Skip to content


The Scholarly Impact of Books Acquired via Approval Plan Selection, Librarian Orders, and Patron-Driven Acquisitions as Measured by Citation Counts

Research Article: “The Scholarly Impact of Books Acquired via Approval Plan Selection, Librarian Orders, and Patron-Driven Acquisitions as Measured by Citation Counts” (Preprints)

https://www.infodocket.com/2018/09/06/research-article-the-scholarly-impact-of-books-acquired-via-approval-plan-selection-librarian-orders-and-patron-driven-acquisitions-as-measured-by-citation-counts-preprints/

“The following accepted for publication research article (preprint) was recently shared on the C&RL (College & Research Libraries) web site.

It is scheduled to be published in the May 2019 issue of C&RL.

Title

The Scholarly Impact of Books Acquired via Approval Plan Selection, Librarian Orders, and Patron-Driven Acquisitions as Measured by Citation Counts

Authors

David C. Tyler
University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Brianna D. Hitt
University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Francis A. Nterful
University of Nebraska-Lincoln

McKenna R. Mettling
University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Source

via C&RL

Abstract

Patron-driven acquisition has been an important, if contentious, topic for decades, with numerous programs having been piloted, adopted, and reported on, largely favorably, in the library literature. Still, questions and doubts persist for academic libraries, especially where the composition of vendor plans and packages and the judgement of patrons are concerned. Past literature has approached the assessment of patron-driven acquisition by analyzing circulation/usage, comparing peer-library holdings, seeking patrons’ or librarians’ judgements of utility and suitability, looking for evidence of collection imbalances, and testing for overlap in patrons’ and librarians’ purchases. To contribute to this literature, this study addresses scholarly impact and examines whose selections – approval plans’, librarians’, or patrons’ – have been most heavily cited. For the social sciences, the sciences, and the humanities, the authors gathered topic-matched random samples of books acquired via approval plans and librarian orders during the first five years’ operation of their institutions’ interlibrary loan purchase-on-demand patron-driven acquisition program and compared their citation counts to the counts of books acquired via the program. Google Scholar was employed to tally citations.

Direct to Full Text Article
48 pages; PDF.”

Stephen

Posted on: September 27, 2018, 6:35 am Category: Uncategorized

0 Responses

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.