Proceedings of the International Conference on Scientific Information Two Volumes (1959) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
The Information-Gathering Habits of American Medical Scientists
The Information-Gathering Habits of American Medical Scientists
Pages 277-286
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 277... ...
One of these Government Soviet information programs gave rise to the study upon which the present paper is based. The specific mission of this program was the dissemination of information on Soviet medical research to American medical scientists.
|
From page 278... ...
The focus always was on existing, familiar channels of information. The findings of the respondents' use of Soviet and other foreign-language information have already been disseminated in the form of a report entitled, "The Use of Soviet Medical Research Information by American Medical Scientists," which was prepared and distributed in 1957.
|
From page 279... ...
This was done to maximize the number of respondents likely to have had recent or current experience in the use of Soviet information. In view of this intentional bias, the sample cannot be considered representative of all American medical research activities, and the conclusions and implications drawn from the study are valid only for those organizations represented in the sample.
|
From page 280... ...
These three tools or techniques constituted 77 per cent of all those mentioned. The remaining five of the eight primary tools or techniques mentioned were indexing and abstracting publications, textbooks, review papers, correspondence with colleagues, and visits to other research organizations.
|
From page 281... ...
After these came personal recommendations, personal reference files, book reviews, library card catalogs, publishers' advertisements, library acquisitions lists, and separate bibliographies, in that order. The average respondent had used an average of i.6 of the aforementioned tools or tech.
|
From page 282... ...
The types of problems described paraheled approximately those described in answer to the set of questions on how the respondents get answers or solutions to questions or problems that they cannot handle from their own immediate knowledge or background. The one notable difference was that a fairly large number of the respondents had conducted literature searches not to solve a specific problem or to obtain the answer to a specific question, but to obtain background information in connection with the writing of a paper or book.
|
From page 283... ...
Here again, we have an instance of literature searching on a continuing, int-ormai basis, rather than a formal basis. Of the various reasons for not searching the literature, the following cropped up most frequently: Respondent had previous knowledge of field and its literature; there was a lack of literature in the field; literature searches bias or inhibit a research worker; literature frequently contains errors; literature searches are not the job of the respondents.
|
From page 284... ...
. termmatlon ot mlcro organisms T%1 · 1 · 1 11 0 12 0 11 16 6 nys1olog1cal properties or chemical makeup of tissues, organs, or organisms 18 16 10 4 9 12 0 Physiological analytical techniques 6 0 14 3 4 4 21 Anatomy or embryology of tissues or organs 12 0 0 5 14 0 6 Surgical or dissection techniques 12 5 4 6 13 5 0 Information on specific diseases 36 48 25 41 60 16 15 Experimental methodology 0 0 6 4 0 0 0 Miscellaneous 0 0 16 19 31 0 11 Totals 118 89 205 129 193 89 115 APPENDIX II Sources of ideasfor current project Source Own previous work Colleagues Reading literature Observation of patients Assignments or suggestions from superiors Hearing lectures Omissions in the literature Disagreement with literature Teaching activities Taking courses Manufacturers or suppliers Miscellaneous Number of respondents 215 133 105 70 58 40 38 18 13 8 8 53 i?
|
From page 285... ...
HERNER Ir~formation-Gathering Habits of Medical Scientists APPENDIX Ill Tools or methods usedfor locating or becoming aware of sources of information Tools or methods Footnotes or other cited references By chance or accident, while looking through publications Indexing and abstracting publications Personal recommendations Personal reference file Book reviews Library card catalogs Publishers' advertisements Library acquisitions lists Separate bibliographies Others Number of respondents 486 481 477 439 405 351 346 332 291 212 12 APPENDIX IV Primary tools or techniques used in literature searches Tools or techniques Consulted colleagues Correspondence Footnotes and cited references Texts and monographs Indexes and abstracts Went to journals Journal indexes Asked librarians Card catalogs Personal reference file Review papers Bibliographies Number of respo1~de'1ts 215 35 258 168 263 348 33 48 25 113 123 33 285
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.