INLS 180 Day 10 Notes

April 3, 2006

 

 

  1. One minute papers

Points

Bias in services

Aesthetics is important in design and in human services

High interactivity =/= high quality

People remember (and focus on) the negative experience (implications for learning/child rearing?)

Perceptions are two-way (how people perceive librarians and vice versa)

Interactivity includes cognitive physical, and emotional facets

Wikipedia/flickr, etc. as social interaction

      Questions

Why not have successful practitioners teach reference?

Can we introduce positive reference experience as part of the ref interview?

What is more important: people skills or library experience?

Can we map type of question to type of ref service (online or not)?

What is a correct answer?

Do people have different expectations about levels of interactivity with people or machines?

 

  1. Note: SILS again #1 (tied)….how does this relate to citation counts?

To date, most of our work has focused on 1-1 communication, group and scholarly next

Informetrics and Bibliometrics, webometrics

queueing theory, circulation models, operations research

citation analysis, from individuals to groups to organizations; from doc to doc to doc to field to field to field

see http://www.cybergeography.org/atlas/info_maps.html  for maps of comm patterns

 

Logical Assumptions (Griffith, Drott & Small)

1. X cited by Y is more likely to be related to Y than arbitrary A not cited

1.      X cited by Y and A not cited by Y=>more likely that X was used in preparation of Y

2.      Y and Z cite X=>more likely Y and Z are related than A and B citing no docs in common

Y cites X and Z=>X and Z more likely related to each other than to A not cited by Y (not co-cited with X and Y) 

 

Problems of citation analysis

Multiple authors

Self-citations

Homographs (same name/different authors)

Synonyms (name variants)

Types of sources (books vs journals, some journals limit citations)

Implicit citations (discussed or implied but not cited)

Time fluctuations (year to year)

Field variations (e.g., humanities vs sciences)

Errors

 

 

Applications

  Various literature studies

  User studies

  Historical studies

  Communication patterns (e.g., how ideas spread)

  IR (e.g., google, Clever today)

  Collection development [note the collection weeding argument]

  Recommendation systems

 

See Oct. 14, 2005 Chronicle of Higher Ed (The number that’s devouring science) re: impact factors

Note h-factor

Note our Mpact indicators work

See web of science from UNC Library page

See www.citeseer.com

See webometrics

                       

3. Discuss:

Smith, L. C. (1981). Citation analysis.  Library Trends, 30(1), Summer 1981.  83-106.  (SILS reserve)

Lawrence, S. (2001). Online or invisible, Nature (online)

 

4. Read for next week

Read for next meeting:

 

Moorhead, G., Ference, R., & Neck, C. P. (1991). Group decision fiascoes continue: Space Shuttle Challenger and a groupthink framework. Human Relations, 44(6). 539-550. (SILS reserve)

 

Examine/read for next meeting:

 

 The Cochrane Collaboration. http://www.cochrane.org/index0.htm

 

The Open Directory. http://dmoz.org/

 

Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

 

Internet Movie Database http://www.imdb.com/

 

 

Optional: Dibbell, J. (1996). A rape in cyberspace: How an evil clown, a Haitian trikster spirit, two wizards, and a cast of dozens turned a database into a society.  In Mark Stefik (Ed.) Internet dreams: Archetypes, myths, and metaphors.  Cambridge, MIT Press.

 

Finholt, T. Collaboratories (online)

 

5. One-minute paper concept

What was the big point you learned in class today?

What is the main, unanswered question you leave class with today?