CALIS分布式联合虚拟参考咨询系统的开发

介绍了CALIS分布式联合虚拟参考咨询系统(DCVRS)的开发,包括系统的架构、组成、功能以及相关标准等。DCVRS项目的目的是为CALIS成员馆提供一个联合虚拟参考咨询服务平台,沟通咨询馆员与读者,真正实时地解答读者在使用数字图书馆中第一时间所发生的问题;同时也有助于推动与国内外虚拟参考咨询的合作以及相关标准技术的发展。     

Organizational Power and the Institutional Review Board

In this essay, we respond to the narratives and essays in this issue by examining organizational power issues related to researchers and institutional research boards (IRBs). Rather than taking a singular perspective on power, we use multiple perspectives and suggest that the cumulative analyses provide the best understanding of IRBs and organizational power.     

Setting the Students’ Bearings and Balance in Appraisal

The author, a professor at the University of Toronto, touches briefly on the extensive and rich archival literature that supports the teaching of macroappraisal, but notes that this is not the only educational material she offers her students when teaching appraisal theory. She discusses the usefulness to archivists of literature from the fields of ethnography, organizational knowing, records in history, personal documentary behaviour, memory, and communications, noting that the use of texts from these fields can encourage students to reflect on their own presumptions and to develop a taste for the wide reading and research that must support appraisal.     

Editorial zum Themenheft: ?‘Software-Reengineering“’

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

Validating the Willingness to Self-Censor Scale: Individual Differences in the Effect of the Climate of Opinion on Opinion Expression

Hayes, Glynn, and Shanahan (2005) defined self-censorship asthe withholding of one’s opinion around an audience perceivedto disagree with that opinion. They argued that people differin their willingness to self-censor and introduced an 8-itemself-report instrument, the Willingness to Self-Censor scale,to measure this individual difference. The results of an experimentalstudy presented here provide further evidence of the constructvalidity of the scale. Each participant in the study was presentedwith a hypothetical scenario that contained information suggestinga group of people the participant was conversing with abouta controversial topic held opinions that were either uniformlysimilar to or different from the participant’s own opinion.Four weeks prior, each participant had responded to the Willingnessto Self-Censor scale and a measure of dispositional shyness.As expected, the manipulation of the climate of opinion affectedwillingness to express an opinion to the group, but more soamong those who scored relatively high on the Willingness toSelf-Censor scale. These results support the notion that somepeople rely on information about the climate of opinion moreso than do others when they decide whether or not to voice theiropinion publicly, and they suggest that the Willingness to Self-Censorscale measures this individual difference.     

State of the art of expert searching: results of a Medical Library Association survey.

OBJECTIVES: Medical Library Association (MLA) members were surveyed to gather background about the current state of expert searching in institutions. The survey results were intended to guide the recommendations of the Task Force on Expert Searching for promoting the importance of expert searching and implementing those recommendations. METHODS: MLA members were surveyed, and data obtained from the survey were compiled and analyzed to answer three general questions: what is the perceived value of searching skills to the institution, how do health sciences librarians maintain and improve their searching skills, and how are searching services promoted and/or mandated in the institution. RESULTS: There were 256 responses to the survey. Over 95% of the respondents saw their expert-searching skills were of value to their institutions, primarily through performing mediated searches and search consultations. Over 83% of the respondents believed that their searching skills had improved over the past 10 years. Most indicated that continued training was very important in maintaining and improving their skills. Respondents promoted searching services most frequently through orientations, brochures, and the libraries' Web pages. No respondent's institution mandated expert searching. Less than 2% of respondents' institutions had best practice guidelines related to expert searching, and only about 8% had guidelines or policies that identified situations where expert searching was recommended. CONCLUSIONS: The survey supports the belief that health sciences librarians still play a valuable role in searching, particularly in answering questions about treatment options and in providing education. It also highlights the need for more expert searching courses. There has been minimal discussion about the perceived need for expert-searching guidelines in the institutions represented by survey respondents.