023635827 = product of:
          0.047271654 = sum of:
            0.047271654 = weight(_text_:access in 6286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047271654 = score(doc=6286,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.29958594 = fieldWeight in 6286, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6286)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Academic and special research libraries in the US and Canada access on average 7,4 online systems. This probably doubles or triples when including CD-ROMs and locally loaded databases. Examines the many ways in which online versions of databases can vary on different systems. Discusses the differences of updating, dates covered, price, subfile structure, field subdivisions, content or inclusion, support features and system search features. Provides statistics on these differences
  8. Tenopir, C.: Trends in user searching (1996) 0.01
    0.0059089568 = product of:
      0.023635827 = sum of:
        0.023635827 = product of:
          0.047271654 = sum of:
            0.047271654 = weight(_text_:access in 7471) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047271654 = score(doc=7471,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.29958594 = fieldWeight in 7471, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7471)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses a number of trends in the provision of commerical research online systems to end users, as opposed to professional intermediaries. The trends highlighted include: Web versions of, for example, FirstSearch and EBSCOhost; end user access via the library, which cushions the user from direct paymant for use; the integration of information sources in specific subject areas; the rethinking of proprietary software solutions; and the provision of specialized products with a very specific customer focus
  9. Tenopir, C.; Neufang, R.: Electronic reference options : how they stack up in research libraries (1992) 0.01
    0.005518945 = product of:
      0.02207578 = sum of:
        0.02207578 = product of:
          0.04415156 = sum of:
            0.04415156 = weight(_text_:22 in 2343) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04415156 = score(doc=2343,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2343, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2343)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Online. 16(1992) no.2, S.22-28
  10. Tenopir, C.: Online systems for information access and retrieval (2008) 0.00
    0.0044317176 = product of:
      0.01772687 = sum of:
        0.01772687 = product of:
          0.03545374 = sum of:
            0.03545374 = weight(_text_:access in 5587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03545374 = score(doc=5587,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.22468945 = fieldWeight in 5587, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5587)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  11. Allard, S.; Levine, K.J.; Tenopir, C.: Design engineers and technical professionals at work : observing information usage in the workplace (2009) 0.00
    0.0039421036 = product of:
      0.015768414 = sum of:
        0.015768414 = product of:
          0.03153683 = sum of:
            0.03153683 = weight(_text_:22 in 2735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03153683 = score(doc=2735,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16302267 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2735, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2735)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2009 12:43:37
  12. Nicholas, D.; Huntington, P.; Jamali, H.R.; Tenopir, C.: What deep log analysis tells us about the impact of big deals : case study OhioLINK (2006) 0.00
    0.003693098 = product of:
      0.014772392 = sum of:
        0.014772392 = product of:
          0.029544784 = sum of:
            0.029544784 = weight(_text_:access in 5605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029544784 = score(doc=5605,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.18724121 = fieldWeight in 5605, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5605)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This article presents the early findings of an exploratory deep log analysis of journal usage on OhioLINK, conducted as part of the MaxData project funded by the US Institute of Museum and Library Services. OhioLINK, the original "big deal", provides a single digital platform of nearly 6,000 full-text journal for more than 600,000 people in the state of Ohio. The purpose of the paper is not only to present findings from the deep log analysis of journal usage on OhioLINK, but, arguably more importantly, to try test a new method of analysing online information user behaviour - deep log analysis. Design/methodology/approach - The raw server logs were obtained for the period June 2004 to December 2004. For this exploratory study one month (October) of the on-campus usage logs and seven months of the off-campus transaction logs were analysed. Findings - During this period approximately 1,215,000 items were viewed on campus in October 2004 and 1,894,000 items viewed off campus between June and December 2004. The paper presents a number of usage analyses including: number of journals used, titles of journals used, use over time, a returnee analysis and a special analysis of subject, date and method of access. Practical implications - The research findings help libraries evaluate the efficiency of big deal and one-stop shopping for scholarly journals and also investigate their users' information seeking behaviours. Originality/value - The research is a part of efforts to test the applications of a new methodology, deep log analysis, for use and user studies. It also represents the most substantial independent analysis of, possibly, the most important and significant of the journal big deals ever conducted.
  13. Rowlands, I.; Nicholas, D.; Williams, P.; Huntington, P.; Fieldhouse, M.; Gunter, B.; Withey, R.; Jamali, H.R.; Dobrowolski, T.; Tenopir, C.: ¬The Google generation : the information behaviour of the researcher of the future (2008) 0.00
    0.003693098 = product of:
      0.014772392 = sum of:
        0.014772392 = product of:
          0.029544784 = sum of:
            0.029544784 = weight(_text_:access in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029544784 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.18724121 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - This article is an edited version of a report commissioned by the British Library and JISC to identify how the specialist researchers of the future (those born after 1993) are likely to access and interact with digital resources in five to ten years' time. The purpose is to investigate the impact of digital transition on the information behaviour of the Google Generation and to guide library and information services to anticipate and react to any new or emerging behaviours in the most effective way. Design/methodology/approach - The study was virtually longitudinal and is based on a number of extensive reviews of related literature, survey data mining and a deep log analysis of a British Library and a JISC web site intended for younger people. Findings - The study shows that much of the impact of ICTs on the young has been overestimated. The study claims that although young people demonstrate an apparent ease and familiarity with computers, they rely heavily on search engines, view rather than read and do not possess the critical and analytical skills to assess the information that they find on the web. Originality/value - The paper reports on a study that overturns the common assumption that the "Google generation" is the most web-literate.
  14. Douglass, K.; Allard, S.; Tenopir, C.; Wu, L.W.; Frame, M.: Managing scientific data as public assets : data sharing practices and policies among full-time government employees (2014) 0.00
    0.003693098 = product of:
      0.014772392 = sum of:
        0.014772392 = product of:
          0.029544784 = sum of:
            0.029544784 = weight(_text_:access in 1195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029544784 = score(doc=1195,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15778996 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046553567 = queryNorm
                0.18724121 = fieldWeight in 1195, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.389428 = idf(docFreq=4053, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1195)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper examines how scientists working in government agencies in the U.S. are reacting to the "ethos of sharing" government-generated data. For scientists to leverage the value of existing government data sets, critical data sets must be identified and made as widely available as possible. However, government data sets can only be leveraged when policy makers first assess the value of data, in much the same way they decide the value of grants for research outside government. We argue that legislators should also remove structural barriers to interoperability by funding technical infrastructure according to issue clusters rather than administrative programs. As developers attempt to make government data more accessible through portals, they should consider a range of other nontechnical constraints attached to the data. We find that agencies react to the large number of constraints by mostly posting their data on their own websites only rather than in data portals that can facilitate sharing. Despite the nontechnical constraints, we find that scientists working in government agencies exercise some autonomy in data decisions, such as data documentation, which determine whether or not the data can be widely shared. Fortunately, scientists indicate a willingness to share the data they collect or maintain. However, we argue further that a complete measure of access should also consider the normative decisions to collect (or not) particular data.