文学研究中的搜索工具和学术引文实践

IF 1.3 4区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Carl A. Lehnen, Glenda M. Insua
{"title":"文学研究中的搜索工具和学术引文实践","authors":"Carl A. Lehnen, Glenda M. Insua","doi":"10.1108/rsr-07-2022-0025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe wide adoption of web-scale discovery tools calls into question the usefulness and viability of traditional subject indexes. This study examines this question of usefulness in the context of the discipline of literary studies. To what extent can researchers rely on the primary database devoted to language and literature study to discover relevant scholarship, and how does the database's performance compare to other common search tools?Design/methodology/approachThe study uses a random sample of citations from articles published in the flagship journal, PMLA, to see how well the sources cited by literature scholars are covered in various search tools, including the MLA International Bibliography.FindingsOf the search tools investigated, Google Scholar found the largest number of citations, even when limiting to literary scholarship. However, the eclecticism of citations suggests that scholars benefit from using a variety of search tools and methods.Originality/valueAlthough other studies have looked at discoverability in certain subject areas, this one focuses on literary studies. An understanding of the relative coverage of different search tools can inform librarian practices and recommendations.","PeriodicalId":46478,"journal":{"name":"Reference Services Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Search tools and scholarly citation practices in literary studies\",\"authors\":\"Carl A. Lehnen, Glenda M. Insua\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/rsr-07-2022-0025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe wide adoption of web-scale discovery tools calls into question the usefulness and viability of traditional subject indexes. This study examines this question of usefulness in the context of the discipline of literary studies. To what extent can researchers rely on the primary database devoted to language and literature study to discover relevant scholarship, and how does the database's performance compare to other common search tools?Design/methodology/approachThe study uses a random sample of citations from articles published in the flagship journal, PMLA, to see how well the sources cited by literature scholars are covered in various search tools, including the MLA International Bibliography.FindingsOf the search tools investigated, Google Scholar found the largest number of citations, even when limiting to literary scholarship. However, the eclecticism of citations suggests that scholars benefit from using a variety of search tools and methods.Originality/valueAlthough other studies have looked at discoverability in certain subject areas, this one focuses on literary studies. An understanding of the relative coverage of different search tools can inform librarian practices and recommendations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Reference Services Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Reference Services Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/rsr-07-2022-0025\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reference Services Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/rsr-07-2022-0025","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的网络规模发现工具的广泛采用对传统主题索引的有用性和可行性提出了质疑。本研究在文学研究学科的背景下考察了这个有用性问题。研究人员在多大程度上可以依靠致力于语言和文学研究的主要数据库来发现相关的学术成果?与其他常见的搜索工具相比,该数据库的性能如何?设计/方法/方法本研究随机抽取了旗舰期刊《PMLA》上发表的文章的引用样本,以了解文学学者引用的来源在各种搜索工具(包括MLA International Bibliography)中的覆盖程度。在调查的搜索工具中,b谷歌Scholar发现了最多的引用,即使仅限于文学奖学金。然而,引文的折衷主义表明,学者受益于使用各种搜索工具和方法。原创性/价值虽然其他研究也关注了某些学科领域的可发现性,但本研究关注的是文学研究。了解不同搜索工具的相对覆盖范围可以为图书管理员提供实践和建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Search tools and scholarly citation practices in literary studies
PurposeThe wide adoption of web-scale discovery tools calls into question the usefulness and viability of traditional subject indexes. This study examines this question of usefulness in the context of the discipline of literary studies. To what extent can researchers rely on the primary database devoted to language and literature study to discover relevant scholarship, and how does the database's performance compare to other common search tools?Design/methodology/approachThe study uses a random sample of citations from articles published in the flagship journal, PMLA, to see how well the sources cited by literature scholars are covered in various search tools, including the MLA International Bibliography.FindingsOf the search tools investigated, Google Scholar found the largest number of citations, even when limiting to literary scholarship. However, the eclecticism of citations suggests that scholars benefit from using a variety of search tools and methods.Originality/valueAlthough other studies have looked at discoverability in certain subject areas, this one focuses on literary studies. An understanding of the relative coverage of different search tools can inform librarian practices and recommendations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Reference Services Review
Reference Services Review INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Reference Services Review (RSR ) is a quarterly, refereed journal dedicated to the enrichment of reference knowledge and the advancement of reference services. RSR covers all aspects of reference functions, including automation of reference services, evaluation and assessment of reference functions and sources, models for delivering quality reference services in all types and sizes of libraries, development and management of teaching/learning activities, promotion of information literacy programs, and partnerships with other entities to achieve reference goals and objectives. RSR prepares its readers to understand and embrace current and emerging technologies affecting reference functions, instructional services and information needs of library users.
×
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