Keeping up to date with research developments is a central activity of academic researchers, but researchers face difficulties in managing the rapid growth of available scientific information. This study examined how researchers stay up to date, using the information journey model as a framework for analysis and investigating which dimensions influence information behaviors. We designed a 2-round study involving semistructured interviews and prototype testing with 61 researchers with 3 levels of seniority (PhD student to professor). Data were analyzed following a semistructured qualitative approach. Five key dimensions that influence information behaviors were identified: level of seniority, information sources, state of the project, level of familiarity, and how well defined the relevant community is. These dimensions are interrelated and their values determine the flow of the information journey. Across all levels of professional expertise, researchers used similar hard (formal) sources to access content, while soft (interpersonal) sources were used to filter information. An important "pain point" that future information tools should address is helping researchers filter information at the point of need. IntroductionConducting and delivering up-to-date research is key to academic work, but keeping up to date is becoming more challenging: Researchers have to locate relevant information within a body of literature that is growing by millions of new articles per year (Björk, Roos, & Lauri, 2009;Khabsa & Giles, 2014). Many researchers "feel that they do not find all the information on the topic for which they are searching" (Hemminger, Lu, Vaughan, & Adams, 2007, p. 2211. This "information explosion" has changed information behaviors and exposed new problems. Although information is more accessible than 20 years ago, it is harder to get to the "right information as needed at a given time" (Saracevic, 2009(Saracevic, , p. 2571. The study reported here aimed to better understand current information behaviors of scholars, their adjustments as a result of information overload, and requirements for improved information services, with a particular focus on how they keep up to date.In this paper, we present our analysis of in-depth interviews with 61 researchers, in which we investigated their information needs and requirements for future tools. We use the information journey model (Blandford & Attfield, 2010) to frame the data analysis, and build on the work of Wilson and Walsh (1996), and Järvelin and Ingwersen (2004) to identify dimensions involved in the information journey, This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.how they interrelate, and how the values within each dimension influence the way researchers seek, acquire, and use information. Findings should inform the design of future information systems (e.g., information-seeking tools, dashboards, database...

While always integral to scientific activity, data work has recently emerged as a key set of processes within societal activities of all kinds. While data work presents new opportunities for discovery, value creation, and decision making, its emergence also raises significant ethical issues, including those of ownership, privacy, and trust. This article presents a review of data work, and how negotiating a trade‐off between its value and risks requires locating its processes within the contexts of its conditions and consequences. These include international, national, and sectoral conditions of law, policy, and regulation at a macro level; organizational conditions of information and data governance that aim to address the value and risks of data work at a meso level; along with attention to the everyday contexts of data and information handling by data information and other professionals at a micro level. In conclusion, a conceptual framework is presented that locates the processes of data work within the matrix of its macro meso and micro conditions, its consequences for individuals, organizations, and society, and the relations between them. Suggestions are given for how research into the study of data work—its value risks and governance— can be advanced by using this framework.

Purpose -This editorial seeks to examine the definition of a "digital library" to see whether one can be constructed that usefully distinguishes a digital library from other types of electronic resources. Design/methodology/approach -The primary methodology compares definitions from multiple settings, including formal institutional settings, working definitions from articles, and a synthesis created in a seminar at Humboldt University in Berlin. Findings -At this point, digital libraries are evolving too fast for any lasting definition. Definitions that users readily understand are too broad and imprecise, and definitions with more technical precision quickly grow too obscure for common use. Originality/value -A functional definition of a digital library would add clarity to a burgeoning field, especially when trying to evaluate a resource. The student perspective provides a fresh look at the problem.