Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2020View details →

Datasets of Twitter mentions and publications in Information Science & Library Science and Microbiology

Datasets used in the study 'Identifying and characterizing social media communities: a socio-semantic network approach to altmetrics'. Microbiology publications (mic_publiccations.tsv). Dataset of 101,206 Microbiology publications with their author keywords. Microbiology mentions (mic_mentions.tsv). Dataset of 328,110 Twitter mentions to Microbiology publications. Information Science & Library Science publications (lis_publications.tsv). Dataset of 8452 Information Science & Library Science publications with their author keywords. Information Science & Library Science mentions (lis_mentions.tsv). Dataset of 35,411 Twitter mentions to Information Science & Library Science publications.

opencc-by-4.0Nov 2021View details →

Information literacy in the area of Library and Information Science. A bibliometric analysis in Latin America, from the Lens database (2001-2020).

The results of scientific production on ALFIN (2001-2020) in the areas of Library and Information Science are shown. All BIC journals were identified from Latindex. Then it was verified whether these journals were contained in the following databases: Web of Science (Core Collection and Scielo Citation Index), Scopus, Lens and Dimensions. The Lens database was chosen for retrieving records on ALFIN and performing the bibliometric analysis, as it has the highest coverage of BIC journals in Latindex. The trend and growth of scientific production were evaluated according to authors and year of publication; the productivity of authors was analyzed using Lotka's Law and the dispersion of the literature according to Bradford's Law. The degree, index and coefficient of collaboration were determined and collaboration networks were identified according to authors. The results show that scientific production on ALFIN in Latin America, reached a peak between 2017 and 2018, presenting a decrease from 2019 onwards. It was also observed that the production, collaboration between authors and the number of journals is predominantly Brazilian.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2021View details →

Citizen science at public libraries: Data on librarians and users perceptions of participating in a citizen science project in Catalunya, Spain

As libraries struggle to keep pace with the changing societal landscape, emerging practices such as citizen science (CS) initiatives are being incorporated to reinforce the idea of public libraries as gathering, meeting, and collaboration spaces within the context of shared community and shared learning resources. However, there is little empirical evidence of whether the most open and participatory ways that CS puts forward can converge with and be nurtured by the essence of public libraries. Also, the roles of librarians and users in the ‘next generation public library’ have been under-developed. As the number of CS initiatives at public libraries grows, so does the need to collect evidence on the impact and the capacity of assimilation of CS practices. The data describes librarians and users' perceptions of participating in a citizen science project. Two hands-on activities for librarians of the Barcelona Network of Public Libraries were implemented. One was a training course for 30 librarians from 24 libraries which allowed them to envisage citizen science implementation in each library. The second activity consisted in the co-creation of a citizen social science project. 40 library users, 7 librarians from 3 different cities, and professional scientists, were involved. The data on librarians and users' perception was collected through participant observation, surveys, and a focus group to identify strengths and challenges of implementing citizen science at public libraries. The data covers librarians and users attitudes towards citizen science, their motivations to participate, their perceived ability to implement a citizen science project (as for librarians) or to contribute to science (as for library users), and the participants intention to keep engaged with citizen science, drawing on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Responses to closed-ended survey questions are analyzed at a descriptive level. The qualitative feedback from the focus group and the open-ended survey question on motivations is subjected to a thematic analysis. The data offers interesting insights to identify opportunities and challenges of implementing citizen science at public libraries, contributing to the debate over the public library's mission as local community hub. The dataset is formed by 5 tables: <ol> <li>Librarians_pre.csv: data on librarians profiles, attitudes towards citizen science, expected impact of the project and self-efficacy collected at the beginning of the Citizen Science Lab.</li> <li>Librarians_post.csv: data on librarians profiles, attitudes towards citizen science, perceived impact of the project and self-efficacy collected at the end of the Citizen Science Lab.</li> <li>Users_first_phase.csv: data on users profiles, motivation, attitudes towards the library, confidence to perform scientific tasks and self-efficacy collected at the beginning of the Science and Citizen Action.</li> <li>Users_second_phase.csv: data on users profiles and motivation collected at the middle of the Science and Citizen Action.</li> <li>Users_last_phase.csv: data on users profiles, attitudes towards the library, confidence to perform scientific tasks and perceived impact of the project collected at the end of the Science and Citizen Action.</li> </ol> Citizen Science Lab Questionnaire (Librarians_pre) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Personal information </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 1. [rol_1] What is your role at the library? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Director</li> <li>Library technician</li> <li>Support technician</li> <li>Service support</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 2. [years_1] How long have you been working at the library? </td> <td> <ul> <li>2 or less</li> <li>3 to 5 years</li> <li>6 to 10 years</li> <li>11 to 20 years</li> <li>more than 20 years</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 3. [back_1] Do you have a scientific background? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 4. [know_1] Have you already heard about citizen science? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 5. [part_1] Have you already participated in a citizen science project? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Attitudes towards users engagement </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 6. [att_lib_pre1] Do you believe that library users are able to participate in a citizen science project? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 7. [att_lib_pre2] Do you believe that library users will commit to participating in a citizen science project? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Expected impacts </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 8. [exp_lib_pre] To what extent do you believe that citizen science may bring positive impacts to your library?   </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Self-efficacy </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 9. [se_lib_pre1] Right now, do you feel able to recommend any citizen science project to library users? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 10. [se_lib_pre2] Right now, do you feel able to implement yourself and lead a citizen science project? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> Citizen Science Lab Questionnaire (Librarians_post) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Personal information </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 1. [years_2] How long have you been working at the library? </td> <td> <ul> <li>2 or less</li> <li>3 to 5 years</li> <li>6 to 10 years</li> <li>11 to 20 years</li> <li>more than 20 years</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 2. [back_2] Do you have a scientific background? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 3. [sat_1] To what extent does the project meet your initial expectations? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Attitudes towards users engagement </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 4. [att_lib_post1] Do you believe that library users will commit to participating in a citizen science project? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 5. [att_lib_post2] What are/could be the potential barriers to users engagement in citizen science? </td> <td> [open] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Perceived impact </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 6. [imp_lib] What do you believe that citizen science may bring to public libraries and users? 1 [Not at all] …… 5 [Totally]   </td> <td> a. Knowledge of the scientific process b. New connections among participants                                                        c. Fun d. New knowledge of the local environment e. Scientific evidence on a common concern f. Social cohesion g. Positive attitudes towards science h. Willingness to learn i. Critical thinking and self-efficacy </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Self-efficacy </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 8. [se_lib_post1] Right now, do you feel able to recommend any citizen science project to library users? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 9. [se_lib_post2] Right now, do you feel able to implement yourself and lead a citizen science project? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Intention to keep engaged </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 10. [eng_lib] To what extent are you motivated to keep engaged with citizen science?                                                                                                                                                                              </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>   Science and Citizens Action Focus group guide (Librarians) Opening questions 1. To start with…. Are you satisfied with the project? Probe: Yes, no, why? Was it fun/interesting/challenging/enriching…. 2. Do you feel you have learned something new? Probe: About your library’s environment, users, science and citizen science... Is there anything special that you will take with you after the project? Reflections on the cocreation process 3. At what time during the project have you felt most comfortable? Probe: For example, has it been easier to lead the activity and/or involve and retain the community? Did you find it entertaining? 4. At what time during the project have you felt less at ease? Probe: What was challenging during the cocreation process? 5. To what extent do you feel more capable of implementing and leading a citizen science project in your library right now? Probe: For example, in the case of both more crowdsourcing and of cocreated projects that actively involve the community Reflections on the perceived impact 6. To what extent does the project meet your initial expectations? Probe: in line with what you discussed at the beginning of the project, you expected it to promote participation, new connections among participants, improve the library perceptions and stimulate the participants’ critical thinking...Do you think that citizen science may meet these expectations? Reflections on citizen science at public libraries 7. To what extent can citizen science (in its most ‘extreme’ form of participation) be imagined as an activity within the library that promotes more active user participation? Probe: Through for example cocreation, experimentation, and hands-on learning activities... 8. Do you think that the activity has brought new knowledge? What new knowledge has the activity brought from your perspective? Probe: Knowledge of the scientific process, knowledge of the community or new users... 9. What could be the opportunities and barriers of introducing citizen science at public libraries? And the barriers? Probe: Like for example improving the perception of the library, actively involving certain users...What could be the ‘return’ for the community? What impact can citizen science projects have on making the environment more dynamic from libraries? 10. More generally, what could be the ‘added value’ of the introduction of citizen science within the library’s range of activities? Probe: Is it a fun activity that promotes socialization, for example? Or that allows to generate new knowledge? Or that highlights the library’s social value? Or, also, that may offer new uses and new roles to the library? Can it foster a sense of community with the library as a connector? What other impacts can be generated in your environment? Closing 11. Do you see yourselves the next year, implementing a citizen science project as part of the library’s range of activities? And adopting an existing one? Probe: Are you motivated to get more involved with citizen science projects? What kind of projects? What level of user involvement do you expect? What barriers do you see to users’ involvement? What benefits and opportunities do you think you can bring to the library? 12. We have now reached the end of the discussion. Anyone want to add anything else? Science and Citizens Action Questionnaire (Users_first_phase) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Personal information </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 1. [gen_1] Are you..? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Woman</li> <li>Man</li> <li>NA</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 2. [years_3] How old are you? </td> <td> <ul> <li>18-25</li> <li>26-35</li> <li>36-45</li> <li>46-55</li> <li>56-65</li> <li>66+</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 3. [rol_2] What is your role at the library? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Library user not associated with local associations</li> <li>Library technician</li> <li>Member of a local association</li> <li>Representative of public administrations</li> <li>Representative of the private sector</li> <li>Others:</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 4. [back_3] Do you have a scientific background? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 5. [part_2] Have you already participated in a citizen science project? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Motivations to participate </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 6. [mot_us] What did motivate you to participate in the project? </td> <td> [open] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Attitudes towards the library </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 7. [att_us_pre1] To what extent do you believe that your library is responsive to the community needs? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 8. [att_us_pre2] To what extent to you believe your library is able to face local challenges based on users' active participation? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Confidence to perform scientific tasks </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 9. [conf_us_pre] To what extent do you feel able to contribute to perform the following scientific tasks: 1 [Not at all] …… 4 [Totally] </td> <td> a. Formulate the research question b. Data collection c. Analysis and interpretation of the results d. Propose concrete actions based on scientific evidence </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Self-efficacy </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 10. [se_us_pre] To what extent do you feel able to positively contribute to the library and your community? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> Science and Citizens Action Questionnaire (Users_second_phase) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Personal information </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 1. [gen_3] Are you..? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Woman</li> <li>Man</li> <li>NA</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 2. [years_5] How old are you? </td> <td> <ul> <li>18-25</li> <li>26-35</li> <li>36-45</li> <li>46-55</li> <li>56-65</li> <li>66+</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 3. [rol_4] What is your role at the library? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Library user or technician not associated with local associations</li> <li>Member of a local association</li> <li>Representative of public administrations</li> <li>Representative of the private sector</li> <li>Others:</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 3. [back_5] Do you have a scientific background? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 4. [mot_us2] To what extent are you motivated to carry out the experiment? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> Science and Citizens Action Questionnaire (Users_last_phase) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Personal information </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 1. [gen_2] Are you..? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Woman</li> <li>Man</li> <li>NA</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 2. [years_4] How old are you? </td> <td> <ul> <li>18-25</li> <li>26-35</li> <li>36-45</li> <li>46-55</li> <li>56-65</li> <li>66+</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 3. [rol_3] What is your role at the library? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Library user or technician not associated with local associations</li> <li>Member of a local association</li> <li>Representative of public administrations</li> <li>Representative of the private sector</li> <li>Others:</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 3. [back_4] Do you have a scientific background? </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 4. [part_3] To how many cocreation sessions have you participated? </td> <td> <ul> <li>None</li> <li>1</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 5. [sat_2] To what extent are you satisfied with the experiment? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Attitudes towards the library </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 6. [att_us_post] To what extent do you believe that the project has positively changed your perception of the library? </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Confidence to perform scientific tasks </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 7. [conf_us_post] To what extent do you feel able to contribute to perform the following scientific tasks: 1 [Not at all] …… 5 [Totally] </td> <td> a. Formulate the research question b. Data collection c. Analysis and interpretation of the results d. Propose concrete actions based on scientific evidence </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Perceived impact </td> </tr> <tr> <td> 8. [imp_us] What do you believe that citizen science may bring to public libraries and users? 1 [Not at all] …… 5 [Totally]   </td> <td> a. Knowledge of the scientific process b. New connections among participants                                                                  c. Fun d. New knowledge of the local environment e. Scientific evidence on a common concern f. Social cohesion g. Positive attitudes towards science h. Willingness to learn i. Critical thinking and self-efficacy </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2024View details →

Beyond the Shelves: Embarking on Citizen Science with Your Library

The video “Beyond the Shelves: Embarking on Citizen Science with your Library” by LibOCS project partner UT Library shows how to make first connections with librarians and get to know the role of university libraries in citizen science.

opencc-by-4.0Feb 2017View details →

Research table for visualization of research performance of the German National Library of Science and Technology, German National Library of Medicine and German National Library of Economics via different communication channels

A collection of data for (a practice) work during my studies for Bachelor. Since there wasn't much time given the data collection isn't as complete as it could be. Also, all text is in German. Definition of variables for data collection can be found in my finished work "How is reserach performance of the German National Library of Science and Technology, German National Library of Medicine and German National Library of Economics made visible via different communication channels; analysis of information of publication on official social media channels and news on offical webside" (in question to be published on Zenodo). Collected data from following official communication channels: Facebook, Twitter, Blogs, Google +, Youtube, Flickr, LinkedIn, Research-Gate, Slideshare, repository and news on websites. For some channels not all data could be collected. Research period from 01.08.2016 to 01.02.2017 (half a year).

dryad36/100

The role of health sciences libraries in supporting medical image consent standards survey documentation

Objective: To determine if health sciences library workers were familiar with best practices regarding informed consent for the publication of medical images and if they incorporate the recommendations into their professional work. Methods: A survey was developed by the authors and distributed to library listservs in the United States. The results of the survey were tabulated in R. Results: A total of 90 respondents were included in the data analysis with all respondents reporting multiple responsibilities in their professional role. While the majority of library workers (59%) were familiar with the best practices, few incorporated the recommendations into their everyday professional work. Conclusions: The professional work of health sciences library workers does not appear to include a significant inclusion of the best practices for the informed consent for the publication of medical images. There is a need for future research to better understand how library workers can better incorporate their knowledge of medical image publication consent standards into their work.

opencc-zeroApr 2024View details →

opencc-by-4.0Nov 2024View details →

Mnemosine Digital Library. Open Science Laboratory

Mnemosine Digital Library functional architecture.

opencc-zeroJan 2023View details →

Canadian publications in Library and Information Science / Publications canadiennes en bibliothéconomie et sciences de l'information

Overview of Dataset  This dataset was developed through a collaboration between Dalhousie University and the University of Montréal. This project aims to help break down the silos in which the two primary target audiences- information science researchers and academic librarians- conduct their research. The Canadian Publications in Library and Information Science dataset makes visible the work that librarians do and allows other Canadian researchers to discover the research of their colleagues.  The dataset contains 1,326 distinct authors, 850 of which were classified as practitioners and 476 as academics. It has a total of 13,775 records out of which 8,230 are authored by at least one academic and 5,740 are authored by at least one practitioner. File descriptions   Table 1. Canadian LIS authors table (authors) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Field </td> <td> Description </td> </tr> <tr> <td> author_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the publication in the LIS database </td> </tr> <tr> <td> first_name </td> <td> First name of author </td> </tr> <tr> <td> last_name </td> <td> Last name of author </td> </tr> <tr> <td> full_name </td> <td> Full name of author </td> </tr> <tr> <td> status </td> <td> Academic (Ph.D. student, a postdoctoral fellow, or a professor (assistant, associate, full, emeritus) in an organizational unit offering an ALA accredited degree) or practitioner (librarian position in a Canadian university) </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>   Table 2. Works table (publications) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Field </td> <td> Description </td> </tr> <tr> <td> pub_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the publication in the LIS database </td> </tr> <tr> <td> doi </td> <td> Digital object identifiers </td> </tr> <tr> <td> openalex_work_id </td> <td> Identifier of the work in the OpenAlex database (URL format) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> isbn </td> <td> International standard book number (ISBN). </td> </tr> <tr> <td> doc_type </td> <td> Document type. Can take one of the following values: article; review; conference paper, book; edited book; book chapter. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> publication_year </td> <td> Year of publication </td> </tr> <tr> <td> title </td> <td> Title of the document </td> </tr> <tr> <td> source_name </td> <td> Title of the source (journal, conference, or book title for book chapters) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> author_list_full </td> <td> Full text listing of author names </td> </tr> <tr> <td> volume </td> <td> Volume number </td> </tr> <tr> <td> issue </td> <td> Issue number </td> </tr> <tr> <td> pages </td> <td> First and last pages separated by a hyphen. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> bk_edition </td> <td> Book edition </td> </tr> <tr> <td> bk_editor </td> <td> Name of book editor (for book chapters) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> publisher </td> <td> Publisher of the book/journal </td> </tr> <tr> <td> source_id </td> <td> Foreign key to the sources table </td> </tr> <tr> <td> url </td> <td> URL for the publication </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>   Table 3. Author publications table (authors_publications) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <a name="_Hlk155194541"></a>Field </td> <td> Description </td> </tr> <tr> <td> author_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the author in the authors table </td> </tr> <tr> <td> pub_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the work in the publications table </td> </tr> <tr> <td> author_position </td> <td> Position on the byline. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> role </td> <td> Role of the author on the work (author/editor) </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> Table 4. Author IDs table (authors_ids) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Field </td> <td> Description </td> </tr> <tr> <td> author_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the author in the authors table </td> </tr> <tr> <td> source </td> <td> Source for the identifier (e.g., OpenAlex, Scopus, Google Scholar, ORCID) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> identifier </td> <td> Identifier for the author in the source database </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>   Table 5. Publication source table (sources) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Field </td> <td> Description </td> </tr> <tr> <td> source_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the source </td> </tr> <tr> <td> source_name </td> <td> Name of the source </td> </tr> <tr> <td> publisher </td> <td> Publisher name for the source </td> </tr> <tr> <td> issn </td> <td> ISSN for the source </td> </tr> <tr> <td> source_type </td> <td> OpenAlex source type (e.g., journal, conference) </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>   Table 6. Institutions table (institutions) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Field </td> <td> Description </td> </tr> <tr> <td> institution_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the institution </td> </tr> <tr> <td> institution_name </td> <td> Name of the Canadian academic institution </td> </tr> <tr> <td> city </td> <td> Name of the city in which the institution is primarily located </td> </tr> <tr> <td> province </td> <td> Two-letter code of the province in which the institution is located </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>   Table 7. Institution IDs table (institutions_ids) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Field </td> <td> Description </td> </tr> <tr> <td> institution_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the institution in the institutions table </td> </tr> <tr> <td> id_source </td> <td> Source database for the identifier (e.g., OpenAlex) </td> </tr> <tr> <td> identifier </td> <td> Identifier linked to the institution in the source database </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>   Table 8. Authorship institutional affiliation table (authors_publications_institutions) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Field </td> <td> Description </td> </tr> <tr> <td> author_id </td> <td> Author component of the authorship information in the authors_publications table </td> </tr> <tr> <td> pub_id </td> <td> Publication component of the authorship information in the authors_publications table </td> </tr> <tr> <td> institution_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the affiliated institution in the institutions table </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>   Table 9. Citations table (citations) <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> Field </td> <td> Description </td> </tr> <tr> <td> citing_pub_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the citing work in the publications table </td> </tr> <tr> <td> cited_pub_id </td> <td> Unique identifier for the cited work in the publications table </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>   To submit updates For those interested in submitting updates to this dataset, you may send them by email to Philippe Mongeon (PMongeon@dal.ca). Please specify whether you want to modify, add, or delete existing data entries. Files in any format (e.g., XLS, BIB, Word, or a list of DOIs) are accepted. Data paper Find the corresponding data paper that describes the objectives of this dataset and the steps of its creation here: <a href="https://arxiv.org/abs/6053305">https://arxiv.org/abs/6053305</a>. How to cite this dataset Sauvé, J.-S., Hare, M., Krause, G., Poitras, C., Riddle, P., & Mongeon, P. (2024). Canadian publications in Library and Information Science / Publications canadiennes en bibliothéconomie et sciences de l'information [Data set]. Zenodo. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14302591" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14302591</a>

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2021View details →

Information Science & Library Science Landmarks

This dataset was used in a study for the Information Science & Library Science Landmarks.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2022View details →

Description of the Berliner Handreichungen zur Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft & JITA Classification System of Library and Information Science

The two excel files contain data about the collection of the <a href="https://pages.cms.hu-berlin.de/ibi/BHR/">Berliner Handreichungen zur Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft</a> (date of scraping data: March 20, 2021) and the collection of the <a href="http://eprints.rclis.org/view/subjects/"> JITA Classification System of Library and Information Science</a> (date of scraping data: March 20, 2021).

opencc-by-4.0Jun 2024View details →

Survey of library information science graduates' readiness to create an information system in the library (using open science as an example)

Survey "Readiness of library information science graduates to create an information system in the library (on the example of open science)" The research is aimed at identifying the degree of readiness of future specialists in the field of library and information science to work in new and relevant areas of library activities related to the development of information infrastructure of open science. The survey consists of 4 thematic blocks and contains 21 questions. The survey was attended by 54 students from 10 Russian universities, studying in the direction of training 51.03.06 "Library and Information Science". The results of this survey will serve as a basis for the development of professional development programmes on various aspects of the functioning of open science for specialists in the field of library and information activity. Опрос «Готовность выпускников направления библиотечная информационная наука к созданию системы информирования в библиотеке (на примере открытой науки)» Исследование направленно на выявление степени готовности будущих специалистов в области библиотечно-информационной деятельности к работе в новых и актуальных направлениях деятельности библиотек, связанных с развитием информационной инфраструктуры открытой науки. Опрос состоит из 4-х тематических блоков и содержит 21 вопрос. В опросе приняли участие 54 студента из 10 российских вузов, обучающихся по направлению подготовки 51.03.06 «Библиотечно-информационная деятельность». Результаты данного опроса послужат основой разработки программ повышения квалификации по различным аспектам функционирования открытой науки для специалистов в области библиотечно-информационной деятельности.

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2021View details →

Open Science for Action (OS4A): A working model for libraries

A diagram outlining a conceptual model for how libraries can contribute to and advance open science in principle and practice.

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2020View details →

Dataset for "Understanding Performance Concerns in the API Documentation of Data Science Libraries"

Dataset for the manuscript "Understanding Performance Concerns in the API Documentation of Data Science Libraries", including the results of knowledge classification, consistency analysis, and evolution analysis on the API documentation data.

openJul 2013View details →

Is epistemological purism possible in Library and Information Science research?

Is epistemological purism possible in Library and Information Science research?Several scholars in Knowledge Organization (KO) and in Library and Information Science (LIS) have expressed concern that the field seems driven primarily by practical applications and professional practices. Others have stressed the need for research in the field to be more theoretically motivated, lest it continue to be perceived not as a scientific field but simply as a set of techniques used to solve problems. Hence, there have been calls for scholars and practitioners to make explicit the epistemological assumptions underlying methods used to design information services and tools for their users as this can help identify inherent biases. In answer to these calls, we examined the epistemological assumptions underlying methods deployed in some fields of KO and LIS – namely information retrieval and topic mapping. A careful examination of the underlying assumptions to these methods showed that they exhibited epistemological hybridity, in this case, a combination of empiricism and positivism with a dash of pragmatism and hermeneutics at the end. We therefore hypothesize that it may not be a straightforward task for a researcher or an information professional to claim that a method borrows solely from positivism, rationalism, empiricism or social-constructivism or historicism or hermeneutics, simply because there is a gap between epistemological theories and methods linked to them. Also, a given piece of work may deploy methods linked to different epistemological theories.Although our examples are taken from LIS and KO fields, we suspect that our observations may be generalized to other scientific disciplines and fields of inquiry.

opencc-by-4.0Jun 2022View details →

Book of Abstracts from Conference for the Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections (SPNHC), International Partner – BHL (Biodiversity Heritage Library) and National Partner – NatSCA (Natural Sciences Collections Association) 2022

The complete book of abstracts (Posters & Oral Presentations).

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2024View details →

Is There an Academic Elegancy in the Field of Library Science and Information Science? Are the Higher Impact Studies Citing the Studies Published in the Higher Impact Journals?

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

opencc-zeroDec 2018View details →

e-LiS, e-prints in library & information science: metadata in RDF/XML

This RDF-XML dump contains metadata about the items deposited in e-LiS (http://eprints.rclis.org), converted in Linked Open data. "Established in 2003, e-LIS is an international digital repository for Library and Information Science (LIS), including Communication. It has grown thanks to a team of volunteer editors that support 22 languages. The development of an international network has been stimulated by the extension of the Open Access concept to works and facilitated by the dissemination of material within the LIS community. These are some of the reasons for the success of e-LIS. In a few years, e-LIS has been established as the largest international open repository in the field of library and information science."