School of Information and Library Science
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

INLS 881/882, Research Issues and Questions I & II
Fall 2016 & Spring 2017

Optional Readings

Syllabus / Schedule / Assignments / Sakai class site

Research Areas/Topics: The scope of the field / Description and organization of information / Personal information management / Scientific data management; Big data / Curation, preservation, archives / Information/technology services / Information professions and the workforce / Information organizations and their management; Information behaviors within organizational contexts / Professional ethics / Information policy / Information needs and their expression / Information seeking behaviors and processes / Information sources / Information retrieval systems / Methods for evaluating IR systems / Interactive information retrieval / Human-computer interaction / Information use / Data/information/knowledge sharing / Social media / Scholarly work and publication / Scholarly communication and its impact

Research Skills: The role of theory; the variety of methods / Developing a research question / Reviewing the literature / Conducting your research; Research and its role in academic life / Research ethics / Developing a research proposal / Presenting your work orally / Designing and creating posters / Writing scholarly publications / Collaboration; interdisciplinary research / Diversity, inclusiveness, cultural competency / Refereeing, peer reviewing / Issues faced during the transition into a doctoral program / Development as a researcher; work-life balance

ADDITIONAL READINGS ON RESEARCH AREAS/TOPICS IN INFORMATION AND LIBRARY SCIENCE

The scope of the field

• Shu, F., Lariviere, V., Mongeon, P., Julien, C.-A., & Piper, A. (2016). On the evolution of library and information science doctoral dissertation topics in North America (1960-2013). Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 57(2), 131-142. [UNC libraries]
• Bates, M.J. (2015). The information professions: Knowledge, memory, heritage. Information Research, 20(1), Paper 655. http://www.informationr.net/ir/20-1/paper655.html.
• Hartel, J. (2012). Welcome to library and information science. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 53(3), 165-175. [UNC libraries]
• Ma, L. (2012). Meanings of information: The assumptions and research consequences of three foundational LIS theories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 63(4), 716-723. [UNC libraries]
• Wang, F.-Y., Zeng, D., Carley, K.M., & Mao, W. (2007). Social computing: From social informatics to social intelligence. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(2), 79-83. [UNC libraries]
• Never Ending Friending: A Journey into Social Networking. Fox Interactive Media, 2007. Read pages 1-36. http://blogs.forrester.com/Never_Ending_Frieding_April_2007.pdf.
• Bates, M. (2006). Fundamental forms of information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(8), 1033-1045. [UNC libraries]
• Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625-636. [UNC libraries]
• Clark, A. (1999). An embodied cognitive science? Trends in Cognitive Science, 3(9), 345-351. [UNC libraries]
• Radford, G.P. (1998). Flaubert, Foucault, and the bibliotheque fantastique: Toward a postmodern epistemology for library science. Library Trends, 46(4), 616-634. [UNC libraries]
• Buckland, M. (1996). Documentation, information science, and library science in the USA. Information Processing & Management, 32(1), 63-76. [UNC libraries]
• Buckland, M.K. (1991). Information as thing. Journal of the American Society for Information science, 42(5), 351-360. [UNC libraries]
• Shera, J.H. (1968). An epistemological foundation for library science. In Montgomery, E.B. (ed.), The Foundations of Access to Knowledge: A Symposium. Syracuse University, 7-25. [SILS reserves - BD161 .F6]
• Heilprin, L.B. (1968). Response [to Shera]. In Montgomery, E.B. (ed.), The Foundations of Access to Knowledge: A Symposium. Syracuse University, 26-35. [SILS reserves - BD161 .F6]

Description and organization of information

• Tennis, J. (2012). The strange case of eugenics: A subject's ontogeny in a long-lived classification scheme and the question of collocative integrity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 63(7), 1350-1359. [UNC libraries]
• Kless, D., Milton, S., Kazmierczak, E., & Lindenthal, J. (2015). Thesaurus and ontology structure: Formal and pragmatic differences and similarities. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(7), 1348-1366. [UNC libraries]
• Glushko, R.J., ed. (2013). The Discipline of Organizing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [SILS reserves - Z666.5 .D57 2013] (If you need an introduction to this part of our field, this would be a good place to start.)
• Hjørland, B. (2013). Facet analysis: The logical approach to knowledge organization. Information Processing & Management, 49(2), 545-557.
• Fox, M.J., & Reece, A. (2012). Which ethics? Whose morality?: An analysis of ethical standards for information organization. Knowledge Organization, 39(5), 377-383. [UNC libraries]
• Feinberg, M. (2011). Organization as expression: Classification as digital media. In Winget, M.A., & Aspray, W. (eds.), Digital Media: Technological and Social Challenges of the Interactive World. Lanham: Scarecrow Press, 115-133. [SILS - ZA4045 .D54 2011]
• Mai, J.-E. (2010). Classification in a social world: Bias and trust. Journal of Documentation, 66(5), 627-642. [UNC libraries]
• Hjørland, B. (2009). Concept theory. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 60(8), 1519-1536. [UNC libraries]
• Ding, Y., Jacob, E.K., Zhang, Z., Foo, S., Yan, E., George, N.L., & Guo, L. (2009). Perspectives on social tagging. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 60(12), 2388-2401.
• Hjørland, B. (2008). What is knowledge organization? Knowledge Organization, 35(2/3), 86-101.
• O'Connor, B.C., Kearns, J., & Anderson, R.L. (2008). Doing Things with Information: Beyond Indexing and Abstracting. Libraries Unlimited. [SILS reserves - ZA3075 .O28 2008] (Of particular interest: Definition of terms (p7-15), Considerations of representation (p21-44), and Doing things with word-based documents (p133-163).)
• Buckland, M.K. (2007). Naming in the library: Marks, meaning, and machines. In Todenhagen, C., & Thiele, W. (eds.), Nominalization, Nomination and Naming. Tubingen: Stauffenburg Verlag, 249-260. [SILS reserves - P323 .N66 2007]
• Fonseca, F. (2007). The double role of ontologies in information science research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(6), 786-793. [UNC libraries]
• Shadbolt, N., Hall, W., & Berners-Lee, T. (2006). The semantic Web revisited. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(3), 96-101. [UNC libraries]
• Listen to: Schachter, J., Butterfield, S., Wales, J., & Shirky, C. (2005). Folksonomy: How I learned to stop worrying and love the mess. Panel discussion from ETech 2005. (35 minutes). [http://www.itconversations.com/shows/detail464.html]
• Mai, J.-E. (2004). Classification in context: Relativity, reality, and representation. Knowledge Organization, 31(1), 39-48. [SILS Library]
• Pinto, H.S., & Martins, J.P. (2004). Ontologies: How can they be built? Knowledge and Information Systems, 6(4), 441-464. [UNC libraries]
• Jacob, E. K. (2004). Classification and categorization: A difference that makes a difference. Library Trends, 52(3), 515-540. [UNC libraries]
• Chu, H. (2003). Information Representation and Retrieval in the Digital Age. Medford, NJ: Published for ASIST by Information Today. [SILS Library - Z666.5 .C48 2003]
• Binwal, J.C., & Lalhmachhuana. (2001). Knowledge representation: Concept, techniques and the analytico-synthetic paradigm. Knowledge Organization, 28(1), 5-16. [SILS Library]
• Sowa, J. (2000). Chapter 1, Logic. In Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations. Brooks/Cole, 1-43. [Available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Kwasnik, B. (1999). The role of classification in knowledge representation and discovery. Library Trends, 48(1), 22-47. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost]
• Miller, G. (1995). WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38(11), 39-41. [ACM Digital Library]
• Hjorland, B. (1992). The concept of 'subject' in information science. Journal of Documentation, 48(2), 172-200. [SILS library]
• Wilson, P. (1968). Two Kinds of Power: An Essay on Bibliographical Control. Berkeley: University of California Press. (Chapters II, V, and VI are of particular interest for this topical area.) [SILS Library - Z674 .C3 v.5; full view available via Google Book Search]

Personal information management

• Bruce, H.W., Wenning, A., Jones, E., Vinson, J., & Jones, W. (2011). Seeking an ideal solution to the management of personal information collections. Information Research, 16(1), Paper 462. http://www.informationr.net/ir/16-1/paper462.html
• Whittaker, S. (2011). Personal information management: From information consumption to curation. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 45, 1-62. [UNC libraries]
• Barreau, D. (2008). The persistence of behavior and form in the organization of personal information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2), 307-317. [UNC libraries]
• Bernstein, M., Van Kleek, M., Karger, D., & schraefel, mc. (2008). Information scraps: How and why information eludes our personal information management tools. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 26(4), Article 24. [ACM Digital Library]
• Jones, W. (2007). How people keep and organize their information. In Jones, W., & Teevan, J. (eds.), Personal Information Management. Seattle: University of Washington Press, pages 35-56. [SILS library - HD30.2 .P472 2007]
• Jones, W. (2007). Personal information management. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 41, 453-504. [SILS Library Reference - Z699.A1 A65; UNC libraries]
• Kelly, D. (2006). Evaluating personal information management behavior and tools. Communications of the ACM, 49(1), 84-86. [ACM Digital Library]
• Dumais, S., Cutrell, E., Cadiz, J., Jancke, G., Sarin, R., & Robbins, D.C. (2003). Stuff I've seen: A system for personal information retrieval and re-use. Proceedings of the 26th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 72-79. [ACM Digital Library]
• Barreau, D.K., & Nardi, B.A. (1995). Finding and reminding: File organization from the desktop. ACM SIG CHI Bulletin, 27(3), 39-43. [ACM Digital Library]

Scientific data management; Big data

• Bishoff, C., & Johnston, L. (2015). Approaches to data sharing: An analysis of NSF data management plans from a large research university. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 3(2), eP 1231. http://jlsc-pub.org/articles/abstract/10.7710/2162-3309.1231/
• Shah, D.V., Cappella, J.N., & Neuman, W.R. (2015). Big data, digital media, and computational social science: Possibilities and perils. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1), 6-13. [UNC libraries]
• Corti, L., Van den Eynden, V., Bishop, L., & Woollard, M. (2014). Management and Sharing Research Data: A Guide to Good Practice. Los Angeles: Sage. [Davis - H62 .A5 C67 2014]
• Moore, R., Rajasekar, A., & Xu, H. (2014). Extensible generic data management software. Journal of Open Research Software, 2(1), e9, p1-5. http://doi.org/10.5334/jors.ap
• Daries, M.P., Reich, J., Waldo, J., Young, E.M., Whittinghill, J., Ho, A.D., Seatong, D.T., & Chuang, I. (2014). Privacy, anonymity, and big data in the social sciences. Communications of the ACM, 57(9), 56-63. [UNC libraries]
• boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662-679. [UNC libraries]
• Borgman, C.L. (2012). The conundrum of sharing research data. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 63(6), 1059-1078. [UNC libraries]
• McKinsey Global Institute. (2011, May). Big data: The next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. McKinsey & Co. http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/big_data_the_next_frontier_for_innovation
• Edwards, P.N., Mayernik, M.S., Batcheller, A.L., Bowker, G.C., & Borgman, C.L. (2011). Science friction: Data, metadata, and collaboration. Social Studies of Science, 41(5), 667-690. [UNC libraries]
• Rajasekar, A., Moore, R., Wan, M., Schroeder, W., & Hasan, A. (2010). Applying rules as policies for large-scale data sharing. Paper presented a the 2010 International Conference on Intelligent Systems, Modelling and Simulation, 322-327. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ISMS.2010.66
• Lynch, C. (2008). How do your data grow? [Commentary]. Nature, 455(4), 28-29. [UNC libraries]
• Borgman, C.L., Wallis, J.C., & Enyedy, N. (2007). Little science confronts the data deluge: Habit ecology, embedded sensor networks, and digital libraries. International Journal of Digital Libraries, 7, 17-30. [UNC libraries]

Curation, preservation, archives

• Allard, S., Lee, C., McGovern, N., & Bishop, A. (2016). The Open Data Imperative: How the Cultural Heritage Community Can Address the Federal Mandate. Council on Library and Information Resources. https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub171/pub171.
• Freund, L., & Toms, E.G. (2016). Interacting with archival finding aids. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 67(4), 994-1008. [UNC libraries]
• Rhee, H.L. (2015). Reflections on archival user studies. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 54(4), 29-42. [http://journals.ala.org/rusq/article/view/5707/7098]
• Vilar, P., & Sauperl, A. (2015). Archives, quo vadis et cum quibus?: Archivists' self-perceptions and perceptions of users of contemporary archives. International Journal of Information Management, 35(5), 551-560. [UNC libraries]
• Trace, C.B., & Francisco-Revilla, L. (2015). The value and complexity of collection arrangement for evidentiary work. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(9), 1857-1882. [UNC libraries]
• Bartlett, J.A. (2014). Internet reviews: Crowdsourcing in libraries and archives. Kentucky Libraries, 78(2), 6-8. [UNC libraries]
• Downing, N.M. (2014). The UNC Law Library's redaction of its digitized collection of North Carolina Supreme Court briefs: A case study. Master's paper, School of Information & Library Science, University of North Carolina. [Carolina Digital Repository; SILS MP4123]
• Wood, S., Carbone, K., Cifor, M., Gilliland, A., & Punzalan, R. (2014). Mobilizing records: Re-framing archival description to support human rights. Archival Science, 14(3/4), 397-419. [UNC libraries]
• Lynch, C. (2013). The future of personal digital archiving: Defining the research agendas. In Hawkins, D.T. (ed.), Personal Archiving: Preserving our Digital Heritage. Information Today, 259-277. [UNC libraries, e-book]
• Cook, T. (2013). Evidence, memory, identity, and community: Four shifting archival paradigms. Archival Science, 13(2-3), 95-120.
• Carroll, E. (2013). Digital inheritance: Tackling the legal and practical issues. In Hawkins, D.T. (ed.), Personal Archiving: Preserving our Digital Heritage. Information Today, 73-84. [UNC libraries, online]
• Kim, S. (2013). Landscape of personal digital archiving activities and research. In Hawkins, D.T. (ed.), Personal Archiving: Preserving our Digital Heritage. Information Today, 153-185. [UNC libraries, online]
• Marshall, C.C. (2013). Social media, personal data, and reusing our digital legacy. In Hawkins, D.T. (ed.), Personal Archiving: Preserving our Digital Heritage. Information Today, 85-108. [UNC libraries, online]
• Ubois, J. (2013). Personal digital archives: What they are, what they could be, and why they matter. In Hawkins, D.T. (ed.), Personal Archiving: Preserving our Digital Heritage. Information Today, 1-9. [UNC libraries, online]
• Tibbo, H.R. (2012). Placing the horse before the cart: Conceptual and technical dimensions of digital curation. Historical Social Research, 37(3), 187-200. [Social Science Open Access Repository, http://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/37891]
• Watson, S., & Waterton, E. (2011). Heritage and community engagement: Finding a new agenda. In Waterton, E., & Watson, S. (eds.), Heritage and Community Engagement: Collaboration or Contestation? Routledge, 1-11. [SILS - G156.5 .H47 H457 2011]
• Lee, C.A. (2011). Collecting the externalized me: Appraisal of materials in the social web. In Lee, C.A. (ed.), I, Digital: Personal Collections in the Digital Era. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 202-238. [SILS Reserves - CD977 .I22 2011]
• Marshall, C.C. (2011). Challenges and opportunities for personal digital archiving. In Lee, C.A. (ed.), I, Digital: Personal Collections in the Digital Era. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 90-114. [SILS Reserves - CD977 .I22 2011]
• Onuf, R., & Hyry, T. (2011). Take it personally: The implications of personal records in electronic form. In Lee, C.A. (ed.), I, Digital: Personal Collections in the Digital Era. Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 241-256. [SILS Reserves - CD977 .I22 2011]
• Moyle, M., Tonra, J., & Wallace, V. (2011). Manuscript transcription by crowdsourcing: Transcribe Bentham. LIBER Quarterly, 20(3/4), 347-356. [UNC libraries]
• Flinn, A. (2010). Independent community archives and community-generated content: 'Writing, saving and sharing our histories'. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 16(1), 39-51. [UNC libraries]
• Szabo, G., & Huberman, B.A. (2010). Predicting the popularity of online content. Communications of the ACM, 53(8), 80-88. [UNC libraries]
• Flinn, A., Stevens, M., & Shepherd, E. (2009). Whose memories, whose archives? Independent community archives, autonomy and the mainstream. Archival Science, 9(1-2), 71-86. [UNC libraries]
• Marshall, C.C. (2008). From writing and analysis to the repository: Taking the scholars' perspective on scholarly archiving. Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, 251-260. [ACM Digital Library]
• Flinn, A. (2007). Community histories, community archives: Some opportunities and challenges. Journal of the Society of Archivists, 28(2), 151-176. [UNC libraries]
• Smith, A. (2007). Valuing preservation. Library Trends, 56(1), 4-25. [UNC libraries]
• Silberman, N. (2007). Cultural heritage and the information technologies: Facing the grand challenges and structural transformations of the 21st century. In Niccolucci, F. (ed.), Digital Applications for Tangible Cultural Heritage: Report on the State of teh Union: Policies, Practices and Developments in Europe, Volume 2. Budapest: Archaeolingua. http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1034&context=neil_silberman.
• Lee, C. (2007). A talk on digital preservation. UNC-CH/YouTube Information in Life Series. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHy9CW_vMp4&feature=PlayList&p=19189F4C412A6E09&index=1
• Couture, C., & Ducharme, D. (2005). Research in archival science: A status report. Archivaria, 59, 41-68. [Available online at http://journals.sfu.ca/archivar/index.php/archivaria].

Information/technology services

• Tobias, C., & Blair, A. (2015). Listen to what you cannot hear, observe what you cannot see: An Introduction to evidence-based methods for evaluating and enhancing the user experience in distance library services. Journal of Library & Information Services, 9(1-2), 148-156.
• Davies, R., & Williams, D. (2013). Towards a conceptual framework for provider information behaviour. Journal of Documentation, 69(4), 545-566. [UNC libraries]
• Tyckoson, D.A. (2011). History and functions of reference service. In Bopp, R.E., & Smith, L.C. (eds.),Refernce and Information Services: An Introduction. 4th edition. Santa Barbara: Libraries Unlimited, 3-17. [UNC libraries]
• McInerney, C.R., & Koenig, M.E.D. (2011). Knowledge Management (KM) Processes in Organizations: Theoretical Foundations and Practice. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services #18. Morgan & Claypool. [UNC libraries]
• Peters, T.A. (2011). Left to their own devices: The future of reference services on personal, portable information, communication, and entertainment devices. Reference Librarian, 52, 88-97. [UNC libraries]
• Aabo, S., Audunson, R., & Varheim, A. (2010). How do public libraries function as meeting places? Library & Information Science Research, 32(1), 16-26. [UNC libraries]
• Bardhan, I.R., Demirkan, H., Kannan, P.K., Kauffman, R.J., & Sougstad, R. (2010). An interdisciplinary perspective on IT services management and service science. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(4), 13-64. [UNC libraries]
• Maglio, P.P., & Spohrer, J. (2008). Fundamentals of service science. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 18-20. [UNC libraries]
• Burnett, G., Jaeger, P.T., & Thompson, K.M. (2008). Normative behavior and information: The social aspects of information access. Library & Information Science Research, 30(1), 56-66. [UNC libraries]
• Brown, S.W. (2008). The reference interview: Theories and practice. Library Philosophy and Practice, January, 1-8.
• Xie, H.I. (2008). Users' evaluation of digital libraries (DLs): Their uses, their criteria, and their assessment. Information Processing & Management, 44(3), 1346-1373.
• Glushko, R.J. (2008). Designing a service science discipline with discipline. IBM Systems Journal, 47(1), 15-27. [UNC libraries]
• Spohrer, J., Maglio, P. P., Bailey, J., & Gruhl, D. (2007). Steps toward a science of service systems. Computer, 40(1), 71-77. [UNC libraries]
• Pomerantz, J., & Marchionini, G. (2007). The digital library as place. Journal of Documentation, 63(4), 505-533. [UNC libraries]
• Fallis, D. (2006). Social epistemology and information science (part 2). Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 40, 486-503 (only). [UNC libraries]
• Xie, H.(I.) (2006). Evaluation of digital libraries: Criteria and problems from users' perspectives. Library & Information Science Research, 28(3), 433-452.
• Hernon, P., & Calvert, P. (2005). E-service quality in libraries: Exploring its features and dimensions. Library & Information Science Research, 27(3), 377-404. [UNC libraries]
• Bourne, C.P., & Hahn, T.B. (2003). A History of Online Information Services, 1963-1976. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [SILS Library - Z699 .B647 2003]
• Whitten, G.D. (2003). An examination of information systems service quality measurement: the contribution of the SERVQUAL instrument from the marketing literature. Proceedings of the Ninth Americas Conference on Information Systems, 2821-2830.
• Saracevic, T. (2000). Digital library evaluation: Toward an evolution of concepts. Library Trends, 49(2), 350-369.
• Hernon, P., Nitecki, D.A., & Altman, E. (1999). Service quality and customer satisfaction: An assessment and future directions. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 25(1), 9-17.
• Saracevic, T., & Kantor, P. B. (1997). Studying the value of library and information services. Part II. Methodology and taxonomy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(6), 543-563. [UNC libraries]
• Kettinger, W.J., & Lee, C.C. (1997). Pragmatic perspectives on the measurement of information systems service quality. MIS Quarterly, 21(2), 223-240. [UNC libraries]
• Blackler, F. (1995). Knowledge, knowledge work and organizations: an overview and interpretation. Organization Studies, 16(6), 1021-1046. [UNC libraries]
• Pitt, L.F., Watson, R.T., & Kavan, C.B. (1995). Service quality: A measure of information systems effectiveness. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 173-187. [UNC Libraries]
• Edwards, S., & Browne, M. (1995). Quality in information services: Do users and librarians differ in their expectations? Library & Information Science Research, 17(2), 163-182. [UNC libraries]

Information professions and the workforce

• Edwards, S. (2015, April). Mapping the library, archive, record, information and knowledge workforce. CILIP Update, 37. [SILS Library]
• Marshall, J.G. (2012). Workforce trends, issues and values. Information Services & Use, 32(3/4), 153-157. [UNC libraries]
• Moran, B.B., & Marchionini, G. (2012). Information Professionals 2050: Educating the next generation of information professionals. Information Services & Use, 32(3/4), 95-100. [UNC libraries via EBSCOhost]
• Hawk, S., Kaiser, K.M., Goles, T., Bullen, C.V., Simon, J.C., Beath, C.M., Gallagher, K.P., & Frampton, K. (2012). The information technology workforce: A comparison of critical skills of clients and service providers. Information Systems Management, 29(1), 2-12. [UNC libraries]
• King, J.L. (2011). CIO: Concept is over. Journal of Information Technology, 26, 129-138. [UNC libraries]
• Joseph, D., Ang, S., Chang, R.H.L., & Slaughter, S.A. (2010). Practical intelligence in IT: Assessing soft skills of IT professionals. Communications of the ACM, Virtual Extension, 53(2), 149-154. [UNC libraries]
• Bullen, C.V., Abraham, T., Gallagher, K., Simon, J.C., & Zwieg, P. (2009). IT workforce trends: Implications for curriculum and hiring. Communication of the Association for Information Systems, 24, Article 9. [UNC libraries]
• Stokker, J., & Hallam, G. (2009). The right person, in the right job, with the right skills, at the right time: A workforce-planning model that goes beyond metrics. LIbrary Management, 15(8/9), 561-571. [UNC libraries]
• Simon, J.C., Kaiser, K.M., Beath, C., Goles, T., & Gallagher, K. (2007). Information technology workforce skills: Does size matter? Information Systems Management, 24, 345-359. [UNC libraries]
• SIM Advocacy Research Team. (2006, March 6). The Information Technology Workforce: Trends and Implications 2005-2008. Prepared for the Society of Information Management. http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.simnet.org/resource/resmgr/community_files/2005-2008_it_workforce.pdf.
• Gallivan, M., Adya, M., Ahuja, M., Hoonakker, P., & Woszcaynski, A. (2006). Workforce diversity in the IT profession: Recognizing the resolving the shortage of women and minority employees. SIGMIS CPR '06: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGMIS CPR Conference on Computer Personnel Research, 44-45. [UNC libraries]

Information organizations and their management; Information behaviors within organizational contexts

• Smutny, Z. (2016). Social informatics as a concept: Widening the discourse. Journal of Information Science, 42(5), 681-710. [UNC libraries]
• Fayard, A.-L., & Weeks, J. (2014). Affordances for practice. Information & Organization, 24(4), 236-249. [UNC libraries]
• Karunakaran, A., Reddy, M.C., & Spence, P.R. (2013). Toward a model of collabortive information behavior in organizations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 64(12), 2437-2451. [UNC libraries]
• Gilstrap, D.L. (2009). A complex systems framework for research on leadership and organizational dynamics in academic libraries. portal: Libraries and the Academy, 9(1), 57-77. [UNC libraries]
• Choo, C.W. (2007). Information seeking in organizations: epistemic contexts and contests. Information Research, 12(2), Paper 298. http://informationr.net/ir/12-2/paper298.html.
• Garcia, A.C., Dawed, M.E., Kohne, M.L., Miller, F.M., & Growschwitz, S.F. (2006). Workplace studies and technological change. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 40, 393-437. [UNC libraries]
• Bharati, P., & Chaudhury, A. (2006). Studying the current status of technology adoption. Communications of the ACM, 49(10), 88-93. [UNC libraries]
• Moran, B.B. (2005). Continuity and change: The integration of Oxford University's libraries. Library Quarterly, 75(3), 262-294. [UNC libraries]
• Moore, J.E., & Love, M.S. (2005). IT professionals as organizational citizens. Communications of the ACM, 48(6), 88-93. [UNC libraries]
• Weick, K. (2001). Making Sense of the Organization. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing. [Davis Library - HD57.7 .W447 2001]
• Orlikowski, W.J., & Barley, S.R. (2001). Technology and institutions: What can research on information technology and research on organizations learn from each other? MIS Quarterly, 25(2), 145-165. [UNC libraries]
• Kreitz, P.A. (2008). Best practices for managing organizational diversity. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(2), 101-120. [UNC libraries]Eason, K. (2001). Changing perspectives on the organizational consequences of information technology. Behaviour & Information Technology, 20(5), 323-328. [UNC libraries]
• Pfeffer, J. (1998). Seven practices of successful organizations. California Management Review, 40(2), 96-124. [UNC libraries, via EbscoHost]

Professional ethics

• For additional readings, see the reading list for INLS 584, Information Ethics, available via the SILS course schedule each semester taught.
• Floridi, L. (2008). Foundations of information ethics. In Himma, K.E., & Tavani, H.T. (eds.), The Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics. Wiley, 3-23.
• Mathiesen, K., & Fallis, D. (2008). Information ethics and the library profession. In Himma, K.E., & Tavani, H.T. (eds.), The Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics. Wiley, 221-244.
• Fallis, D. (2007). Information ethics for twenty-first century library professionals. Library Hi Tech, 25(1), 23-36. (Skim entire article; focus on two sections: The theories, and Limitations of the theories)
• Kizza, J.M. (2007). Ethics and the professions. In Ethical and Social Issues in the Information Age. London: Springer, 65-96. (Read sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.4.1.)
• Huff, C. (1996). Unintentional power in the development of computer systems. Computers & Society, 26(4), 6-9.

Information policy

• Hansson, K., Belkacem, K., & Ekenberg, L. (2015). Open government and democracy: A research review. Social Science Computer Review, 33(5), 540-555.
• Zuboff, S. (2015). Big other: Surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology, 30(1), 75-89.
• Oltmann, S.M. (2015). Data, censorship, and politics: Analyzing the restricted flow of information in federal scientific policy development. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(1), 144-161.
• Duff, A.S. (2015). Needing NoDI (normal democratic information)? The problem of information poverty in post-industrial society. Information, Communication & Society, 18(1), 63-77.
• Newell, B.C. (2014). Technopolicing, surveillance, and citizen oversight: A neorepublication theory of liberty and information control. Government Information Quarterly, 31(3), 421-431.
• Zuiderwijk, A., & Janssen, M. (2014). Open data policies, their implementation and impact: A framework for comparison. Government Information Quarterly, 31(1), 17-29. [UNC libraries]
• Lips, A.M.B. (2013). Reconstructing, attributing and fixating citizen identities in digital-era government. Media, Culture & Society, 35(1), 61-70.
• Morris, D.S., & Morris, J.S. (2013). Digital inequality and participation in the political process: Real or imagined? Social Science Computer Review, 31(5), 589-600.
• Dobusch, L. (2012). The digital public domain: Relevance and regulation. Information & Communications Technology Law, 21(2), 179-202.
• Mager, A. (2012). Algorithmic ideology: How capitalist society shapes search engines. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 769-787.
• Dahlberg, L. (2011). Re-constructing digital democracy: An outline of four 'positions'. New Media & Society, 13(6), 855-872.
• Dawes, S.S. (2010). Stewardship and usefulness: Policy principles for information-based transparency. Government Information Quarterly, 27(4, special issue), 377-383. [UNC libraries]
• Relly, J.E., & Sabharwal, M. (2009). Perceptions of transparency of government policymaking: A cross-national study. Government Information Quarterly, 26(1, special issue), 148-157. [UNC libraries]
• Relyea, H.C. (2009). Congress and freedom of information: A retrospective and a look at a current issue. Government Information Quarterly, 26(3), 437-440.
• Relyea, H.C. (2009). Federal freedom of information policy: Highlights of recent developments. Government Information Quarterly, 26(2), 314-320.
• Martin, S., & Rabina, D. (2009). National security, individual privacy and public access to government-held information: The need for changing perspectives in a global environment. Information & Communications Technology Law, 18(1), 13-18.
• Britz, J.J. (2008). Making the global information society good: A social justice perspective on the ethical dimensions of the global information society. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(7), 1171-1183.
• Strickland, L.S. (2005). Domestic security surveillance and civil liberties. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 39, 433-513.
• Halstuk, M.E., & Chamberlin, B.F. (2001). Open government in the digital age: The legislative history of how Congress established a right of public access to electronic information held by federal agencies. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(1), 45-63.

Information needs and their expression

• Ingwersen, P. (1982). Search procedures in the library--Analyzed from the cognitive point of view. Journal of Documentation, 38(3), 165-191. [SILS Library; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Day, R.E. (2011). Death of the user: Reconceptualizing subjects, objects, and their relations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 62(1), 78-88. [UNC libraries]

Information seeking behaviors and processes

• Agarwal, N.K. (2015). Towards a definition of serendipity in information behaviour. Information Research, 20(3), paper 675. http://InformationR.net/ir/20-3/pape675.html.
• Lueg, C.P. (2015). The missing link: Information behavior research and its estranged relationship with embodiment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 66(12), 2704-2707. [UNC libraries]
• Tabak, E. (2014). Jumping between context and users: A difficulty in tracing information practices. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 65(11), 2223-2232. (Read p.2223-2226.) [UNC libraries]
• Zhang, P., & Soergel, D. (2014). Toward a comprehensive model of the cognitive process and mechanisms of individual sensemaking. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 65(9), 1733-1756. [UNC libraries]
• Wilson, T.D. (2010). Fifty years of information behavior research. Bulletin of ASIST, 36(3), 27-34. [UNC libraries]
• Fisher, K.E., & Naumer, C.M. (2006). Information grounds: Theoretical basis and empirical findings on information flow in social settings. In Spink, A., & Cole, C. (eds.), New Directions in Human Information Behavior. Springer, 93-111. [UNC libraries, online book]
• Case, D.O. (2006). Information behavior. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 40, 293-327. [UNC libraries]
• Wildemuth, B.M. (2004). The effects of domain knowledge on search tactic formulation.  Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(3), 246-258. [UNC libraries]
• Rieh, S.Y. (2004). On the web at home: Information seeking and web searching in the home environment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(8), 743-753. [UNC libraries]
• Erdelez, S. (2004). Investigation of information encountering in the controlled research environment. Information Processing & Management, 40(6), 1013-1025. [UNC libraries]
• Vakkari, P., Pannanen, M., & Serola, S. (2003). Changes of search terms and tactics while writing a research proposal: longitudinal case study. Information Processing & Management, 39(3), 445-464. [UNC libraries]
• Vakkari, P. (2001). A theory of the task-based information retrieval process: A summary and generalisation of a longitudinal study. Journal of Documentation, 57(1), 44-60.
• Chatman, E. (1999). A theory of life in the round. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(3), 207-217. [UNC libraries]
• Hert, C.A. (1997). What do we know about user behavior on information retrieval systems? In Understanding Information Retrieval Interactions: Theoretical and Practical Implications. Greenwich, CT: Ablex, 13-50. [SILS Library - ZA4060 .H67 1997]
• Chatman, E. (1996). The impoverished life-world of outsiders. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(3), 193-206. [UNC libraries]
• Savolainen, R. (1993). The sense-making theory: Reviewing the interests of a user-centered approach to information seeking and use. Information Processing & Management, 29(1), 13-28. [UNC libraries]
• Ellis, D. (1993). Modeling the information-seeking patterns of academic researchers: a grounded theory approach. Library Quarterly, 63(4), 469-486. [UNC libraries]
• Kuhlthau, C. C. (1991). Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user's perspective. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(5), 361-371. [UNC libraries]
• Bates, M. (1989). The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface. Online Review, 13(5), 407-424. [SILS Library]

Information sources

• Lucassen, T., & Schraagen, J.M. (2012). Propensity to trust and the influence of source and medium cues in credibility evaluation. Journal of Information Science, 38(6), 566-577.
• Agarwal, N.K., Xu, Y. (C.), & Poo, D.C.C. (2011). A context-based investigation into source use by information seekers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 62(6), 1098-1104. [UNC libraries]
• Lu, L., & Yuan, Y.C. (2011). Shall I Google it or ask the competent villain down the hall? The moderating role of information need in information source selection. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 62(1), 133-145.
• Woudstra, L., & van den Hooff, B. (2008). Inside the source selection process: Selection criteria for human information sources. Information Processing & Management, 44(3), 1267-1278.
• Kink, N., & Hess, T. (2008). Search engines as substitutes for traditional information sources? An investigation of media choice. The Information Society, 24(1), 18-29.
• Savolainen, R. (2008). Source preferences in the context of seeking problem-specific information. Information Processing & Management, 44(1), 274-293.
• Griffiths, J.R., & Brophy, P. (2005). Student searching behavior and the web: Use of academic resources and Google. Library Trends, 53(4), 539-554.
• Savolainen, R., & Kari, J. (2004). Placing the Internet in information source horizons: a study of information seeking by Internet users in the context of self-development. Library & Information Science Research, 26(4), 415-433.
• Hertzum, M., Andersen, H.H.K., Andersen, V., & Hansen, C.B. (2002). Trust in information sources: seeking information from people, documents, and virtual agents. Interacting with Computers, 14(5), 575-599.
• Sonnenwald, D. H., Wildemuth, B. M., & Harmon, G. L. (2001). A research method to investigate information seeking using the concept of information horizons: an example from a study of lower socio-economic students’ information seeking behaviour. The New Review of Information Behaviour Research, 2, 65-86.

Information retrieval systems

• Hjorlund, B. (2015). Classical databases and knowledge organizaiton: A case for Boolean retrieval and human decision-making during searches. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(8), 1559-1575. [UNC libraries]
• Baeza-Yates, R., & Ribeiro-Neto, B. (2011). IR models. In Modern Information Retrieval. Harlow, England: Pearson Education, p57-64. [SILS reserves - ZA3075 .B34 2011]
• Järvelin, K. (2011). IR research: Systems, interaction, evaluation and theories. ACM SIGIR Forum, 45(2), 17-31. [UNC libraries]
• Baeza-Yates, R., & Ribeiro-Neto, B. (2011). Introduction. In Modern Information Retrieval. Harlow, England: Pearson Education, p1-12. [SILS reserves - ZA3075 .B34 2011]
• Croft, W.B., Metzler, D., & Strohman, T. (2010). Search Engines: Information Retrieval in Practice. Boston: Addison Wesley. [SILS reserves - TK5105.884 .C765 2010]
• Callan, J., Allan, J., Clarke, C.L.A., Dumais, S., Evans, D.A., Sanderson, M., & Zhai, C.X. (2007). Meeting of the MINDS: An information retrieval research agenda. SIGIR Forum, 41(2), 25-34. [ACM Digital Library]
• Wleklinski, J. M. (2005). Studying google scholar: Wall to wall coverage? Online, 29(3), 22-26. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost]
• Croft, W. B. (ed.) (2000). Combining approaches to information retrieval. In Advances in Information Retrieval: Recent Research from the Center for Intelligent Information Retrieval. Boston: Kluwer, p1-36. [SILS library - QA76.9.D3 A34835 2000]

Methods for evaluating IR systems

• Kelly, D. (2009). Methods for evaluating interactive information retrieval systems with users. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, 3(1-2), 1-232. [UNC libraries]
• Järvelin, K. (2007). An analysis of two approaches in information retrieval: From frameworks to study designs. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(7), 971-986. [UNC libraries]
• Jones, K.S. (2006). What's the value of TREC - Is there a gap to jump or a chasm to bridge? SIGIR Forum, 40(1), 10-20. [UNC libraries]
• Harman, D.K., & Voorhees, E.M. (2006). TREC: An overview. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 40, 113-155. [UNC libraries]
• Kekalainen, J., & Jarvelin, K. (2002). Evaluating information retrieval systems under the challenges of interaction and multidimensional dynamic relevance. Proceedings of the 4th CoLIS Conference, 253-270. [http://www.sis.uta.fi/infim/julkaisut/fire/JK05.pdf]

Interactive information retrieval

• Kelly, D., & Azzopardi, L. (2015). How many results per page? A study of SERP size, search behavior and user experience. Proceedings of the 38th Annual ACM International Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '15), Santiago, Chile, 183-192. [UNC libraries]
• Smith, C.L. (2015). Domain-independent search expertise: A description of procedural knowledge gained during guided instruction. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(7), 1388-1405. [UNC libraries]
• Borlund, P. (2010). The cognitive viewpoint: The essence of information retrieval interaction. In Larsen, B. (ed.), The Janus Faced Scholar: A Festschrift in Honour of Peter Ingwersen. Copenhagen: Royal School of Library and Information Science, 23-34. http://vbn.aau.dk/files/90357690/JanusFacedScholer_Festschrift_PeterIngwersen_2010.pdf
• Hjørland, B. (2010). The foundation of the concept of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 61(2), 217-237. [UNC libraries]
• Spärck-Jones, K., Robertson, S.E., & Sanderson, M. (2007). Ambiguous requests: Implications for retrieval tests, systems and theories. SIGIR Forum, 41(2), 8-17. [ACM Digital Library]
• Marchionini, G. (2006). Exploratory search: From finding to understanding. Communications of the ACM, 49(4), 41-46. [ACM Digital Library]
• Borlund, P. (2003). The concept of relevance in IR. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 54(10), 913-925. [UNC libraries]
• Vakkari, P. (2001). A theory of the task-based information retrieval process: A summary and generalisation of a longitudinal study. Journal of Documentation, 57(1), 44-60. [UNC libraries]
• Savage-Knepshield, P.A., & Belkin, N.J. (1999). Interaction in information retrieval: Trends over time. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(12), 1067-1082. [UNC libraries]
• Ingwersen, P., & Willett, P. (1995). An introduction to algorithmic and cognitive approaches for information retrieval. Libri, 45(3/4), 160-177. [SILS Library]
• Belkin, N.J. (1990). The cognitive viewpoint in information science. Journal of Information Science: Principles and Practice, 16(1), 11-15. [SILS Library]

Human-computer interaction

• Hearst, M.A. (2014). What's missing from collaborative search?IEEE Computer, 47(3), 58-61. [UNC libraries]
• Wilson, M.L. (2012). Search User Interface Design. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services #20. Morgan & Claypool. [UNC libraries]
• Makri, S., Blandford, A., Cox, A.L., Attfield, S., & Warwick, C. (2011). Evaluating the Information Behaviour methods: Formative evaluations of two methods for assessing the functionality and usability of electronic information resources. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 69(7/8), 455-482. [UNC libraries]
• Ellcessor, E. (2010). Bridging disability divides: A critical history of Web content accessibility through 2001. Information, Communication & Society, 13(3), 289-308. [UNC libraries]
• Peters, C., & Bradbard, D.A. (2010). Web accessibility: An introduction and ethical implications. Journal of Information, Communication & Ethics in Society, 8(2), 206-232. [UNC libraries]
• Wilson, M.L., schraefel, m.c., & White, R.W. (2009). Evaluating advanced search interfaces using established information-seeking models. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 60(7), 1407-1422. [UNC libraries]
• Capra, R., Marchionini, G., Oh, J.S., Stutzman, F., & Zhang, Y. (2007). Effects of structure and interaction style on distinct search tasks. Proceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, 442-451. [UNC libraries]
• Vaughan, M.W., & Dillon, A. (2006). Why structure and genre matter for users of digital information: A longitudinal experiment with readers of a web-based newspaper. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(6), 502-526. [UNC libraries]
• White, R.W., & Ruthven, I. (2006). A study of interface support mechanisms for interactive informtion retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(7), 933-948. [UNC libraries]
• Carroll, J.M. (ed.) (2003). HCI Models, Theories, and Frameworks: Toward a Multidisciplinary Science. Morgan Kaufmann. [SILS Library - QA76.9.H85 C367 2003; also available online via UNC libraries]

Information use

• Rieh, S.Y., Collins-Thompson, K., Hansen, P., & Lee, H.-J. (2016). towards searching as a learning process: A review of current perspectives and future directions. Journal of Information Science, 42(1), 19-34. [UNC libraries]
• Harris, V. & Hepburn, P. (2013). Trends in image use by historians and the implications for librarians and archivists. College & Research Libraries, 74(3), 272-287. [UNC Libraries]
• Savolainen, R. (2009). Epistemic work and knowing in practice as conceptualizations of information use. INformation Research, 14(1), Paper 392. http://informationr.net/ir/14-1/paper392.html.
• Savolainen, R. (2009). Interpreting informational cues: An explorative study on information use among prospective homebuyers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 60(11), 2244-2254. [UNC libraries]
• Lusoli, Wainer; Miltgen, Caroline. (2009). Young People and Emerging Digital Services: An Exploratory Survey on Motivations, Perceptions and Acceptance of Risks. Executive Summary. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, EUR 23765 EN, 9-11. http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC50089.pdf.
• Wang, P., & White, M.D. (1999). A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study II. Decisions at the reading and citing stages. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(2), 98-114. [UNC libraries]
• Manguel, A. (1996). A History of Reading. New York: Viking. [Davis LIbrary - Z1003 .M292 1996]

Data/information/knowledge sharing

• Allard, S., Lee, C., McGovern, N., & Bishop, A. (2016). The Open Data Imperative: How the Cultural Heritage Community Can Address the Federal Mandate. Council on Library and Information Resources. https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub171/pub171.
• Kim, Y., & Stanton, J.M. (2016). Institutional and individual factors affecting scientists' data-sharing behaviors: A multilevel analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 67(4), 776-799.
• Tenopir, C., Dalton, E.D., Allard, S., Frame, M., Pjesivac, I., Birch, B., Pollock, D., & Dorsett, K. (2015). Changes in data sharing and data reuse practices and perceptions among scientists worldwide. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0134826. [Online]
• Corti, L., & Van den Eynden, V. (2015). Learning to manage and share data: Jump-starting the research methods curriculum. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(5), 545-559. [UNC libraries]
• Candela, L., Castelli, D., Manghi, P., & Tani, A. (2015). Data journals: A survey. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(9), 1747-1762. [UNC libraries]
• Xu, B., & LI, D. (2015). An empirical study of the motivations for content contribution and community participation in Wikipedia. Information & Management, 52(3), 275-286. [UNC libraries]
• Tenopir, C., Sandusky, R.J., Allard, S., & Birch, B. (2014). Research data management services in academic research libraries and perceptions of librarians. Library & Information Science Research, 36(2), 84-90. [UNC libraries]
• Sayogo, D.S., & Pardo, T.A. (2013). Exploring the determinants of scientific data sharing: Understanding the motivation to publish research data. Government Information Quarterly, 30(Supplement 1), S19-S31. [UNC libraries]
• Yuan, Y.C., Zhao, X., Liao, Q., & Chi, C. (2013). The use of different information and communication technologies to support knowledge sharing in organizations: From e-mail to micro-blogging. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 64(8), 1659-1670. [UNC libraries]
• Hartter, J., Ryan, S.J., MacKenzie, C.A., Parker, J.N., & Strasser, C.A. (2013). Spatially explicit data: Stewardship and ethical challenges in science. PLoS Biology, 11(9), article e1001634.
• Wallis, J.C., Rolando, E., & Borgman, C.L. (2013). If we share data, will anyone use them? Data sharing and reuse in the long tail of science and technology. PLoS ONE, 8(7): e67332. [Online]
• Nielsen, M.A. (2012). Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [SILS - Q180.55.M4 N54 2012; also available as an ebook]
• Widen, G., & Hansen, P. (2012). Managing collaborative information sharing: Bridging research on information culture and collaborative information behaviour. Information Research, 17(4), Paper 538. http://InformationR.net/ir/17-4/paper538.html.
• Tabak, E., & Willson, M. (2012). A non-linear model of information sharing practices in academic communities. Library & Information Science Research, 34(2), 110-116. [UNC libraries]
• Chennamaneni, A. Teng, J.T.C., & Raja, M.K. (2012). A unified model of knowledge sharing behaviours: Theoretical development and empirical test. Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(11), 1097-1115. [UNC libraries]
• Tenopir, C., Allard, S., Douglass K., Aydinoglu, A.U., Wu, L., Read, E., et al. (2011), Data sharing by scientists: Practices and perceptions. PLoS ONE 6(6): e21101. [Online]
• De Schutter, E. (2010). Data publishing and scientific journals: The future of the scientific paper in a world of shared data [Editorial]. Neuroinformatics, 8, 151-153. [UNC libraries]
• Wilson, T.D. (2010). Information sharing: An exploration of the literature and some propositions. Information Research, 15(4), Paper 440. http://informationr.net/ir/15-4/paper440.html.
• Cronin, B., & Meho, L.I. (2008). The shifting balance of intellectual trade in information studies. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(4), 551-564. [UNC libraries]
• Springer, M., Dulabahn, B., Michel, P., Natanson, B., Reser, D., Woodward, D., & Zinkham, H. (2008). For the Common Good: The Library of Congress Flickr Photo Project. Library of Congress. http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/flickr_report_final.pdf.
• Erdelez, S., & Rioux, K. (2000). Sharing information encountered for others on the Web. New Review of Information Behaviour Research, 1, 219-233. [UNC libraries]
• Constant, D., Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1994). What's mine is ours, or is it? A study of attitudes about information sharing. Information Systems Research, 594), 400-421. [UNC libraries]

Social media

• Cao, J., Gasoglu, K.A., Sheng, H., & Lowry, P.B. (2015). A systematic review of social networks research in information systems: Building a foundation for exciting future research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 36(Article 37), 727-758. [Online]
• Bouadjenek, M.R., Hacid, H., & Bouzeghoub, M. (2016). Social networks and information retrieval, how are they converging? A survey, a taxonomy and an analysis of social information retrieval approaches and platforms. Information Systems, 56(1), 1-18. [UNC libraries]
• Ngai, E.W.T., Tao, S.S.C., & Moon, K.K.L. (2015). Social media research: Theories, constructs, and conceptual frameworks. International Journal of Information Management, 35(1), 33-44. [UNC libraries]
• Zafarani, R., & Liu, H. (2015). Evaluation without ground truth in social media research. Communications of the ACM, 58(6), 54-60. [UNC libraries]
• Rubenstein, E.L. (2015). "They are always there for me": The convergence of social support and information in an online breast cancer community. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(7), 1418-1430. [UNC libraries]
• Mozafari,N., & Hamzeh, A. (2015). An enriched social behavioural informatino diffusion model in social networks. Journal of Information Science, 41(3), 273-283. [UNC libraries]
• Ocepek, M.G., & Westbrook, L. (2015). Question, answer, compare: A cross-category comparison of answers on question and answer websites. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 21(3-4), 212-226. [UNC libraries]
• Gazan, R. (2011). Social Q&A [Advances in Information Science]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 62(12), 2301-2312. [UNC libraries]
• De Jaegher, H., Di Paolo, E., & Gallagher, S. (2010). Can social interaction constitute social cognition? Trends in Cognitive Science, 14(10), 441-447. [UNC libraries]
• Shirky, C. (2009). How social media can make history. TED: Ideas Worth Spreading. http://www.ted.com/talks/clay_shirky_how_cellphones_twitter_facebook_can_make_history.html.
• Thelwall, M. (2008). Social networks, gender, and friending: An analysis of MySpace member profiles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(8), 1321-1330. [UNC libaries]
• Harper, F.M., Raban, D., Rafaeli, S., & Konstan, J.A. (2008). Predictors of answer quality in online Q&A sites.ACM SIG CHI Proceedings, 865-874. [UNC libraries]
• Bejune, M., & Ronan, J. (2008). Social Software in Libraries: Executive Summary. Association of Research Libraries, SPEC Kit 304, 11-16. http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/spec304web.pdf.
• Parameswaran, M., & Whinston, A.B. (2007). Research issues in social computing. Journal of the AIS, 8(6), article 1. (Read the first three sections, p337-343. [UNC libraries]
• Wang, Fei-Yue; Zeng, Daniel; Carley, Kathleen M.; Mao, Wenji. (2007). Social computing: From social informatics to social intelligence. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(2), 79-83. [UNC libraries]

Scholarly work and publication

• Budd, J.M. (2015). Productivity of U.S. LIS and ischool faculty. Library & Information Science Research, 37(4), 290-295. [UNC libraries]
• Garcia, J.A., Rodriguez-Sanchez, R.; & Fdez-Valdivia, J. (2015). Bias and effort in peer review. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(10), 2020-2030. [UNC libraries]
• Hemminger, B.M., & TerMaat, J. (2014). Annotating for the world: Attitudes toward sharing scholarly annotations. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 65(11), 2278-2292. [UNC libraries]
• Ossenblok, T.L.B., Verleysen, F.T., & Engels, T.C.E. (2014). Coauthorship of journal articles and book chapters in the social sciences and humanities (2000-2010). Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 65(5), 882-897. [UNC Libraries]
• Bjork, B.-C., Laakso, M., Welling, P., & Paetau, P. (2014). Anatomy of green open access. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 65(2), 237-250. [UNC libraries]
• Priem, J. (2013, Mar. 27). Beyond the paper. Nature, 495(7442), 437-440. [UNC libraries]
• Eyre-Walker, A., & Stoletzki, N. (2013). The assessment of science: The relative merits of post-publication review, the impact factor, and the number of citations. PLoS Biology, 11(10), e1001675. [Online]
• Acord, S.K., & Harley, D. (2013). Credit, time, and personality: The human challenges to sharing scholarly work using Web 2.0. New Media & Society, 15(3), 379-397. [UNC libraries]
• Priem, J., & Hemminger, B.M. (2012). Decoupling the scholarly journal. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 6, Article 19. [UNC libraries]
• Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Russell, B., Canty, N., & Watkinson, A. (2011). Social media use in the resarch workflow. Learned Publishing, 24(3), 183-195. [UNC libraries]
• King, D.W., & Tenopir, C. (2011). Some economic aspects of the scholarly journal system. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 45, 295-366. [UNC libraries]
• Bornmann, L. (2011). Scientific peer review. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 45, Chapter 5. [UNC libraries]
• Stoilescu, D., & McDougall, D. (2010). Starting to publish academic research as a doctoral student. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 5. [Online]
• Gilbert, E. (2009, Feb.). Elizabeth Gilbert on nurturing creativity. TED talks. http://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_gilbert_on_genius.html.
• Clarke, R. (2009). Journal self-citation XIX: Self-plagiarism and self-citation: A practical guide based on underlying principles. Communications of the AIS, 25(Article 19), 155-164. [UNC libraries]
• Lane, N. (2008). US science and technology: An uncoordinated system that seems to work. Technology in Society, 30(3-4), 248-263. [UNC libraries]
• Birnholtz, J.P. (2006). What does it mean to be an author? The intersection of credit, contribution, and collaboration in science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(13), 1758-1770. [UNC libraries]
• Lee, A.S. (2007). Crafting a paper for publication. Communications of the AIS, 20, article 7, 33-40. [CAIS online]
• Mingers, J. (2002). The long and winding road: Getting papers published in top journals. Communications of the AIS, 8, article 22. [CAIS online]
• Axtell, J. (1998). Twenty-five reasons to publish. In The Pleasures of Academe: A Celebration & Defense of Higher Education. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 48-68. [Davis - LA227.4 .A98 1998]
• Ashford, S. J. B. (1996). The publishing process: The struggle for meaning. In Frost, P., & Taylor, M. S. (eds.), Rhythms of Academic Life: Personal Accounts of Careers in Academia. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 119-127. [Davis - LB1778.2 .R59 1996]

Scholarly communication and its impact

• Ivanovic, D., & Ho, Y.-S. (2016). Highly cited articles in the Information Science and Library Science category in Social Science Citation Index: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 48(1), 36-46. [UNC libraries]
• Jamali, H.R., & Alimohammadi, D. (2015). Blog citations as indicators of the societal impact of research: Content analysis of social sciences blogs. International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology, 5(1), 15-32. [UNC libraries]
• Chakraborty, T., Kumar, S., Goyal, P., Ganguly, N., & Mukherjee, A. (2015). On the categorization of scientific citation profiles in computer science. Communications of the ACM, 58(9), 82-90. [UNC libraries]
• Roemer, R.C., & Borchardt, R. (2015). Meaningful Metrics: A 21st-Century Librarian's Guide to Bibliometrics, Altmetrics, and Research Impact. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries. [Park Library - Z669.8 M43 2015]
• Onodera, N., & Yoshikane, F. (2014). Factors affecting citation rates of research articles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 2014. [UNC libraries]
• Milard, B. (2014). The social circles behind scientific references: Relationships between citing and cited authors in chemistry publications. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 65(12), 2459-2468. [UNC libraries]
• Bornmann, L. (2012). What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? A literature survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 64(2), 217-233. [UNC libraries]
• Kousha, K., Thelwall, M., &U Rezaie, S. (2011). Assessing the citation impact of books: The role of Google Books, Google Scholar, and Scopus. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 62(11), 2147-2164. [UNC libraries]
• Ding, Y., & Cronin, B. (2011). Popular and/or prestigious? Measures of scholarly esteem. Information Processing & Management, 47(1), 80-96. [UNC libraries]
• Danell, R. (2011). Can the quality of scientific work be predicted using information on the author's track record? Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 62(1), 50-60. [UNC libraries]
• Priem, J., & Hemminber, B.M. (2010). Scientometrics 2.0: Toward new metrics of scholarly impact on the social Web. First Monday, 15(7). [Online]
• Blessinger, K., & Hrycaj, P. (2010). Highly cited articles in library and information science: An analysis of content and authorship trends. Library & Information Science Research, 32(2), 156-162. [UNC libraries]
• Meho, L.I., & Sugimoto, C. (2009). Assessing the scholarly mpact of information studies: A tale of two citation databases -- Scopus and Web of Science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 60(12), 2499-2508. [UNC libraries]
• Browman, H.I., & Stergiou, K.I. (eds.) (2008). The use and misuse of bibliometric indices in evaluating scholarly performance. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8(1). Theme issue. [http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/esep/v8/n1/]
• Leydesdorff, L. (2008). Caveats for the use of citation indicators in research and journal evaluations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(2), 278-287. [UNC libraries]
• Cronin, B., & Meho, L. (2006). Using the h-index to rank influential information scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(9), 1275-1278. [UNC libraries]
• Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Smith, J.A., & Luce, R. (2005). Toward alternative metrics of journal impact: A comparison of download and citation data. Information Processing & Management, 41(6), 1419-1440. [UNC libraries]
• Antelman, K. (2004). Do open-access articles have a greater research impact? College & Research Libraries, 65(5), 372-382. [UNC libraries]
• Zhao, J.L., & Resh, V.H. (2001). Internet publishing and transformation of knowledge processes. Communications of the ACM, 44(12), 103-109. [UNC libraries]
• Crane, D. (1972). Invisible Colleges. Chicago:  Univ. of Chicago Press. [Davis Library, Undergrad Library - Q175.5 .C7 (1988)]

ADDITIONAL READINGS ON SKILLS THAT NOVICE RESEARCHERS SHOULD ACQUIRE

The role of theory; the variety of methods

• Jaccard, J., & Jacoby, J. (2010). Theory Contruction and Model-Building Skills: A Practical Guide for Social Scientists. New York: Guilford Press. [SILS reserves - H62 .J29 2010]
• Budd, J.M. (2007). What we say about research: Rhetoric and argument in library and information science. Library Quarterly, 76(2), 220-240. [UNC libraries]
• Gregor, S. (2006). The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 611-642. Read pages 611-622. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost]
• Kim, S.J., & Jeong, D.Y. (2006). An analysis of the development and use of theory in library and information science research articles. Library & Information Science Research, 28(4), 548-562. [UNC libraries]
• Bates, M. (2005). An introduction to metatheories, theories, and models. In Fisher, K. E., Erdelez, S., & McKechnie, L. (eds.), Theories of Information Behavior. Medford, N.J. : Published for the American Society for Information Science and Technology by Information Today, 1-24. [SILS Library - ZA3075.T465 2005]
• Pettigrew, K., & McKechnie, L. (2001). The use of theory in information science research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 52(1), 62-73. [UNC libraries]
• Glazier, J.D. (1997). Appendix A: Philosophical presuppositions of research. In Powell, R.R., Basic Research Methods for Librarians. 3rd ed. Ablex Publishing. [SILS Reserves - Z669.7 .P68 1997]
• Poole, H. (1985). Theories of the Middle Range. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. [SILS reserves - Z669.7 .P66 1985]

• Rawson, C., & Hughes-Hassell, S. (2015). Research by design: The promise of design-based research for school library research. School Libraries Worldwide, 21(2), 11-25.
• Kelly, D. (2009). Methods for evaluating interactive information retrieval systems with users. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval, 3(1-2), 1-224.
• Wildemuth, B.M. (2009). Applications of Social Research Methods to Questions in Information and Library Science. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. [SILS Reserve - Z669.7 .W55 2009]
• Vakkari, P. (2008). Trends and approaches in information behaviour research. Information Research, (13)4, Paper 361. Available at: http://InformationR.net/ir/13-4/paper361.html.
• Hider, P., & Pymm, B. (2008). Empirical research methods reported in high-profile LIS journal literature. Library & Information Science Research, (30)108, 114-109.
• Losee, R.M. (1993). Research and Evaluation for Information Professionals. San Diego: Academic Press. [SILS - Z669.8 .L67 1993]

Developing a research question

• Schwartz-Shea, P., & Yanow, D. (2012). Ways of knowing: Research questions and logics of inquiry. In Interpretive Research Design: Concepts and Processes. New York: Routledge, 24-44. [Davis - Q175 .S4144 2012]
• Bent, M., Gannon-Leary, P., & Webb, J. (2008). Information literacy in a researcher's learning life: The seven ages of research. New Review of Information Networking, 13(2), 81-99. [UNC libraries]
• Krathwohl, D.R., & Smith, N.L. (2005). The description of the problem. In How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 45-74. [SILS Reserves - LB2369 .K723 2005]
• Booth, A. (2006). Clear and present questions: Formulating questions for evidence based practice. Library Hi Tech, 24(3), 355-368. [UNC libraries]
• Koufogiannakis, D., & Crumley, E. (2006). Research in librarianship: Issues to consider. Library Hi Tech, 24(3), 324-340.
• Wilson, T.D. (2002). 'Information science' and research methods. Paper to appear in Slovak, in Knižnicná a informacná veda (Library and Information Science), published by the Department of Library and Information Science, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovak Republic. Updated 26th March 2002. http://informationr.net/tdw/publ/papers/slovak02.html.
• Bryman, A. (2007). The research question in social research: What is its role? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 10(1), 5-20.

Reviewing the literature

• Boell, S.K., & Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. (2015). On being 'systematic' in literature reviews in IS. Journal of Information Technology, 30, 161-173.
• Jaidka, K., Khoo, C.S.G., & Na, J.-C. (2013). Literature review writing: How information is selected and transformed. Aslib Proceedings, 65(3), 303-325. [UNC libraries]

Conducting your research; Research and its role in academic life

• Gardner, S.K. (2009). Conceptualizing success in doctoral education: Perspectives of faculty in seven disciplines. Review of Higher Education, 32(3), 383-406. [UNC libraries]
• Gosling, P. (2006). Dealing with setbacks. In Mastering Your PhD: Survival and Success in the Doctoral Years and Beyond. Berlin: Springer, 43-49 (Chapter 7). [Davis - LB2386 .G67 2006; also available as an e-book]
• Marshall, S. (2004). Time management. In Your PhD Companion. Oxford: How To Books, 57-60. [Davis - LB2386 .M377 2004]
• Bichel, R., & Cheney, D. (2004). The information cycle: How today's events are tomorrow's information. http://www.libraries.psu.edu/instruction/infocycle/infocycle.html.
• Axtell, J. (1998). (Mis)understanding academic work. In The Pleasures of Academe: A Celebration & Defense of Higher Education. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 3-26. [SILS Reserve - LA227.4 .A98 1998]

Research ethics

• Mongeon, P., & Lariviere, V. (2016). Costly collaborations: The impact of scientific fraud on co-authors' careers. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 67(3), 535-542. [UNC libraries]
• Israel, M. (2015). Research Ethics and Integrity for Social Scientists: Beyond Regulatory Compliance. 2nd ed. Sage. [UNC libraries online]
• Kenneally, E. (2015). How to throw the race to the bottom: Revisiting signals for ethical and legal research using online data. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 45(1), 4-10. [UNC libraries]
• Nichols-Casebolt, A. (2012). Research Integrity and Responsible Conduct of Research. New York: Oxford University Press. [UNC libraries online]
• Barrera, D., & Simpson, B. (2012). Much ado about deception: Consequences of deceiving research participants in the social sciences. Sociological Methods & Research, 41(3), 383-413. [UNC libraries]
• Beaulieu, A., & Estalella, A. (2012). Rethinking research ethics for mediated settings. Information, Communication & Society, 15(1), 23-42. [UNC libraries]
• Miller, T., & Bell, L. (2012). Consenting to what? Issues of access, gate-keeping and 'informed' consent. In Ethics in Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Sage, 61-76. [UNC libraries online; Davis - H62 .E777 2012]
• Tyldum, G. (2012). Ethics or access? Balancing informed consent against the application of institutional, economic or emotional pressures in recruiting respondents for research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 15(3), 199-210. [UNC libraries]
• Costley, C., Elliott, G., & Gibbs, P. (2010). Research ethics and insider-researchers. In Doing Work Based Research: Approaches to Enquiry for Insider-Researchers. Los Angeles: Sage, 25-36. [UNC libraries online]
• Churchill, H., & Sanders, T. (2007). Managing the ethics of academia. In Getting Your PhD: A Practical Insider's Guide. Los Angeles: Sage, 45-57. [SILS reserve - LB2386 .C58 2007]
• Carlin, A.P. (2003). Disciplinary debates and bases of interdisciplinary studies: The place of resarch ethics in library and information science. Library & Information Science Research, 25(1), 3-18. [UNC libraries]
• Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Engineering; Institute of Medicine. (1995). On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Developing a research proposal (including a proposal for grant funding)

• Ogden, E.H. (2007). Complete Your Dissertation or Thesis in Two Semesters or Less. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. [Davis - LB2369 .O33 2007]
• Eve, J. (2008). Writing a research proposal: Planning and communicating your research ideas effectively. Library and Information Research, 32(102), 18-28. [http://www.lirg.org.uk/lir/ojs/index.php/lir/article/view/92/136]
• Churchill, H., & Sanders, T. (2007). Formulating a research question. In Getting Your PhD: A Practical Insider's Guide. Los Angeles: Sage, 22-32. [SILS reserve - LB2386 .C58 2007]
• Trochim, W.M.K. (2006). Research Methods Knowledge Base.
  • Foundations: Philosophy of Research, http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/philosophy.php
  • Foundations: Conceptualizing, http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/resprob.php
• Metoyer-Duran, C., & Hernon, P. (1994). Problem statements in research proposals and published research: A case study of researchers' viewpoints. Library & Information Science Research, 16(2), 105-118. [SILS Library]
• Locke, L.F., Spirduso, W.W., & Silverman, S.J. (1992). Developing proposals: Some common problems. In Galliers, R. (ed.), Information Systems Research: Issues, Methods and Practical Guidelines. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific, 182-207. See, especially, the Figure. [SILS Library - T58.6 .I515 1992; also available via Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Bargar, R.R., & Duncan, J.K. (1982). Cultivating creative endeavor in doctoral research. Journal of Higher Education, 53(1), 1-31. [UNC libraries]

Presenting your work orally

• Radel, J. (2012). Effective presentations. KU Medical Center On-Line Tutorial Series. http://www.kumc.edu/SAH/OTEd/jradel/effective.html.
• Northwest Center for Public Health Practice. (2012). Effective Presentations: A Toolkit for Engaging an Audience. School of Public Health, University of Washington. https://www.ag.ndsu.edu/evaluation/documents/effective-presentations-a-toolkit-for-engaging-an-audience.
• Alley, M. (n.d.) Rethinking presentation slides: The assertion-evidence structure. Leonhard Center, Penn State University. http://www.writing.engr.psu.edu/slides.html. (Includes video examples of student presentations using this approach; more examples and guidance available via main site, http://www.engr.psu.edu/speaking/SPEECH.html.)
• Browse the resources available at http://www.effectivemeetings.com/presenting/index.asp

Designing and creating posters

• Purrington, C.B. (2015). Designing conference posters. http://colinpurrington.com/tips/poster-design.
• Alley, M. (n.d.) Scientific posters. In Speaking Guidelines for Engineering and Science. http://www.writing.engr.psu.edu/posters.html.
• Introduction to Poster Making. Research Poster Tutorials, Makesigns. http://www.makesigns.com/tutorials/.
• Hess, G., Tosney, K., & Liegel, L. (2013). Creating effective poster presentations: An effective poster. http://www.ncsu.edu/project/posters/
• Sherman, R.O. (2010). How to create an effective poster presentation. American Nurse Today, 13-15. [Online]
• Hoffman, H. (2007). Creating effective poster presentations using PowerPoint. Presented at M.E.D.S. Workshop, May 2007. [Online]

Writing scholarly publications (conference papers, journal articles)

• Nitecki, D.A. (2010). Finalizing a research paper -- Findings through conclusion [Guest editorial]. Library & Information Science Research, 32(1), 1-3. [UNC libraries]
• Hartley, J. (2008). Academic Writing and Publishing: A Practical Handbook. London: Routledge. [SILS Reserve - PN146 .H373 2008]
• Creedy, J. (2008). Writing a research paper. In Research Without Tears: From the First Ideas to Published Output. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Pub., 25-49. [Davis - LB2369 .C72 2008]
• Churchill, H., & Sanders, T. (2007). Writing up and writer's block [and] Papers and publishing. In Getting Your PhD: A Practical Insider's Guide. Los Angeles: Sage, 73-94. [SILS reserve - LB2386 .C58 2007]
• Clarke, R. (2006). Plagiarism by academics: More complex than it seems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(2), 91-121. [UNC libraries]
• Kock, N., & Davison, R. (2003). Dealing with plagiarism in the information systems research community: A look at factors that drive plagiarism and ways to address them. MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 511-532. [UNC libraries, via EBSCOhost]

Collaboration; Interdisciplinary research

• Madsen, D. (2016). Liberating interdisciplinarity from myth: An exploration of the discursive constructino of identities in information studies. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 67(11), 2697-2709. [UNC libraries]
• Chung, E., Kwon, N., & Lee, J. (2016). Understanding scientific collaboration in the research life cycle: Bio- and nanoscientists' motivations, information-sharing and communicaiton practices, and barriers to collaboration. JOurnal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 67(8), 1836-3848. [UNC libraries]
• Lariviere, V., Gingras, Y.,, Sugimoto, C.R., & Tsou, A. (2015). Team size matters: Collaboration and scientific impact since 1900. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(7), 1323-1332. [UNC libraries]
• Raasch, C., Lee, V., Spaeth, S., & Herstatt, C. (2013). The rise and fall of interdisciplinary research: The case of open source innovation. Research Policy, 42, 1138-1151. [UNC libraries]
• Sugimoto, C.R., Ni, C., Russell, T.G., & Bychowski, B. (2011). Academic genealogy as an indicator of interdisciplinarity: An examination of dissertation networks in library and information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 62(9), 1808-1828. [UNC libraries]
• Klein, J.T. (2010). A taxonomy of interdisciplinarity. In Frodeman, R., Klein, J.T., Mitcham, C., & Holbrook, J.B. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 15-30. [Davis - BD255 .O94 2010]
• Reychav, I., & Te'eni, D. (2009). Knowledge exchange in the shrines of knowledge: The "how's" and "where's" of knowledge sharing processes. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1266-1277. [UNC libraries]
• Chua, A.Y.K., & Yang, C.C. (2008). The shift toward multi-disciplinarity in information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 59(13), 2156-2170. [UNC libraries]
• Wuchty, S., Jones, B.F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036-1039. [UNC libraries]
• Birnholtz, J.P. (2007). When do researchers collaborate? Toward a model of collaboration propensity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 58(14), 2226-2239. [UNC libraries]
• Aboelela, S.W., Larson, E., Bakken, S., Carrasquillo, O., Formicola, A., Glied, S.A., Haas, J., & Gebbie, K.M. (2007). Defining interdisciplinary research: Conclusions from a critical review of hte literature. Health Services Research, 42(1), 329-346. [UNC libraries]
• Bronstein, L. R. (2003). A model for interdisciplinary collaboration. Social Work, 48(3), 297-306. [UNC libraries, EBSCOhost]
• Sanz-Menendez, L., Bordons, M., & Zulueta, M.A. (2001). Interdisciplinarity as a multidimensional concept: Its measure in three different research areas. Research Evaluation, 10(1), 47-58. [UNC libraries]
• Palmer, C.L. (1999). Structures and strategies of interdisciplinary science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(3), 242-253. [UNC libraries]
• Pierce, S. (1999). Boundary crossing in research literature as a means of interdisciplinary information transfer. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(3), 271-279. [UNC libraries]
• Nissani, M. (1997). Ten cheers for interdisciplinarity: The case for interdisciplinary knowledge and research. Social Science Journal, 34(2), 201-216. [UNC libraries]
• Kouzes, R.T., Myers, J.D., & Wulf, W.A. (1996). Collaboratories: Doing science on the internet. IEEE Computer, 29(8), 40-46. [UNC libraries]

Diversity, inclusiveness, cultural competency

• Oxley, R. (2013). iDiversity and LIS Education: Student-based Groups Promoting Cultural Competence as a Vision for the Profession. Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy, 83, 236-242.
• Jaeger, P.T., Subramaniam, M., Jones, C.B., & Bertot, J.C. (2011). Diversity and LIS education: Inclusion and the age of information. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 52(3), 166-183. [UNC libraries]
• Subramaniam, M., & Jaeger, P. (2011). Weaving diversity into LIS: An examination of diversity course offerings in iSchool programs. Education for Information, 28(1), 109-127. [UNC libraries]
• Jaeger, P.T., Bertot, J.C., & Franklin, R.E. (2010). Diversity, inclusion, and underrepresented populations in LIS research. Library Quarterly, 80(2), 175-181. [UNC libraries]
• Subramaniam, M., & Jaeger, P.T. (2010). Modeling inclusive practice?: Attracting diverse faculty and future faculty to the information workforce. Library Trends, 59(1/2), 109-127. [UNC libraries, via Project Muse]
• Mestre, L.S. (2010). Librarians working with diverse populations: What impact does cultural competency training have on their efforts? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 36(6), 479-488. [UNC libraries]
• Overall, P.M. (2010). The effect of service learning on LIS students' understanding of diversity issues related to equity of access. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 51(4), 251-266. [UNC libraries]
• Adkins, D., & Espinal, I. (2004). The diversity mandate. Library Journal, 45(2), 149-161. [http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2004/04/careers/the-diversity-mandate/]

Refereeing; Peer reviewing

• Iivari, J. (2016). How to improve the quality of peer reviews? Three suggestions for system-level changes. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 38, Article 12. [Online] (Note: the same issue includes a related article and two responses to this article.)
• Bornmann, L. (2011). Scientific peer review. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 45, 199-245. [UNC libraries]
• Bornmann, L., & Daniel, H.-D. (2010). The manuscript reviewing process: Empirical research on review requests, review sequences, and decision rules in peer review. Library & Information Science Research, 32(1), 5-12. [UNC libraries]
• Schwartz, C., & Hernon, P. (2010). Some thoughts on peer review. Library & Information Science Research, 32(1), 13-15. [UNC libraries]
• Lepak, D. (2009). Editor's comments: What is good reviewing? Academy of Management Review, 34(3), 375-381. [UNC libraries]
• Marchionini, G. (2008). Editorial: Reviewer merits and review control in an age of electronic manuscript management systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 26(4), Article 25. [ACM Digital Library]
• Hartley, J. (2008). Refereeing. In Academic Writing and Publishing: A Practical Handbook. London: Routledge, 151-159. [SILS Reserves - PN146 .H373 2008]
• Edwards, P.M. (2007). Developing as a writer: Refereeing manuscripts for peer-reviewed LIS journals. College & Research Libraries News, 68(10): 630-631. [Available online or in Course Tools: Resources on class Sakai site]
• Baruch, Y., Sullivan, S.E., & Schepmyer, H.N. (2006). Winning Reviews: A Guide for Evaluating Scholarly Writing. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan. [Davis Library - PN162 .B36 2006]
• Kitchin, R., & Fuller, D. (2005). Appendix 3: Refereeing for journals, publishers and conferences. In Academic's Guide to Publishing. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 170-175. [UNC libraries e-book; Davis Library - Z286.S37 K58 2005]
• Koh, C. E. (2003). IS journal review process: A survey on IS research practices and journal review issues. Information & Management, 40(8), 743-756. [UNC libraries]
• Lee, A.S. (1995). Reviewing a manuscript for publication. Journal of Operations Management, 13(1), 87-92. [UNC libraries]

Issues faced during the transition into a doctoral program

• Mantai, L. (2015). Feeling like a researcher: Experiences of early doctoral students in Australia. Studies in Higher Education, early online. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1067603]
• Acker, S., & Haque, E. (2015). The struggle to make sense of doctoral study. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(2), 229-241. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.956699]
• Portnoi, L.M., Chlopecki, A.L.A., & Peregrina-Kretz, D. (2015). Expanding the doctoral student socialization framework: The central role of student agency. Journal of Faculty Development, 29(3), 5-16. [UNC libraries]
• Pifer, M.J., & Baker, V.L. (2014). "It could be just because I'm different": Otherness and its outcomes in doctoral education. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 7(1), 14-30.
• Baptista, A.V. (2014). 'With all my heart': Mature students' emotions while doing a research-based PhD. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 114, 914-918. [UNC libraries]
• Foot, R., Crowe, R.A., Tollafield, K.A., & Allan, C.E. (2014). Exploring doctoral student identity development using a self-study approach. Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 2(1), 103-118.
• Baker, V.L., Pifer, M.J., & Flemion, B. (2013). Process challenges and learning-based interactions in Stage 2 of doctoral education: Implications from two applied social science fields. Journal of Higher Education, 84(4), 449-476.
• Gildersleeve, R.E., Croom, N.N., & Vasquez, P.L. (2011). "Am I going crazy?!": A critical race analysis of doctoral education. Equty & Excellence in Education, 44(1), 93-114. [UNC libraries]
• Baker, V.L., & Pifer, M.J. (2011). The role of relationships in the transition from doctoral student to independent scholar. Studies in Continuing Education, 33(1), 5-17. [UNC libraries]
• McAlpine, L., & Amundsen, C. (2009). Identity and agency: Pleasures and collegiality among the challenges of the doctoral journey. Studies in Continuing Education, 31(2), 109-125. [UNC libraries]
• Walker, G.E., Golde, C.M., Jones, L., Bueschel, A.C., & Hutchings, P. (2008). Creating and sustaining intellectual community. In The Formation of Scholars: Rethinking Doctoral Education for the Twenty-First Century. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 120-140. [Davis - LB2386 .F67 2008]
• Grover, V. (2007). Successfully navigating the stages of doctoral study. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 2, 9-21.
• Hadjioannou, X., Shelton, N., Fu, d., & Dhanarattigannon, J. (2007). The road to a doctoral degree: Co-travelers through a perilous passage. College Student Journal, 41(1), 160-177.
• Goode, J. (2007). Empowering or disempowering the international Ph.D. student? Constructions of the dependent and independent learner. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28(5), 589-603. [UNC libraries]
• Lovitts, B.E. (2005). Being a good course-taker is not enough: A theoretical perspective on the transition to independent research. Studies in Higher Education, 30(2), 137-154. [UNC libraries]
• Ward, K., & Wolf-Wendel, L. (2004). Academic motherhood: Managing complex roles in research universities. Review of HIgher Education, 27(2), 233-257. [UNC libraries]
• Milner, H.R. (2004). African American graduate students' experiences: A critical analysis of recent research. In Cleveland, D. (ed.), A Long Way to Go: Conversations about Race by African American Faculty and Graduate Students. New York: P. Lang, 19-31. [Davis - LC2781.5 .L67 2004; also available as an ebook]
• Balderrama, M., Texeira, T., & Valdez, E. (2004). Una luch de fronteras (A struggle of borders): Women of color in the academy. Race, Gender, & Class, 11(4), 135-148.
• Austin, A.E. (2002). Creating a bridge to the future: Preparing new faculty to face changing expectations in a shifting context. Review of Higher Education, 26(2), 119-144.

Development as a researcher; Work-life balance

• Gopaul, B. (2015). Inequality and doctoral education: Exploring the "rules" of doctoral study through Bourdieu's notion of field. Higher Education, 70(1), 73-88.
• Exner, N. (2014). Research information literacy: Addressing original researchers' needs. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(5), 460-466.
• Sinclair, J., Barnacle, R., & Cuthbert, D. (2014). How the doctorate contributes to the formation of active researchers: What the research tells us. Studies in Higher Education, 39(10), 1972-1986.
• van de Schoot, R., Yerkes, M.A., Mouw, J.M., & Sonneveld, H. (2013). What took them so long? Explaining PhD delays among doctoral candidates. PLoS ONE, 89(7), e68839. [Online]
• Martinez, E., Ordu, C., Della Sala, M.R., & McFarlane, A. (2013). Striving to obtain a school-work-life balance: The full-time doctoral student. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 8. [Online]
• Haynes, C., Bulosan, M., Citty, J., & Grant-Harris, M. (2012). My world is not my doctoral program... or is it?: Female students' perceptions of well-being. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7. [Online]
• Lahenius, K., & Maatta, S. (2011). Students' experiences in different forms of support during doctoral studies. 2011 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 452-456.
• Mowbray, S., & Halse, C. (2010). The purpose of the PhD: Theorising the skills acquired by students. Higher Education Research & Development, 29(6), 653-664.
• Feldon, D.F., Maher, M.A., & Timmerman, B.E. (2010, July 16). Graduate Education: Performance-based data in the study of STEM Ph.D. education. Science, 329(5989), 282-283.
• Sugimoto, C.R., Russell, T.G., & Grant, S. (2009). Library and information science doctoral education: The landscape from 1930-2007. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 50(3), 190-202.
• Kinman, G., & Jones, F. (2008). A life beyond work? Job demands, work-life balance, and wellbeing in UK academics. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 17(1-2), 41-60. [UNC libraries]
• Brus, C.P. (2006). Seeking balance in graduate school: A realistic expectation or a dangerous dilemma? New Directions for Student Services, No. 115, Chapter 3.

Syllabus / Schedule / Assignments / Sakai class site

The INLS 881-882 website, UNC-CH, 2009-2010, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Address all comments and questions to Barbara M. Wildemuth at wildem@ils.unc.edu.
This page was last modified on November 8, 2016, by Barbara M. Wildemuth.