2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.acalib.2011.08.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Evaluation of Digital Libraries and Institutional Repositories in India

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
22
0
3

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
1
22
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…IR managers during the repositioning process were encouraged to also seek alternate content types for inclusion in the IR, strengthen metadata, and review the IR technical infrastructure to more robustly support existing IR content. Tripathi and Jeevan (2011) found similar results in India, where institutional repositories faced a huge problem with low quantities of scholarly submissions from researchers. An investigation of Malaysian repositories supports this finding, but suggests that when librarians take an active role in repository collection development and marketing, the number of submissions improves (Kamraninia and Abrizah, 2010).…”
Section: Literature Reviewsupporting
confidence: 72%
“…IR managers during the repositioning process were encouraged to also seek alternate content types for inclusion in the IR, strengthen metadata, and review the IR technical infrastructure to more robustly support existing IR content. Tripathi and Jeevan (2011) found similar results in India, where institutional repositories faced a huge problem with low quantities of scholarly submissions from researchers. An investigation of Malaysian repositories supports this finding, but suggests that when librarians take an active role in repository collection development and marketing, the number of submissions improves (Kamraninia and Abrizah, 2010).…”
Section: Literature Reviewsupporting
confidence: 72%
“…As Figure suggests, the majority of studies were focused on evaluating the quality of digital libraries’ services from the perspective of the users (Ahmad & Abawajy, ; Amannollahi‐Nik, Alipoorhafezi & Matlabi, ; Amini, ; Garibay, Gutiérrez & Figueroa, ; Helena Vinagre, Gaspar Pinto & Ochôa, ; Jafar‐Begloo, Hamidi, Anvari & Rouhani, ; Kyrillidou & Giersch, ; Lai, Chiu, Huang, Chen & Huang, ; Moreira, Gonçalves, Laender & Fox, ; Naiej, Noroozi & Hamidi, ; Sohrabi, Farzaneh & Reisi, ; Yousefzadeh‐Najdi, ). The second most frequent focus of research was on digital libraries as a whole (including analysing the various aspects of digital libraries) (Al‐Dini, ; Cemal, Doğan, Özlem & Sacit, ; Fuhr et al., ; Górny, Catlow & Mazurek, ; Hoe‐Lian Goh et al., ; Jose, ; Masoudnia & Ali‐Ebadi, ; Tripathi & Jeevan, ; Xie, , ). Studies are conducted to:…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Markey, Rieh, St. Jean, Yakel, and Yao (2009, May 19) emphasize that service is an internal critical success factor in IRs. Tripathi and Jeevan (2011) suggest that users must be educated as to intellectual property rights issues so that IR services can achieve success by being rights-compliant. Thibodeau (2007) stated that the success of an IR will ultimately be determined by the use of the collection, and Sawant (2012) similarly indicated that users are one of the important factors of the long-term survival of IRs.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Universities and other research organizations worldwide are spending large amounts of money to establish digital libraries and institutional repositories (Tripathi & Jeevan, 2011). However, low success rates have been reported for IRs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%