1 / 18

Knowing Journal Users: Methods for User-Focused Research and a Case Study of Pediatricians

This article explores research methods for studying journal users and presents a case study of pediatricians' reading patterns and preferences. It discusses the importance of studying journal use for making informed decisions in libraries and designing better journals and systems.

karenstephens
Télécharger la présentation

Knowing Journal Users: Methods for User-Focused Research and a Case Study of Pediatricians

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Knowing Journal Users: Methods for User-Focused Research and a Case Study of Pediatricians Carol Tenopir Univ. of Tennessee,ctenopir@utk.edu Michael Clarke American Academy of Pediatrics, mclarke@aap.org

  2. Why Study Journal Use? • To make decisions on electronic and print purchases in libraries • To design better journals and systems • To offer better library services • To stay relevant in the future • To drive information literacy instruction • To increase use

  3. Reading Patterns and Preferences • How does use of scholarly materials differ among various disciplines? • How does use of scholarly materials differ by various work roles/level of expertise? • How has use of scholarly materials changed over time? • Does anyone read print journals anymore? • Does anyone use library-provided materials anymore?

  4. Learning About Users and Usage Opinions, preferences (individual) Critical incident (readings), Experimental Usage logs Citations

  5. What Conclusions Can You Draw?  Usage logs  What groups do for electronic  Interviews/surveys/  Opinion, what individuals and journals groups say they do in general and why  Critical (last) incident  What individuals say they do, why, outcomes and value  Observational/  What individuals do in a Experimental controlled or natural setting, and outcomes  Citation Analysis  Whatauthorscite and value

  6. Carol Tenopir. “Use and Users of Electronic Library Resources: An Overview and Analysis of Recent Research Studies”. Prepared for Council on Library and Information Resources Washington, D.C. August 2003.http://www.clir.org/pubs/abstract/pub120abst.html

  7. Some more about Tenopir & King surveys and pediatricians • 25,000+ respondents • All subjects (mostly scientists, engineers, physicians, and social scientists) • University and non-university work places • Mostly North American (2004 Australian) • Medical surveys of UT faculty • Pediatricians in 2004

  8. Types of questions • Demographic • General/recollection • Last incident of reading (to get details, plus outcomes and value of reading) • Preferences/opinions

  9. Surveys of AAP members • One survey asked preferences of things specific to AAP journals • It also asked specifically about reading in Pediatrics and other related journals • A second survey replicated other surveys by Tenopir & King, focusing on purpose and value of last reading

  10. Survey results from first AAP survey… • Mike Clarke

  11. Pediatricians Compared to others… • Carol Tenopir

  12. Univ. medical Practicing Pediatricians Univ Scientists All Scientists Soc Sci/Psych Engineers ~322 articles/year ~180 articles/year ~216 articles/year ~130 articles/year ~191 articles/year ~111 articles/year Reading Varies by Subject Discipline and workplace

  13. Year of Articles 2 % 13 % 17 % 23 % 64 % 81.3 % 10.4 % Pediatricians Astronomers 20.8 % 68.8 % Scientists

  14. Print or Electronic 20 % 37 % 63 % Electronic 80 % Print University Faculty Astronomers 16.4% 25 % 83.6% 75 % Medical Faculty Pediatricians

  15. Form of Final Reading by Pediatricians 7.5% 92.6% n=644

  16. Sources of Readings 21.4 % 36 % 42.9 % 49 % 35.7 % 15 % Universities Astronomers 12 % 15.6 % 16 % 22.1 % 72 % 62.3% Pediatricians Medical Faculty

  17. Principal Purpose of Reading

  18. Location of Pediatricians when Reading n= 650

More Related