RefWorks Usage Patterns: Exploring the First Four Semesters of Use by Faculty, Graduate Students, and Undergraduates

Hristova, Mariela

doi:10.1080/10875301.2012.720654

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the time of writing, Mendeley (now owned by Elsevier) allowed users to list their own articles on their profile even though the site seems to be mainly focused on sharing reference lists rather than scientists publicizing their own research. Some reference managers, such as RefWorks (Hristovaa, ), also allow reference sharing, although this is not their primary function.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Academia.edu: Social network or Academic Network?

Thelwall

Kousha

2013

Asso for Info Science & Tech

196

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academic social network sites Academia.edu and ResearchGate, and reference sharing sites Mendeley, Bibsonomy, Zotero, and CiteULike, give scholars the ability to publicize their research outputs and connect with each other. With millions of users, these are a significant addition to the scholarly communication and academic information‐seeking eco‐structure. There is thus a need to understand the role that they play and the changes, if any, that they can make to the dynamics of academic careers. This article investigates attributes of philosophy scholars on Academia.edu, introducing a median‐based, time‐normalizing method to adjust for time delays in joining the site. In comparison to students, faculty tend to attract more profile views but female philosophers did not attract more profile views than did males, suggesting that academic capital drives philosophy uses of the site more than does friendship and networking. Secondary analyses of law, history, and computer science confirmed the faculty advantage (in terms of higher profile views) except for females in law and females in computer science. There was also a female advantage for both faculty and students in law and computer science as well as for history students. Hence, Academia.edu overall seems to reflect a hybrid of scholarly norms (the faculty advantage) and a female advantage that is suggestive of general social networking norms. Finally, traditional bibliometric measures did not correlate with any Academia.edu metrics for philosophers, perhaps because more senior academics use the site less extensively or because of the range informal scholarly activities that cannot be measured by bibliometric methods.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Academia.edu: Social network or Academic Network?

Thelwall

Kousha

2013

Asso for Info Science & Tech

196

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Learning more about the most popular features of these programs can aid us in future marketing efforts and in designing instruction to address knowledge gaps among current users. Such research should reveal idiosyncrasies among RefWorks users like those identified by various studies (Hristova, 2012;Lonergan, 2017;Melles & Unsworth, 2015).…”

Section: Future Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Despite a rather rich history of research on CMS in academic libraries, little has been said about the potential to grow library services through CMS-centered programming. Several articles do suggest, if often only in passing, that library instruction in CMS can lead to more involvement with faculty on campus (Duong, 2010;East, 2001;Harrison, Summerton, & Peters, 2005;Hristova, 2012;Siegler & Simboli, 2002). Despite their vague promises of improved collaboration, however, these studies do not detail any wider impact on libraries which feature CMS in their programming.…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Leveraging Citation Management Software (CMS) for Broad Library Impact

McColl

2018

palrap

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Librarians recognized an opportunity to grow the number of RefWorks users on campus and launched an initiative to more aggressively market the software. Barriers to growth were recognized, staff training was undertaken, and targeted services and programming were infused with more content centered on the citation management software (CMS). After a year and a half, the library assessed the popularity and impact of the program. While RefWorks is now much more widely used on campus, it has also led to additional instructional classes, workshops, and reference transactions. These additional and unanticipated benefits have greatly enhanced the reputation of the software among librarians. In addition, students, faculty, and university administrators have all responded positively to the results of the initiative, enhancing the reputation of the library on campus. Other academic libraries may benefit from a similar campaign based on their own subscription CMS.

show abstract

“…The authors argue that reference management, including the use of RMS, can be seen as a solution to competing demands on a researcher's workflow, and as such there is no right answer. Hristova (2012) examined RefWorks usage statistics to compare student and faculty usage patterns. Her findings challenged the assumption that faculty are heavier users of RMS than students; instead the majority had relatively low frequency and intensity of use.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reference management software preferences among liberal arts faculty

Lonergan

2017

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-The purpose of this study was to determine faculty preferences and attitudes regarding reference management software (RMS) to improve the library's support and training programs. Design/methodology/approach-A short, online survey was emailed to approximately 272 faculty. Findings-Survey results indicated that multiple RMS were in use, with faculty preferring Zotero over the library-supported RefWorks. More than 40 per cent did not use any RMS. Research limitations/implications-The relatively short length of the survey precluded a more detailed investigation of faculty attitudes. The 20 per cent response rate, although typical of surveys of this type, may over-represent those faculty who have strong attitudes toward RMS. These findings support the necessity of doing more research to establish the parameters of the RMS environment among faculty, with implications for support, instruction and outreach at the institutional level. Practical implications-Surveys should be conducted to establish local faculty RMS usage and preferences, as they may differ from both published findings and local expectations. Because it is unlikely that faculty will overwhelmingly use one RMS, libraries should plan to support multiple RMS. Originality/value-This study is among the first to investigate the issue of RMS faculty preferences in a liberal arts setting.

show abstract

RefWorks Usage Patterns: Exploring the First Four Semesters of Use by Faculty, Graduate Students, and Undergraduates

Cited by 8 publications

References 10 publications

Academia.edu: Social network or Academic Network?

Academia.edu: Social network or Academic Network?

Leveraging Citation Management Software (CMS) for Broad Library Impact

Reference management software preferences among liberal arts faculty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About