IntroductionA pilot study by 6 Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSAs) explored how bibliometrics can be used to assess research influence.MethodsEvaluators from 6 institutions shared data on publications (4202 total) they supported, and conducted a combined analysis with state-of-the-art tools. This paper presents selected results based on the tools from 2 widely used vendors for bibliometrics: Thomson Reuters and Elsevier.ResultsBoth vendors located a high percentage of publications within their proprietary databases (>90%) and provided similar but not equivalent bibliometrics for estimating productivity (number of publications) and influence (citation rates, percentage of papers in the top 10% of citations, observed citations relative to expected citations). A recently available bibliometric from the National Institutes of Health Office of Portfolio Analysis, examined after the initial analysis, showed tremendous potential for use in the CTSA context.ConclusionDespite challenges in making cross-CTSA comparisons, bibliometrics can enhance our understanding of the value of CTSA-supported clinical and translational research.

The developmental course of multidimensional speech processing was examined in 80 children between 3 and 6 years of age and in 60 adults between 20 and 86 years of age. Processing interactions were assessed with a speeded classification task (Garner, 1974a), which required the subjects to attend selectively to the voice dimension while ignoring the linguistic dimension, and vice versa. The children and adults exhibited both similarities and differences in the patterns of processing dependencies. For all ages, performance for each dimension was slower in the presence of variation in the irrelevant dimension; irrelevant variation in the voice dimension disrupted performance more than irrelevant variation in the linguistic dimension. Trends in the degree of interference, on the other hand, showed significant differences between dimensions as a function of age. Whereas the degree of interference for the voice-dimension-relevant did not show significant age-related change, the degree of interference for the word-dimension-relevant declined significantly with age in a linear as well as a quadratic manner. A major age-related change in the relation between dimensions was that word processing, relative to voice-gender processing, required significantly more time in the children than in the adults. Overall, the developmental course characterizing multidimensional speech processing evidenced more pronounced change when the linguistic dimension, rather than the voice dimension, was relevant.Spoken words contain different types of information, such as auditory, phonetic, and semantic. Previous studies have suggested that these sources of information are processed together in a closely related manner by adults. Adult listeners, for example, cannot attend selectively to the voice dimension and ignore irrelevant variation in the linguistic dimension of speech, or vice versa. Instead, irrelevant variation in one dimension affects reaction time decisions in the other (Mullennix & Pisoni, 1990). Studies with auditory versions of "Stroop" stimuli (e.g., the word man spoken by a female voice; the word red printed in blue ink) (Stroop, 1935) revealed that adult listeners also cannot ignore irrelevant semantic content. Instead, semantic content systematically affects voice-gender reaction times. Performance is slower to Stroop targets representing conflict between voice and word dimensions, and faster to Stroop targets representing congruence between dimensions (Green & Barber, 1981, 1983. Such evidence implies that the voice and word dimensions are not processed independently (

The University of Michigan Library wanted to learn more about the kinds of searches its users were conducting through the "one search" search box on the Library Web site. Library staff conducted two investigations. A preliminary investigation in 2011 involved the manual review of the 100 most frequently occurring queries conducted through the site search box over the course of a month. Those 100 search terms accounted for 16 percent of total queries and were largely one-word searches for databases. In the follow-up investigation, the Library embarked on a more ambitious exploration of the 454,443 searches conducted during the winter 2011 semester, devising a method for selecting, categorizing, and summarizing user search queries. A sample of 1,201 searches from the search query logs was examined; after eliminating duplicate searches, there were 992 unique terms available for categorization. Using a non-overlapping sample of queries, a rubric was developed for categorizing user searches. Each of seven library staff members reviewed all unique terms in the sample to categorize them into the best fitting category from the rubric. After establishing a threshold for reliability among the individuals categorizing the queries, 862 unique search terms were analyzed. Based on this analysis, the most frequent kinds of searches conducted in the winter semester in 2011 on the University of Michigan Library's Web site were specific databases (28 percent), topical/exploratory types of queries (28 percent), and books (including searches by title, ISBN, call number, or a combination thereof) (16 percent).Within the sample, known-item searches comprised nearly half (44 percent) of searches in the sample. Another fifth (20 percent) of total searches were categorized as "exploratory," supporting the need to provide broader, subject-based paths to information through the site. Somewhat surprisingly, there were a small number of article searches (article titles, or mixed searches of journal names and authors and/or title words) in the search box-an indication that users understand the University of Michigan Library primary search box is not for articles.

No abstract