Archive for July 2011
The Oxford English Dictionary added the term “information fatigue” to its 2009 edition. Will “information burn-out” enter in the future?
As just one example, a study a couple of years ago by market-research firm Pear Analytics (www.pearanalytics.com) found that
- only 4 percent of Twitter “tweets” consist of real news.
- In contrast, spam makes up another 4 percent,
- self-promotion 6 percent,
- messages with “pass-along value” 9 percent,
- conversation 38 percent,
- and “pointless babble” 40 percent…
Goldsborough. Reid. Information Fatigue: Don’t Burden Others With Excess Information-and Don’t Let Them Burden You. InfoToday, Online: posted on Juky 25, 2011.
An impressive study research, sponsored by the Publishing Research Consortium: includes interviews of key-people from Pfizer, the CERN, Mendeley, the British Library, from TEMIS, Elsevier, Springer, Nature, Wiley, etc.
Journal Article Mining: a research study into Practices, Policies, Plans …..and Promises Eefke Smit and Maurits van der Graaf. PRC June 2011 153pp. This is a study commissioned by PRC which offers the first comprehensive look at what publishers and others are doing, and plan to do, in both data and text mining of the scholarly, mainly journal, literature. Lots of fascinating detail from a number of viewpoints – from 29 interviews and 190 detailed responses to a survey
…for the researcher, the student and the lay man.
An excellent review in the latest JMLA:
The paper reviews recent studies that evaluate the impact of free access (open access) on the behavior of scientists as authors, readers, and citers in developed and developing nations. (…)
- Researchers report that their access to the scientific literature is generally good and improving (76% of researchers think that it is better now than 5 years ago)
- Publishers (Elsevier and Oxford UP) reveal an increase in the number of journals available at a typical university and an even larger increase in the article downloads
- For authors, the access status of a journal is not an important consideration when deciding where to publish (journal reputation is stronger)
- The high cost of Western scientific jounals poses a major barrier to researchers in developing nations
- There is clear evidence that free access increases the number of article downloads, although its impact on article citations is not clear
- Recent studies provide little evidence to support the idea that there is a crisis in access to the scholarly literature
- Author’s resistance to publication fees is a major barrier to greater participation in open access iniatives
- The empowerment of health care consumers through universal access to original research has ben cited as a key benefit of free access to the scientific literature
- overall, the published evidence does not indicate how (or whether) free access to the scientific literature influences consumers’ reading or behavior
- current research reveals no evidence of unmet demand for the primary medical or health sciences literature among the general public
- most research on access to the scientific literature assumes a traditional and hierarchical flow of information from the publisher to the eader, with the library often serving ans an intermediary betwwen the two. Very little has been done to investigate alternative routes of access to the scientific literature
Davis, Philip M. & Walters, William H. The impact of free access to the scientific literature: a review of recent research. J Med Libr Assoc 99(3):208-17 (2011).
Reported by Medical News Today:
“The microblogging service Twitter is a new means for the public to communicate health concerns and could afford health care professionals new ways to communicate with patients. With the growing ubiquity of user-generated online content via social networking Web sites such as Twitter, it is clear we are experiencing a revolution in communication and information sharing. (…)
Researchers demonstrated that Twitter users are already extensively sharing their experiences of toothache and seeking advice from other users (…)
Of those tweets, 83% were primarily categorized as a general statement of dental pain, 22% as an action taken or contemplated, and 15% as describing an impact on daily activities. Among the actions taken or contemplated, 44% reported seeing a dentist, 43% took an analgesic or antibiotic medication and 14% actively sought advice from the Twitter community. (…)
This paper highlights the potential of using social media to collect public health data for research purposes,” said the journal editor. “Utilizing Twitter is an interesting, early stage approach with potential impact in the assessment of large sets of population information.” (…)
… the extensive reach of Twitter is currently being used successfully in public health to distribute health information to the segments of the public who access Twitter, but there are major limitations and challenges to be overcome before Twitter and its data products can be used for routine public health surveillance.
The Use Of Twitter For Public Health Surveillance Of Dental Pain. Medical News Today, posted on 20th of July 2011.
Reported by Science Library Pad:
email, the killer app that is unkillable
E-mail is not an optimal tool for many types of collaboration, but it is very difficult to get people to move away from using email. In fact it’s difficult to get people to send less email and to stop checking their inbox every six seconds.
Two salient quotes from a recent >Globe and Mail article
“The real problem of e-mail is people, and people are not a solvable problem.” [quote from Merlin Mann of InboxZero.com]
In one 2001 study, [Thomas Jackson] found that employees reacted to 70 per cent of incoming e-mails within six seconds of their arrival. Dr. Jackson calls it “an addiction.” Problematically, it took them 64 seconds to recover their train of thought after the interruption, a dismal stat considering numerous e-mails flowed in every five minutes.
Globe and Mail – Confessions of an inbox obsessive – July 15, 2011
Posted on 19th of July,