Informacijsko ponašanje znanstvenika
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15291/libellarium.v7i1.194Ključne riječi:
informacijsko ponašanje, znanstvenici, znanost i istraživanje u digitalnom okruženjuSažetak
Posljednjih godina svjedočimo intenzivnim polemikama o promjenama u znanstvenoj praksi uzrokovanim povećanom dostupnošću digitalnih izvora i alata što je potaknulo očigledan i brzi razvoj drugačijeg informacijskog ponašanja znanstvenika, te se postavlja pitanje koje informacijske izvore znanstvenici koriste, kako i kada. Nedavna istraživanja informacijskog ponašanja znanstvenika pokazuju značajne promjene u načinima na koje istraživači komuniciraju, objavljuju radove, surađuju, traže informacije i koriste ih. Istraživanja opisuju prethodno nepoznate uzorke informacijskog ponašanja znanstvenika (eng. skimming, navigating, power browsing, squirrelling, cross-checking) koji imaju (ili bi trebali imati) velik učinak na razvoj informacijskih alata i informacijskih usluga za znanstvenike. Ovaj se rad bavi ključnim informacijskim konceptima u kontekstu znanstvenog istraživanja (npr. informacijom, informacijskom potrebom, relevantnošću, primjerenošću stvarnoj informacijskoj potrebi, informacijskim preopterećenjem, izbjegavanjem informacija), nekim općim karakteristikama informacijskog ponašanja u području znanstvenih informacija (npr. razlikama između znanstvenika i drugih korisnika informacija, razlikama među disciplinama, pojedincima itd.), nekim tipičnim primjerima informacijskog ponašanja (npr. pregledavanjem, berrypicking-om, čitanjem samo osnovnih informacija, a ne punog teksta, praćenjem referencija naprijed/natrag u inicijalnom izvoru informacija, letimičnim pregledavanjem, preuzimanjem materijala za kasnije čitanje), te se raspravlja o implikacijama navedenog na alate i usluge. Na kraju rada pažnja se pridaje problematici vezanoj za znanost i istraživanje u digitalnom okruženju.
Preuzimanja
Reference
DISISS. 1980. Design of information systems in the social services:towards the improvement of Social Science information systems: overviewof research carried out 1971-1975. Bath: University Library.
Information behaviour of the researcher of the future – Executivesummary. 2008. Accessed March 2013. www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/gg_final_keynote_11012008.pdf
Academic libraries of the future. Futures thinking for academiclibrarians. 2011. Accessed March 2013. http://www.futurelibraries.info/content/page/academic-libraries-future-2.
Adema, J., and Schmidt, B. 2010. From Service Providers to ContentProducers: New Opportunities For Libraries in Collaborative Open AccessBook Publishing. New Review of Academic Librarianship 16 (1), 28-43.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2010.509542
ALA/ACRL Research Planning and Review Committee: 2010 top ten trends inacademic libraries. 2010. Accessed March 2013. http://crln.acrl.org/content/71/6/286.full.pdf+html.
Anderson, T. D. 2005. Relevance as process: judgements in the contextof scholarly research. Information Research 10 (2), paper 226. AccessedMarch 2013. http://InformationR.net/ir/10-2/paper226.html.
Bailey, C. V. 2005. The role of reference librarians in institutionalrepositories. Reference Services Review 33 (3), 259-267.http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00907320510611294
Bates, M. J. 1989. The design of browsing and berrypicking techniquesfor the online search interface. Online Review 13 (5), 407-424.http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb024320
Bates, M. J. 2007. What is browsing – really? A model drawing frombehavioural science research. Information Research 12 (4), paper 330.Accessed March 2013. http://InformationR.net/ir/12-4/paper330.html.
Borgman, C. L. 2007. Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Borgman, C. L. 2009. Scholarship in the Digital Age: Blurring theBoundaries between the Sciences and the Humanities (Keynote Talk).Digital Humanities Conference. College Park, MD. Jun. 2009. AccessedMarch 2013. http://works.bepress.com/borgman/216.
Borgman, C. L. 2010. The Digital Future is Now: A Call to Action forthe Humanities. Digital Humanities Quarterly 3 (4). Accessed March2013. http://works.bepress.com/borgman/233.
Brockman, W. S., Neumann, L., Palmer, C. L. and Tidline. T. J. 2002.Scholarly Work in the Humanities and the Evolving Information Environment. Washington: Digital Library Federation and the Council onLibrary and Information Resources. Accessed March 2013. http://www.diglib.org/pubs/dlf095/index.htm.
Bryant, J., Matthews, G. and Walton, G. 2009. Academic libraries andsocial and learning space: A case study of Loughborough University Library, UK. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 41 (1),7-18.http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0961000608099895
Cann, A., Dimitriou, K. And Hooley, T. Social Media: A Guide forResearchers. London: Research Information Network. Accessed March 2013. http://derby.openrepository.com/derby/bitstream/10545/196715/6/social%20media%20guide%20for%20screen.pdf.
Case, D. O. 2008. Looking for information: A survey of research oninformation seeking, needs & behavior. Philadelphia: ASIST. Chapter 11.
Ellis, D. 1989. A behavioural approach to information retrieval design.Journal of Documentation 59 (3), 318-338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb026843
Ellis, D. 1993. Modeling the information seeking patterns of academicresearchers: the grounded theory approach. Library Quarterly 63 (4),469-486.http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/602622
Ellis, D., Cox, C. and Hall, K. 1993. A comparison of the informationseeking patterns of researchers in the physical and social sciences. Journal of Documentation 49 (4), 356-369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb026919
Fisher, K. E. and Julien, H. 2009. Information behaviour. Annual Reviewof Information Science and Technology 43 (1), 1-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aris.2009.1440430114
Foster, I. and Kesselman, C. ed. 1999. The Grid: Blueprint for a NewComputing Infrappucture. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Gaslikova, I. 1999. Information Seeking in Context and the developmentof information systems. Information Research 5 (1), paper 67. Accessed March 2013. http://informationr.net/ir/5-1/paper67.html.
Haglund, L. and Olsson, P. 2008. The Impact on University Libraries ofChanges in Information Behavior Among Academic Researchers: A Multiple Case Study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 34 (1), 52-59.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2007.11.010
Hey, T. and Trefethen, A. E. 2002. The UK e-Science Core Programme andthe Grid. Future Generation Computer Systems 18, 1017-1031. Accessed March 2013. http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/257644/1/UKeScienceCoreProg.pdf
Kuhlthau, C. C. 2004. Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Libraryand Information Services. 2nd edition. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Kuhlthau, C. C. 1991. Inside the search process: information seekingfrom the user's perspective. Journal of the American Society forInformation Science 42, 361-371.http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199106)42:5<361::AID-ASI6>3.0.CO;2-#
Kuhlthau, C. C. 1993. Seeking meaning: a process approach to libraryand information services. Norwood, N. J.: Ablex.
Line, M. 1971. The information needs of social scientists: an overviewof INFROSS. Aslib Proceedings 23 (8), 412-434.http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb050298
Lipps, J. H. 1999. This is science! In Evolution: Investigating theEvidence. Paleontological Society Special Publication, vol. 9, editedby Scotchmoor, J. and Springer, D. A., 3-16. Accessed March 2013. http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/people/jlipps/science.html.
Maron, N. and Smith, K. K. 2008. Current Models of Digital ScholarlyCommunication: Results of an Investigation Conducted by IthakaStrategic Services for the Association of Research Libraries. AccessedMarch 2013. http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/current-models-report.pdf.
Meho, L. I. and Tibbo, H. R. 2003. Modeling the information-seekingbehavior of social scientists: Ellis' study revisited. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54, 570-587. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.10244
Menzel, H. 1966. Information Needs and Uses in Science and Technology. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 1, 41-69.
Nicholas, D. 2001. Assessing information needs. 2nd edition, London: Aslib.
Paisley, W. J. 1968. Information Needs and Uses. Annual Review ofInformation Science and Technology 3, 1-30.
Palmer, C. L. and Cragin, M. H. 2008. Scholarship and disciplinarypractices. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 42 (1), 163-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aris.2008.1440420112
Palmer, C. L., Teffeau, L. C. and Pirmann, C. M. 2009. Scholarly Information Practices in the Online Environment: Themes from the Literature and Implications for Library Service Development. Accessed March 2013. www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2009/2009-02.pdf.
Palmer, J. 1991a. Scientists and information. 1. Using cluster analysisto identify information style. Journal of Documentation 47 (2),105-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb026873
Palmer, J. 1991b. Scientists and information. 2. Personal factors ininformation behaviour. Journal of Documentation 47 (3), 254-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eb026880
Prabha C., Silipigni C. L., Olszewski L. and Jenkins, L. R. 2007. Whatis enough? Satisficing information needs. Journal of Documentation 63(1), 74-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00220410710723894
Project Academic libraries of the future. 2011. Accessed March 2013. http://www.futurelibraries.info/content/page/academic-libraries-future-2.
Rowlands, I. and Fieldhouse, M. 2007. Information behaviour of theresearcher of the future, Work Package I: Trends in Scholarly Information Behaviour. Accessed March 2013. www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/ggworkpackagei.pdf.
Tenopir, C., Allard S., Bates B., Levine K. J., King D. W., Birch B.,Mays R. and Caldwell C. 2011. Perceived Value of Scholarly Articles. Learned Publishing 24, 123-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/20110207
University of Minnesota Libraries. 2006. A multi-dimensional frameworkfor academic support: final report. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Libraries. Accessed March 2013. http://conservancy.umn.edu/bitppeam/5540/1/UMN_Multi-dimensional_Framework_Final_Report.pdf.
Unsworth, J. 2000. Scholarly primitives: What methods do humanitiesresearchers have in common, and how might our tools reflect this? Symposium on Humanities Computing: Formal Methods, ExperimentalPractice. King's College, London. Accessed March 2013. http://www3.isrl.illinois.edu/~unsworth//Kings.5-00/primitives.html.
Vakkari, P. 1999. Task complexity, problem structure and informationactions: integrating studies of information seeking and informationretrieval. Information Processing & Management 35 (6), 819-837.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4573(99)00028-X
Vilar, B., Pisanski J. and Južnič P. 2012. Are librarians familiar withinformation seeking behaviour of teachers and researchers in theirrespective institutions? In Libraries in the Digital Age (LIDA)Proceedings. Accessed March 2013.http://ozk.unizd.hr/proceedings/index.php/lida2012/article/download/51/25.
Williams, P. and Rowlands, I. 2007. Information behaviour of theresearcher of the future, Work Package II: The Literature on YoungPeople and their Information Behaviour. Accessed March 2013. www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/ggworkpackageii.pdf.
Wilson, T. D. 2000. Recent trends in user studies: action research andqualitative methods. Information Research 5 (3), paper 76. AccessedMarch 2013. http://informationr.net/ir/5-3/paper76.html.
Witt, M. 2009. Institutional Repositories and Research Data Curation ina Distributed Environment. Library Trends 57 (2), 191-201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/lib.0.0029
Preuzimanja
Objavljeno
Broj časopisa
Rubrika
Licenca
This work is licensed under a KreativniCommons Attribution-NonCommercial Međunarodne licence.
