weighted allocation formula and the association between academic discipline and research cited by...
TRANSCRIPT
The weighted allocation formula and the association between academic discipline and research cited by faculty.
Kristin CalvertHead of Content Organization & Management
ALCTS Collection Management Section7th Annual Collection Management & Development Research Forum 2016 ALA Annual Conference
Tension over allocations
• Allocation formula for monograph funds
• Balancing a department’s need for journals and books
• Regardless of what metrics we used there were manual adjustments and horse-trading
Research questions
• Can we determine a better way to identify a department’s demand for books?
Research questionsQ1. Does a statistically-significant relationship exist between academic department and the type(s) of research cited in its faculty’s scholarship?
Q2. Does a statistically-significant relationship exist between academic discipline and the type(s) of research cited in its faculty’s scholarship?
Q3. What is the average age of publication cited?
Methodology
• Citation analysis of research published by Western Carolina University faculty and staff
Methodology
Web of Knowledge:• Pub. date: 2012-2014• Address: “Cullowhee”• Arts & Humanities Citation
Index, Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, Book Citation Index, &Conf. Proceedings Citation Index.
Methodology
The results were saved and exported using the methodology provided by Salisbury and Smith in their 2010 article in Collection Management“The Use of Web of Knowledge to Study Publishing and Citation Use for Local Researchers at the Campus Level”Lutishoor Salisbury, Jeremy S. Smith Collection Management Vol. 35, Iss. 2, 2010DOI:10.1080/01462671003597959http://tiny.cc/q916by
Methodology – authors
• Publications were not duplicated across departments or included multiple times for the same department when more than one WCU faculty author was present
• Department assigned based on the first WCU author listed
• Department assigned code to anonymize* data
Methodology – references
USEPA, 2000, EPA841R02001 ReportCook G. K., 2005, P INT C, P1103 ConferenceDuffy DL, 2012, APPL ANIM BEHAV SCI, V138, P99, DOI 10.1016/j.applanim.2012.02.011
Journal
Dunbar Robin, 1997, GROOMING GOSSIP EVOL Book
Typical citations exported from Web of Knowledge
Methodology – references
• No sampling – too many underrepresented departments
• Information obtained by Google (Scholar), WorldCat, Ulrich’s, ISI help pages, or inferred from the citation
• If no determination could be made, references were marked “other”
Methodology – categoriesCategory Examples Final category in
analysisBook Books, book chapters, and material with ISBNs BookThesis Theses and dissertations BookJournal Journal articles, and material with ISSNs ArticleNewspaper Newspaper articles ArticleConference Conference presentations or papers ArticleReport White papers, agency reports, or commissioned
papers available for freeOther
Data Data sets, usually census data OtherPatent Patents OtherStandard Industry standards (e.g. ANSI, ASTM) OtherWeb Blog posts, commercial websites, other free
information on the webOther
Other Unidentified materials and everything else Other
None Publication cited no references Other
Methodology – SPSS
• Chi-Square Test for Association– department * citation type – field * citation type
• Strength of association – Phi and Cramer’s V tests
• Age of references – 0-2 years, 2-5 years, 5-10 years, 10-20
years, 20+ years
Data!
Results
• 12,979 cited references from 370 works were included in the study
• 26 of the 29 academic departments or schools were represented in the sample– Communication, Music, and Stage &
Screen absent from the data
Department * Citation type
Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymptotic Sig. (2-sided)Pearson Chi-Square 2,080.262a 52 .000
Likelihood Ratio 1,863.845 52 .000
N of Valid Cases 12,979 a. 5 cells (6.2%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .20.
Symmetric Measures
ValueNominal by Nominal Phi .400
Cramer's V .283
N of Valid Cases 12,979
Click for cross-tabs!
Field * Citation typeChi-Square Tests
Value df Asymptotic Sig. (2-sided)Pearson Chi-Square 1,185.793a 10 .000
Likelihood Ratio 977.598 10 .000
N of Valid Cases 12,979 a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 6.08.
Symmetric Measures
ValueNominal by Nominal Phi .302
Cramer's V .214
N of Valid Cases 12,979
Click for cross-tabs!
Age of materials
Business Fine Arts Health Sciences
Humanities Social Science STEM0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
0-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years Over 20 years
Takeaways – WCU
• Limitations of the methodology• Repeatability• Demonstrated demand for
books vs. “I need more money”
Takeaways – audience
• These numbers don’t help you• Choice of categories• Reliability of exported citations
Now what?
Importance of books
Student Credit Hours• Undergrad• Grad
Faculty
Cost-per-book
This research
Student Credit Hours
FacultyCost-per-book
Supply
Circulation
Allocation formula metrics
Current Proposed
Sign offKristin Calvert
E-mail: [email protected] URL: http://tiny.cc/calvertkr
Twitter: @CalvertKR LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kristincalvert
SlideShare http://www.slideshare.net/KristinCalvert1 ResearcherID: G-6184-2015
ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7035-140X