Log Usage Analysis: What it Discloses about Use, Information Seeking and Trustworthiness

D. Nicholas, David J. Clark, H. Jamali, A. Watkinson
{"title":"Log Usage Analysis: What it Discloses about Use, Information Seeking and Trustworthiness","authors":"D. Nicholas, David J. Clark, H. Jamali, A. Watkinson","doi":"10.5865/IJKCT.2014.4.1.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Trust and Authority in Scholarly Communications in the Light of the Digital Transition research project1) was a study which investigated the behaviours and attitudes of academic researchers as producers and consumers of scholarly information resources in respect to how they determine authority and trustworthiness. The research questions for the study arose out of CIBER’s studies of the virtual scholar. This paper focuses on elements of this study, mainly an analysis of a scholarly publisher’s usage logs, which was undertaken at the start of the project in order to build an evidence base, which would help calibrate the main methodological tools used by the project: interviews and questionnaire. The specific purpose of the log study was to identify and assess the digital usage behaviours that potentially raise trustworthiness and authority questions. Results from the self-report part of the study were additionally used to explain the logs. The main findings were that: 1) logs provide a good indicator of use and information seeking behaviour, albeit in respect to just a part of the information seeking journey; 2) the ‘lite’ form of information seeking behaviour observed in the logs is a sign of users trying to make their mind up in the face of a tsunami of information as to what is relevant and to be trusted; 3) Google and Google Scholar are the discovery platforms of choice for academic researchers, which partly points to the fact that they are influenced in what they use and read by ease of access; 4) usage is not a suitable proxy for quality. The paper also provides contextual data from CIBER’s previous studies.","PeriodicalId":53292,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology","volume":"4 1","pages":"23-37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5865/IJKCT.2014.4.1.023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

The Trust and Authority in Scholarly Communications in the Light of the Digital Transition research project1) was a study which investigated the behaviours and attitudes of academic researchers as producers and consumers of scholarly information resources in respect to how they determine authority and trustworthiness. The research questions for the study arose out of CIBER’s studies of the virtual scholar. This paper focuses on elements of this study, mainly an analysis of a scholarly publisher’s usage logs, which was undertaken at the start of the project in order to build an evidence base, which would help calibrate the main methodological tools used by the project: interviews and questionnaire. The specific purpose of the log study was to identify and assess the digital usage behaviours that potentially raise trustworthiness and authority questions. Results from the self-report part of the study were additionally used to explain the logs. The main findings were that: 1) logs provide a good indicator of use and information seeking behaviour, albeit in respect to just a part of the information seeking journey; 2) the ‘lite’ form of information seeking behaviour observed in the logs is a sign of users trying to make their mind up in the face of a tsunami of information as to what is relevant and to be trusted; 3) Google and Google Scholar are the discovery platforms of choice for academic researchers, which partly points to the fact that they are influenced in what they use and read by ease of access; 4) usage is not a suitable proxy for quality. The paper also provides contextual data from CIBER’s previous studies.
日志使用分析:它所揭示的用途、信息寻求和可信度
数字化转型背景下学术交流中的信任和权威研究项目(1)是一项研究,调查了学术研究人员作为学术信息资源的生产者和消费者在如何确定权威和可信度方面的行为和态度。本研究的研究问题源于CIBER对虚拟学者的研究。本文着重于本研究的要素,主要是对一个学术出版商的使用日志进行分析,这是在项目开始时进行的,以建立一个证据基础,这将有助于校准项目使用的主要方法工具:访谈和问卷调查。日志研究的具体目的是识别和评估可能引起可信度和权威问题的数字使用行为。研究中自我报告部分的结果也被用来解释日志。主要发现是:1)日志提供了使用和信息寻找行为的良好指标,尽管只是信息寻找旅程的一部分;2)在日志中观察到的“生活”形式的信息寻求行为表明,用户试图在面对信息海啸时做出决定,确定哪些是相关的,哪些是值得信任的;3)谷歌和谷歌Scholar是学术研究人员的首选发现平台,这在一定程度上表明了他们使用和阅读的内容受到易访问性的影响;4)使用率不是质量的合适代表。这篇论文还提供了CIBER之前研究的背景数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信