[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

# [drf:23] Re: [drf:22] 見つけられないものは無いものだ問題　Fwd: "Discoverability" Problem or Non-Existence Problem?

- Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:53:26 +0900

    DRFのみなさま
    村上@NIIです。個人的な経験から。

>     それがうまくいかなければ、GoogleでOAバージョンを探す。
>     ・それがうまくいかなければ、より大きな研究機関に所属している仲間に、
>     横流ししてくれるように電子メールで頼む。（※）

    実際にはOA版さがしと横流し依頼は並行して進めるケースが
    大部分かも。（google以前は横流し依頼の方が主流だった）
    引用するならどうせ出版者版が必要だし。

    一方、著者側はぜひ読んでほしい人には出たら
    すぐに送りつけます。
    あと、抜刷は名刺がわりなので、結構持ち歩いて
    配りまくったりします。

    ＃就職公募に出している若手は切れると痛いので温存してたりしますが。

    そして、だれかにほしいといわれたら原則断りませんし
    「これも読んでね」とおまけをつけることも多い感じです。

    そしてものもちのいいひとはキャビネットいっぱい
    みんなの抜刷や研究会資料を持ってます。
    そういう人にコピーさせていただくこともけっこうあります。

    村上

    07/07/23 に SUGITA Shigeki<sugita ＠ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> さんは書きました:

>     北大　杉田です。

>     ASOAFメーリングリスト（AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM）上の
>     Alma Swanさんからのメールです。

>     研究者の情報探索行動についての質問に対し、幾つかの調査結果を踏まえ、

>     ・図書館の提供情報などに基づき、無料でその場でオンラインアクセス
>     できるフルテキストを探す。
>     （無料で、とは（OA文献というよりも）機関購読のこと）
>     ・それがうまくいかなければ、GoogleでOAバージョンを探す。
>     ・それがうまくいかなければ、より大きな研究機関に所属している仲間に、
>     横流ししてくれるように電子メールで頼む。（※）
>     ・それがうまくいかなければ、著者に電子メールで頼む。（※※）
>     ・それがうまくいかなければ、ILLを申し込むか、主題司書に相談する。

>     とまとめていました。

>     ＃恥ずかしながら、私自身はこのIR関連の業務に携わるまで、（※）や、
>     ＃とくに（※※）（\xAD霹敢髎魎絞顕宗砲梁減澆魏畩丨冒杼詎靴討Ľ蠅泙靴拭\xA3
>     ＃IRはこの（※※）のプラットフォームであるわけですね。

>     すぐに手に入らなければなしで済ます、という傾向についても、

>     > > There is another barrier, too, that is bad for scholarship, and one that is
>     > >  largely self-imposed by scholars and their (rather new-found) attitudes to
>     > >  obtaining information for their work. This is that if an article or book
>     > > will take some time to obtain -- and that time varies between disciplines -
>     > > - then the scholar will, as in the case of toll-barriers, abandon the chase
>     > >  and go without.

>     として示されていました。その傾向は分野によっても差があり、

>     ・人文系　ほんとに重要な本なら何ヶ月でもがんばって待つ。
>     ・数学　BLで文献が供給される2日間は「耐えられなくもないがもっと早く」
>     ・細胞分子生物学　「すぐに、とは、数秒以内に、という意味だ」

>     というエピソードが紹介されています。

>     ASOAFメーリングリストは下記から購読できます。
>     http://listserver.sigmaxi.org/sc/wa.exe?SUBED1=american-scientist-open-access-forum&A=1

>     Alma Swan さんは書きました:
>     > > **Cross-posted from American Scientist Open Access forum list**
>     > >
>     > >  Frank McCown asked:
>     > >
>     >> > > Can anyone point me to research on the topic of how researchers go
>     >> > > about finding research papers on a particular topic? Do most
>     >> > > researchers start with Google Scholar, etc.
>     >> > > or do they first go to OAIster or ScienceDirect? When do they stop
>     >> > > searching? I'm looking for something addressing computer scientists,
>     >> > > perhaps a large survey.
>     > >
>     > > One of our recent studies, based on surveys about researcher behaviour,
>     > > indicated that over 70% of researchers use Google or Google Scholar as
>     > > their first-choice tool for finding information on a topic (http://www.jisc
>     > > .ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Open%20Access%20Self%20Archiving-an%20author%20
>     > > study.pdf). Hardly any use OAIster (they haven't heard of it) and
>     > > ScienceDirect is further down the line, if available. We split the
>     > > responses by major disciplines (physical sciences, life sciences, social
>     > > sciences, arts & humanities) so computer scientists are subsumed into
>     > > physical sciences in the report.
>     > >
>     > > Lee van Orsdel and Katherine Born also did a study recently on this topic
>     > > and reported that Google is used by over 60% of researchers (Van Orsdel L C
>     > >  and Born K (2006) Journals in the time of Google. LibraryJournal.com ,
>     > > April 15, 2006. http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6321722.html )
>     > >
>     > > When researchers do not have access to articles via their library then they
>     > >  set off on a particular path of discovery. Here is an excerpt of our
>     > > report from an even more recent study (http://www.rin.ac.uk/researchers-use
>     > > -libraries or http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/13868/), based on surveys and
>     > > discussions with researchers, on what researchers do when their library
>     > > holdings don't provide access to articles they know they want to see:
>     > >
>     > > "It is commonly said nowadays, with reference to scholars' information-
>     > > seeking and use behaviour, that unless something is available in digital
>     > > form it is invisible. What we learned from this study did not entirely
>     > > support that notion, but there is nevertheless a substantial degree of
>     > > truth in it. Researchers told us that they would ideally like to be able to
>     > >  find everything they need for their work in digital form. The ideal is
>     > > unlikely to be fully achieved in some areas, but in most it is not an
>     > > unimaginable concept. Scholarly publishers continue with their archive-
>     > > digitisation programmes; books are now increasingly available in electronic
>     > >  form; libraries are hard at work digitising legacy material and special
>     > > collections where appropriate. Tomorrow's scholars, especially in the
>     > > sciences, will find that the bulk of what they need -- or think they need -
>     > > - to access is accessible digitally, and for many this is already the case.
>     > >
>     > > That is not necessarily to say it is available digitally. There is still a
>     > > cost for getting at much of the material not purchased by a researcher's
>     > > institution, and those extra costs must be paid for. Sometimes this is a
>     > > dissuasive factor: researchers say that if they run up against a toll
>     > > barrier whilst following up an article or book they 'give up and find
>     > > something else I can get for nothing'. This is not good for scholarship.
>     > >
>     > > There is another barrier, too, that is bad for scholarship, and one that is
>     > >  largely self-imposed by scholars and their (rather new-found) attitudes to
>     > >  obtaining information for their work. This is that if an article or book
>     > > will take some time to obtain -- and that time varies between disciplines -
>     > > - then the scholar will, as in the case of toll-barriers, abandon the chase
>     > >  and go without.
>     > >
>     > > The usual pathway followed to obtain an article not instantly available via
>     > >  a library subscription is much the same in sciences, social sciences, and
>     > > arts and humanities:
>     > >
>     > >     *  the scholar seeks access to the full-text, anticipating immediate
>     > >     and free electronic availability via the local library; if fails
>     > >     *  tries Google to see if an Open Access version is available; if fails
>     > >     *  emails a friend in another institution with better library provision
>     > >      to see if they can email the article; if fails
>     > >     *  emails the author; if fails
>     > >     *  orders article via inter-library loan
>     > >     *  consults a subject librarian for expert help
>     > >
>     > > The difference between the disciplines is that some will press on through
>     > > all steps while others only try some of them. Arts and humanities scholars
>     > > have an information-pursuit timeframe that is longer than that of
>     > > scientists, and told us that if a book is genuinely considered to be very
>     > > important to their work they will wait months if necessary to lay their
>     > > hands on it (and in general this still means it will arrive in printed form
>     > > ). Scientists, on the other hand, and especially some kinds of scientists
>     > > who work in the very fast-moving fields, want information immediately, on
>     > > their computer screen. The two days that the British Library can take to
>     > > supply an article to a mathematician is 'bearable but not ideal', we were
>     > >  told, and is viewed in that way by scientists in fields that move
>     > > reasonably fast but not excessively so (the scientists we spoke to appeared
>     > >  unaware of the BL's ability to deliver within an hour, or unwilling to
>     > > consider this option because of its relatively high cost). Cell and
>     > > molecular biologists, in contrast, told us that "now means in seconds; I
>     > > want it on my screen immediately". If the article cannot be supplied within
>     > >  such a very short timeframe, one that allows for a very few click-through
>     > > steps, then the pursuit is abandoned.
>     > >
>     > > For scientists this is a problem, but one about which they are pragmatic:
>     > > if the article cannot be read -- or at least located and requested --
>     > > within minutes, it remains invisible. For libraries trying their best to
>     > > service the needs of their users, it poses a real dilemma. No library can
>     > > offer the level of provision that such scientists say they want (indeed,
>     > > say they need). Yet despite their need, researchers go without rather than
>     > > spend time and effort and patience chasing an article deemed necessary. The
>     > >  result is information-deficit, with researchers proceeding on the basis of
>     > >  not having taken that information into account in their work. Does this
>     > > have important repercussions?"
>     > >
>     > > Alma Swan
>     > >
>     > > Key Perspectives Ltd
>     > >
>     > > Truro, UK

>     --
>     杉田茂樹 <sugita ＠ xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     北海道大学附属図書館情報システム課システム管理担当
>     電話番号：011-706-2524，ファクシミリ：011-706-4099
>     HUSCAP http://eprints.lib.hokudai.ac.jp/

    --
    Yuko Murakami <murakami ＠ xxxxxxxxx>
    Associate Professor by Special Appointment
    Research and Development Center for Scientific Information Resources
    National Institute of Informatics

- References:
  - [drf:22] 見つけられないものは無いものだ問題　Fwd: "Discoverability" Problem or Non-Existence Problem?
    - From: SUGITA Shigeki

- Prev by Date: [drf:22] 見つけられないものは無いものだ問題　Fwd: "Discoverability" Problem or Non-Existence Problem?
- Next by Date: [drf:24] Re: [drf:22] 見つけられないものは無いものだ問題　Fwd: "Discoverability" Problem or Non-Existence Problem?
- Previous by thread: [drf:22] 見つけられないものは無いものだ問題　Fwd: "Discoverability" Problem or Non-Existence Problem?
- Next by thread: [drf:24] Re: [drf:22] 見つけられないものは無いものだ問題　Fwd: "Discoverability" Problem or Non-Existence Problem?
- Index(es):
  - Date
  - Thread