scholarly journals Have the Most Relevant and Answerable Research Questions Facing Librarians Changed Between 2001 and 2006?

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Lewis ◽  
Lisa Cotter
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Information Access ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Professional Issues ◽  
Library And Information Studies ◽  
Information Studies ◽  
Practice Gap ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Information Practice ◽  
Published Research

Objectives - To examine the similarities and differences between research questions asked by librarians in 2001 to those posed in 2006, and to explore to what extent the published research supports the questions being asked. Methods - Questions collected in 2001 by members of the Evidence-Based Librarianship Implementation Committee (EBLIC) of the MLA Research Section were compared with questions collected in 2006 at a cross-sectoral seminar introducing evidence based library and information practice to Australian librarians. Questions from each list were categorized using the domains of librarianship proposed by Crumley and Koufogiannakis in 2001, and examined with reference to a content analysis of the library and information studies (LIS) research published in 2001 by Koufogiannakis, Slater, and Crumley in 2004. Results - In 2001 and 2006 the most commonly asked questions were in the domain of management (29%, 33%), followed by education (24%, 18.5%). In 2001 questions in the marketing/promotion category ranked lowest (1%), however representation was much greater in 2006 (18.5%) ranking an equal second with education. Questions in the lowest ranked domain in 2006 (collections, 6%) had been more common in 2001 where collections ranked third, representing 19% of the questions. Koufogiannakis, Slater, and Crumley’s content analysis of LIS research published in 2001 revealed that the most popular domain for research was information access and retrieval (38%) followed by collections (24%). Only 1% of published LIS research (seven articles) was in the domain of marketing/promotion. In contrast, 36 articles originally assigned to one of the six established domains could more appropriately have been included in a proposed new domain of professional issues. Conclusion - The disparity between questions being asked by practitioners and the evidence being generated by researchers suggests that the research-practice gap is still an issue. A content analysis of more recently published LIS research would be a useful comparison to Koufogiannakis, Slater, and Crumley’s analysis of research published in 2001.

scholarly journals EBLIG Report: Interest Group Meets in Atlantic Canada and New Co-convenors are Chosen

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 129
Author(s):  
Virginia Wilson ◽  
Lyn Currie
Keyword(s):  
Interest Group ◽  
Public Libraries ◽  
Information Access ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Full Member ◽  
International Evidence ◽  
Evidence Summary ◽  
Information Practice ◽  
Memorial University Of Newfoundland

May was a month of travel for many Evidence-Based Librarianship Interest Group (EBLIG) members. From May 6 – 11, the 4th International Evidence Based Library and Information Practice conference was held in Durham-Chapel Hill, North Carolina. From May 22 – 26, EBLIG members attended the Canadian Library Association (CLA) conference in St. John’s, Newfoundland. As the second anniversary of the formation of EBLIG has come around, the inaugural co-conveners, Lyn Currie and Virginia Wilson, are wrapping up their two-year term. Congratulations to Sue Fahey of Memorial University of Newfoundland and Renée deGannes, Canadian Dental Association, Ottawa, who have taken over the reins and accepted a two-year term as EBLIG’s new co-conveners. EBLIG has been active this past year, mainly in the area of conference workshops and sessions. At the organizers’ invitation, we successfully submitted and presented a half-day post-conference workshop for the 4th International Evidence Based Librarianship Conference. How to Assess the Evidence: A Critical Appraisal Tool for Library and Information Research, facilitated by Lindsay Glynn, of Memorial University of Newfoundland, was an extremely well-received session with nearly 30 participants in attendance. Virginia Wilson and Stephanie Hall created a practical toolkit on evidence-based library and information practice specifically for public librarians: http://ebltoolkit.pbwiki.com/. This toolkit was unveiled at the 2007 CLA conference in St. John’s by Stephanie Hall. A wiki was launched in 2007 entitled eblibrarianship: the Wiki of the Evidence Based Librarianship Interest Group (EBLIG) to facilitate interest group collaboration, sharing, and information access, as well as a means of communication: http://eblibrarianship.pbwiki.com/ EBLIG members are active in the EBLIP community and beyond: EBLIG members edited and contributed to an EBL-themed issue of Feliciter. EBLIG members are participating as editors, on the editorial advisory board, and on the evidence summary team of the open access journal, Evidence Based Library and Information Practice. As a result of a posting on the eblibrarianship wiki for the CLA conference session, Evidence-Based Librarianship: A Toolkit for Public Libraries, Virginia Wilson and Stephanie Hall have been invited to present a 1-hour audio conference for the Education Institute in the fall of 2007. International membership to the interest group is available without having to become a full member of CLA. For only $30 CAD, people residing outside of Canada can join EBLIG and take advantage of networking and continuing education opportunities. More information on international membership is available at http://www.cla.ca/about/igroups/evidence_based.htm. The past two years have been challenging and exciting. An active and engaged membership goes a long way in making this interest group vital and productive.

scholarly journals Librarians and Libraries Supporting Open Access Publishing

1969 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Jennifer Richard ◽  
Denise Koufogiannakis ◽  
Pam Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Professional Associations ◽  
Open Access Publishing ◽  
Service Development ◽  
University Of Alberta ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Library And Information Studies ◽  
Information Studies ◽  
Information Practice ◽  
The University

As new models of scholarly communication emerge, librarians and libraries have responded by developing and supporting new methods of storing and providing access to information and by creating new publishing support services. This article will examine the roles of libraries and librarians in developing and supporting open access publishing initiatives and services in higher education. Canadian university libraries have been key players in the development of these services and have been bolstered by support from librarians working through and within their professional associations on advocacy and advancement initiatives, and by significant funding from the Canadian Foundation for Innovation for the Synergies initiative – a  project designed to allow Canadian social science and humanities journals to publish online. The article also reflects on the experiences of three librarians involved in the open access movement at their libraries, within Canadian library associations, and as creators, managers, and editors in two new open access journals in the field of library and information studies: Evidence-based Library and Information Practice published out of the University of Alberta; and Partnership: the Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research hosted by the University of Guelph. As active participants in the creation of open access content within their own field, the authors are able to lend their experience to faculty in other disciplines and provide meaningful and responsive library service development.  

A Content Analysis of Women's Published Mass Communication Research, 1965–1989

1993 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 815-823 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel Dupagne ◽  
W. James Potter ◽  
Roger Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Content Analysis ◽  
Mass Communication ◽  
Mass Communications ◽  
Communication Research ◽  
Research Topics ◽  
The Past ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Media Research ◽  
Published Research

The purpose of this study is to investigate women's scholarship in mass communications from 1965 to 1989. A content analysis was conducted to examine the percentage of mass media research published by female scholars in eight leading communication journals. Additional research questions involve sex differences in research topics and methods in the published literature. The examination of 1, 391 articles reveals that the amount of published research attributable to females has grown dramatically over the past two decades. The findings also suggest few major differences between female and male scholars in research methods of published articles.

scholarly journals Bibliometric Study of Library and Information Science Journal Articles during 2014 2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (06) ◽  
pp. 390-395
Author(s):  
Ramani Ranjan Sahu ◽  
Lambodara Parabhoi
Keyword(s):  
Information Science ◽  
Library And Information Science ◽  
Science Journal ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Research Papers ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Library And Information Studies ◽  
Information Studies ◽  
Scopus Database ◽  
Published Research

Library and information science education (LIS) has been spreading out all over India. Every state, one or more institutes/universities, offers LIS education. The research papers contributed by both academics and working professionally in the libraries. This paper examines the current trends of LIS publications in India from 2014 to 2018. The study reviewed 1357 documents from 2014 to 2018 indexed in the Scopus database. The study found that majority of the 342 (25.2%) papers published in the year 2018. Favorite source for publications was DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology. Similarly, LIS Indians professional more likely to published research papers collaboratively. Further noted that most frequently used keywords were scientometric, bibliometrics, India and authorship patterns, etc. The degree of collaboration (DC) for five years was 0.79. The analysis of co-citations of reference sources or cited sources indicated that “Scientometric,” and “Annals of library and information studies” mentioned in their articles.

Research Consumerism 101: Evaluating External Evidence of Treatment Effectiveness

2008 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 43-49
Author(s):  
James L. Coyle
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Effectiveness ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Oropharyngeal Dysphagia ◽  
Clinical Importance ◽  
Professional Services ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Intervention Selection ◽  
Published Research

Abstract The modern clinician is a research consumer. Rehabilitation of oropharyngeal impairments, and prevention of the adverse outcomes of dysphagia, requires the clinician to select interventions for which evidence of a reasonable likelihood of a successful, important outcome exists. The purpose of this paper is to provide strategies for evaluation of published research regarding treatment of oropharyngeal dysphagia. This article utilizes tutorial and examples to inform and educate practitioners in methods of appraising published research. It provides and encourages the use of methods of efficiently evaluating the validity and clinical importance of published research. Additionally, it discusses the importance of the ethical obligation we, as practitioners, have to use evidence-based treatment selection methods and measurement of patient performance during therapy. The reader is provided with tactics for evaluating treatment studies to establish a study's validity and, thereby, objectively select interventions. The importance of avoiding subjective or unsubstantiated claims and using objective methods of generating empirical clinical evidence is emphasized. The ability to evaluate the quality of research provides clinicians with objective intervention selection as an important, essential component of evidence-based clinical practice. ASHA Code of Ethics (2003): Principle I, Rule F: “Individuals shall fully inform the persons they serve of the nature and possible effects of services rendered and products dispensed…” (p. 2) Principle I, Rule G: “Individuals shall evaluate the effectiveness of services rendered and of products dispensed and shall provide services or dispense products only when benefit can reasonably be expected.” (p. 2) Principle IV, Rule G: “Individuals shall not provide professional services without exercising independent professional judgment, regardless of referral source or prescription.” (p. 4)

Evidence-Based Practices for Anxiety: Has the Science-Practice Gap Narrowed?

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stacy Freheit ◽  
Gisel G. Suarez Bonilla ◽  
Christopher S. Vye ◽  
Bruce E. Clark
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Based ◽  
Science Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Practices ◽  
Practice Gap

Será que estamos precisando de uma lava jato científica?

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Antonio Marcos Andrade
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Journal ◽  
British Medical Journal ◽  
Evidence Based Medicine ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Plos Medicine ◽  
De Se ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Published Research

Em 2005, o grego John Loannidis, professor da Universidade de Stanford, publicou um artigo na PLOS Medicine intitulado “Why most published research findings are false” [1]. Ele que é dos pioneiros da chamada “meta-ciência”, disciplina que analisa o trabalho de outros cientistas, avaliou se estão respeitando as regras fundamentais que definem a boa ciência. Esse trabalho foi visto com muito espanto e indignação por parte dos pesquisadores na época, pois colocava em xeque a credibilidade da ciência.Para muitos cientistas, isso acontece porque a forma de se produzir conhecimento ficou diferente, ao ponto que seria quase irreconhecível para os grandes gênios dos séculos passados. Antigamente, se analisavam os dados em estado bruto, os autores iam às academias reproduzir suas experiências diante de todos, mas agora isso se perdeu porque os estudos são baseados em seis milhões de folhas de dados. Outra questão importante que garantia a confiabilidade dos achados era que os cientistas, independentemente de suas titulações e da relevância de suas descobertas anteriores, tinham que demonstrar seus novos achados diante de seus pares que, por sua vez, as replicavam em seus laboratórios antes de dar credibilidade à nova descoberta. Contudo, na atualidade, essas garantias veem sendo esquecidas e com isso colocando em xeque a validade de muitos estudos na área de saúde.Preocupados com a baixa qualidade dos trabalhos atuais, um grupo de pesquisadores se reuniram em 2017 e construíram um documento manifesto que acabou de ser publicado no British Medical Journal “Evidence Based Medicine Manifesto for Better Health Care” [2]. O Documento é uma iniciativa para a melhoria da qualidade das evidências em saúde. Nele se discute as possíveis causas da pouca confiabilidade científica e são apresentadas algumas alternativas para a correção do atual cenário. Segundo seus autores, os problemas estão presentes nas diferentes fases da pesquisa:Fases da elaboração dos objetivos - Objetivos inúteis. Muito do que é produzido não tem impacto científico nem clínico. Isso porque os pesquisadores estão mais interessados em produzir um número grande de artigos do que gerar conhecimento. Quase 85% dos trabalhos não geram nenhum benefício direto a humanidade.Fase do delineamento do estudo - Estudos com amostras subdimensionados, que não previnem erros aleatórios. Métodos que não previnem erros sistemáticos (viés na escolha das amostras, falta de randomização correta, viés de confusão, desfechos muito abertos). Em torno de 35% dos pesquisadores assumem terem construídos seus métodos de maneira enviesada.Fase de análise dos dados - Trinta e cinco por cento dos pesquisadores assumem práticas inadequadas no momento de análise dos dados. Muitos assumem que durante esse processo realizam várias análises simultaneamente, e as que apresentam significância estatística são transformadas em objetivos no trabalho. As revistas também têm sua parcela de culpa nesse processo já que os trabalhos com resultados positivos são mais aceitos (2x mais) que trabalhos com resultados negativos.Fase de revisão do trabalho - Muitos revisores de saúde não foram treinados para reconhecer potenciais erros sistemáticos e aleatórios nos trabalhos.Em suma é necessário que pesquisadores e revistas científicas pensem nisso. Só assim, teremos evidências de maior qualidade, estimativas estatísticas adequadas, pensamento crítico e analítico desenvolvido e prevenção dos mais comuns vieses cognitivos do pensamento.

On "Diversity" as Anti-Racism in Library and Information Studies: A Critique

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David James Hudson
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Competence ◽  
Dominant Mode ◽  
Specific Exercise ◽  
Critical Information ◽  
Racial Formations ◽  
Library And Information Studies ◽  
Information Studies ◽  
Library Studies ◽  
Political Economic ◽  
Diversity Discourse

Drawing on a range of critical race and anti-colonial writing, and focusing chiefly on Anglo-Western contexts of librarianship, this paper offers a broad critique of diversity as the dominant mode of anti-racism in LIS. After outlining diversity's core tenets, I examine the ways in which the paradigm's centering of inclusion as a core anti-racist strategy has tended to inhibit meaningful treatment of racism as a structural phenomenon. Situating LIS diversity as a liberal anti-racism, I then turn to diversity's tendency to privilege individualist narratives of (anti-)racism, particularly narratives of cultural competence, and the intersection of such individualism with broader structures of political-economic domination. Diversity's preoccupation with demographic inclusion and individual behavioural competence has, I contend, left little room in the field for substantive engagement with race as a historically contingent phenomenon: race is ultimately reified through LIS diversity discourse, effectively precluding exploration of the ways in which racial formations are differentially produced in the contextually-specific exercise of power itself. I argue that an LIS foregrounding of race as a historical construct - the assumption of its contingency - would enable deeper inquiry into the complex ways in which our field - and indeed the diversity paradigm specifically - aligns with the operations of contemporary regimes of racial subordination in the first place. I conclude with a reflection on the importance of the Journal of Critical Information and Library Studies as a potential site of critical exchange from which to articulate a sustained critique of race in and through our field.

Towards an Archival Critique: Opening Possibilities for Addressing Neoliberalism in the Archival Field

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marika Cifor ◽  
Jamie A. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Justice ◽  
Archival Studies ◽  
Ethical Practice ◽  
Political Practice ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Hands On ◽  
Library And Information Studies ◽  
Information Studies ◽  
Contemporary Life

Neoliberalism, as economic doctrine, as political practice, and even as a "governing rationality" of contemporary life and work, has been encroaching on the library and information studies (LIS) field for decades. The shift towards a conscious grappling with social justice and human rights debates and concerns in archival studies scholarship and practice since the 1990s opens the possibility for addressing neoliberalism and its elusive presence. Despite its far-reaching influence, neoliberalism has yet to be substantively addressed in archival discourse. In this article, we propose a set of questions for archival practitioners and scholars to reflect on and consider through their own hands-on practices, research, and productions with records, records creators, and distinct archival communities in order to develop an ongoing archival critique. The goal of this critique is to move towards "an ethical practice of community, as an important mode of participation." This article marks a starting point for critically engaging the archival studies discipline along with the LIS field more broadly by interrogating the discursive and material evidences and implications of neoliberalism.

Minting the Obverse: Library and Information Studies as a One-Sided Coin

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Gorichanaz
Keyword(s):  
Professional Education ◽  
Liberal Arts ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Human Knowledge ◽  
Research Department ◽  
Library And Information Studies ◽  
Information Studies ◽  
Key Concepts

A synthesis of the work of Michael Buckland reveals the critique that, for too long, LIS has been a one-sided coin. Growing out of professional education, LIS has traditionally nurtured only its applied, practical and empirical side. Challenging this imbalance, emerging research in LIS points to the development of the basic, liberal arts and conceptual side of the discipline. Indeed, the advent of JCLIS reflects this trend. An interest in basic LIS is welcome for a number of reasons: By clarifying key concepts, it will lead to improved practice; by contributing more widely to human knowledge it will fulfill the obligations of being an academic research department; and by exploring information issues which are becoming relevant to all members of society, it will realize a greater purpose. This paper surveys the extent to which the basic side of LIS has emerged, examining the content of the top LIS journals and the curricula of the top LIS institutions. The findings point to an inchoate reverse, but one with numerous challenges that remain beyond the horizon. This paper serves as an invitation to researchers and educators to consider how they can further contribute to minting the basic side of the coin of LIS.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document