图书馆创客空间研究系统综述

IF 2.4 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Soo Hyeon Kim , Yong Ju Jung , Gi Woong Choi
{"title":"图书馆创客空间研究系统综述","authors":"Soo Hyeon Kim ,&nbsp;Yong Ju Jung ,&nbsp;Gi Woong Choi","doi":"10.1016/j.lisr.2022.101202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Despite the abundance of research on library makerspaces, </span>systematic reviews<span> of library makerspace research are lacking. As research on library makerspaces advances, the field needs reliable empirical findings to examine the impact of library makerspaces and identify research areas that are valuable for future research. Guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, 43 out of 838 records were selected for the systematic review. The overall trend of research methodologies and theories, settings, participants, research purposes, as well as tools, technologies and programming in library makerspace research were identified. The findings reveal that qualitative studies that were descriptive in nature were the predominant approaches. While appropriate literatures were explored, theoretical frameworks were less used. This systematic review contributes new areas and directions for future research, including the need for expansion of research methodologies and theoretical frameworks and investigation of diverse users and types of making.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":47618,"journal":{"name":"Library & Information Science Research","volume":"44 4","pages":"Article 101202"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A systematic review of library makerspaces research\",\"authors\":\"Soo Hyeon Kim ,&nbsp;Yong Ju Jung ,&nbsp;Gi Woong Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.lisr.2022.101202\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>Despite the abundance of research on library makerspaces, </span>systematic reviews<span> of library makerspace research are lacking. As research on library makerspaces advances, the field needs reliable empirical findings to examine the impact of library makerspaces and identify research areas that are valuable for future research. Guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, 43 out of 838 records were selected for the systematic review. The overall trend of research methodologies and theories, settings, participants, research purposes, as well as tools, technologies and programming in library makerspace research were identified. The findings reveal that qualitative studies that were descriptive in nature were the predominant approaches. While appropriate literatures were explored, theoretical frameworks were less used. This systematic review contributes new areas and directions for future research, including the need for expansion of research methodologies and theoretical frameworks and investigation of diverse users and types of making.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47618,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Library & Information Science Research\",\"volume\":\"44 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 101202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Library & Information Science Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818822000652\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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":"Library & Information Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818822000652","RegionNum":3,"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: 2

摘要

尽管对图书馆创客空间的研究非常丰富,但对图书馆创客空间研究的系统综述却很缺乏。随着对图书馆创客空间研究的深入,该领域需要可靠的实证结果来检验图书馆创客空间的影响,并确定对未来研究有价值的研究领域。在PRISMA(优选报告项目用于系统评价和荟萃分析)声明的指导下,从838条记录中选择43条进行系统评价。确定了图书馆创客空间研究的研究方法和理论、环境、参与者、研究目的以及工具、技术和编程的总体趋势。研究结果表明,定性研究的性质是描述性的主要方法。虽然探索了适当的文献,但理论框架的使用较少。这一系统综述为未来的研究提供了新的领域和方向,包括研究方法和理论框架的扩展以及对不同用户和类型制作的调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A systematic review of library makerspaces research

Despite the abundance of research on library makerspaces, systematic reviews of library makerspace research are lacking. As research on library makerspaces advances, the field needs reliable empirical findings to examine the impact of library makerspaces and identify research areas that are valuable for future research. Guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, 43 out of 838 records were selected for the systematic review. The overall trend of research methodologies and theories, settings, participants, research purposes, as well as tools, technologies and programming in library makerspace research were identified. The findings reveal that qualitative studies that were descriptive in nature were the predominant approaches. While appropriate literatures were explored, theoretical frameworks were less used. This systematic review contributes new areas and directions for future research, including the need for expansion of research methodologies and theoretical frameworks and investigation of diverse users and types of making.

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
Library & Information Science Research
Library & Information Science Research INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
6.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Library & Information Science Research, a cross-disciplinary and refereed journal, focuses on the research process in library and information science as well as research findings and, where applicable, their practical applications and significance. All papers are subject to a double-blind reviewing process.
×
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