No abstract

Increasingly, e-books are becoming alternatives to print books in academic libraries, thus providing opportunities to assess how well the use of e-books meets the requirements of academics. This study uses the tasktechnology fit (TTF) model to explore the interrelationships of e-books, the affordances offered by smart readers, the information needs of academics, and the "fit" of technology to tasks as well as performance. We propose that the adoption of e-books will be dependent on how academics perceive the fit of this new medium to the tasks they undertake as well as what added-value functionality is delivered by the information technology that delivers the content. The study used content analysis and an online survey, administered to the faculty in Medicine, Science and Engineering at the University of New South Wales, to identify the attributes of a TTF construct of e-books in academic settings. Using exploratory factor analysis, preliminary findings confirmed annotation, navigation, and output as the core dimensions of the TTF construct. The results of confirmatory factor analysis using partial least squares path modeling supported the overall TTF model in reflecting significant positive impact of task, technology, and individual characteristics on TTF for e-books in academic settings; it also confirmed significant positive impact of TTF on individuals' performance and use, and impact of using e-books on individual performance. Our research makes two contributions: the development of an e-book TTF construct and the testing of that construct in a model validating the efficacy of the TTF framework in measuring perceived fit of e-books to academic tasks.

Bibliometric measures for evaluating research units in the book-oriented humanities and social sciences are underdeveloped relative to those available for journal-oriented science and technology. We therefore present a new measure designed for book-oriented fields: the "libcitation count." This is a count of the libraries holding a given book, as reported in a national or international union catalog. As librarians decide what to acquire for the audiences they serve, they jointly constitute an instrument for gauging the cultural impact of books. Their decisions are informed by knowledge not only of audiences but also of the book world, e.g., the reputations of authors and the prestige of publishers. From libcitation counts, measures can be derived for comparing research units. Here, we imagine a matchup between the departments of history, philosophy, and political science at the University of New South Wales and the University of Sydney in Australia. We chose the 12 books from each department that had thehighest libcitation counts in the Libraries Australia union catalog during 2000-2006. We present each book's raw libcitation count, its rank within its LC class, and its LC-class normalized libcitation score. The latter is patterned on the item-oriented field normalized citation score used in evaluative bibliometrics. Summary statistics based on these measures allow the departments to be compared for cultural impact. Our work has implications for programs such as Excellence in Research for Australia and the Research Assessment Exercise in the United Kingdom. It also has implications for data mining in OCLC's WorldCat.

No abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to analyse job ads as relatively accessible indicators of the knowledge, skills and competencies required of librarians by employers. It then uses a framework provided by the literature on professional jurisdiction to examine what may be trends and shaping factors for the Library and Information Studies (LIS) profession with regard to jurisdiction in a changing information landscape. Design/methodology/approach -Job ads were examined in two separate studies; one comparing job ads in Australia and the USA over eight weeks in 2004, and the other looking at one month snapshots of Australian job ads in 1974, 1984, 1994 and 2004. The text from the job ads was analysed using a content analysis software package. The literature on professional jurisdiction provided an interpretive framework. Findings -The Australian snapshots over time showed that there is an increasing lack of clarity about the skills and competencies required of librarians. The American job ads seemed to rank jurisdictional knowledge and professional qualifications more highly than their Australian counterparts. Interpersonal skills, behavioural characteristics and technical services skills are in demand in both countries. Originality/value -In addition to reporting on the knowledge, skills and competencies required of librarians, by applying an interpretive framework from the literature on professional jurisdiction the paper exposes some of the challenges ahead for the LIS profession.Research limitations/implications -The research used a small number of sources and a relatively small number of ads. It is acknowledged that job ads are only one source of information about knowledge, skills and competencies.