Seeking, Reading, and Use of Scholarly Articles: An International Study of Perceptions and Behavior of Researchers

While journal articles are still considered the most important sources of scholarly reading, libraries may no longer have a monopoly on providing discovery and access. Many other sources of scholarly information are available to readers. This international study examines how researchers discover, read, and use scholarly literature for their work. Respondents in 2018 report an average of almost 20 article readings a month and there are still significant differences found in the reading and use of scholarly literature by discipline and geographical location, consistent with the earlier studies. Researchers show they are willing to change or adopt new strategies to discover and obtain articles.

[1]  Dianne Nelson,et al.  The uptake of electronic journals by academics in the UK, their attitudes towards them and their potential impact on scholarly communication , 2001 .

[2]  Kanwal Ameen,et al.  Scholarly communication in the age of Google: Exploring academics' use patterns of e-journals at the University of the Punjab , 2017, Electron. Libr..

[3]  Biddy Casselden,et al.  An exploration into the information-seeking behaviours of engineers and scientists , 2019, J. Libr. Inf. Sci..

[4]  Mark Ware,et al.  The STM report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing fourth edition , 2015 .

[5]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Variations in article seeking and reading patterns of academics: What makes a difference? , 2009 .

[6]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Article and book reading patterns of scholars: findings for publishers , 2012, Learn. Publ..

[7]  Kanwal Ameen,et al.  Practices of quality and trustworthiness in scholarly communication: A case from Pakistan , 2017, Learn. Publ..

[8]  B. Björk,et al.  Anatomy of open access publishing: a study of longitudinal development and internal structure , 2012, BMC Medicine.

[9]  Kerry Holden,et al.  Exploring the tensions and incongruities of Internet governance in Africa , 2016, Gov. Inf. Q..

[10]  Alex Csiszar,et al.  The Scientific Journal: Authorship and the Politics of Knowledge in the Nineteenth Century , 2018 .

[11]  M. Kay.  Towards Electronic Journals: Realities for Scientists, Librarians and Publishers, , 2001 .

[12]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Changes in Scholarly Reading in Finland Over a Decade: Influences of E-Journals and Social Media , 2019, Libri.

[13]  Jenny Fry,et al.  The cultural shaping of scholarly communication: Explaining e-journal use within and across academic fields , 2004, ASIST.

[14]  B. Kirsop,et al.  Open access archiving: the fast track to building research capacity in developing countries , 2006 .

[15]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Towards Electronic Journals: Realities for Scientists, Librarians, and Publishers,,,, , 2000 .

[16]  Stephen S. Murray,et al.  The effect of use and access on citations , 2005, Inf. Process. Manag..

[17]  Belver C. Griffith,et al.  Communication and Information Processing within Scientific Disciplines: Empirical Findings for Psychology , 1979 .

[18]  Teja Koler-Povh,et al.  Impact of open access on citation of scholarly publications in the field of civil engineering , 2013, Scientometrics.

[19]  Colin Steele.  The scientific journal: authorship and the politics of knowledge in the nineteenth century , 2019, Journal of the Australian Library and Information Association.

[20]  Fytton Rowland,et al.  How international readers view Chinese academic journals: a survey of Chinese-speaking scholars in the UK , 2008 .

[21]  Li Zhang,et al.  Use of Library Services by Engineering Faculty at Mississippi State University, a Large Land Grant Institution , 2015 .

[22]  C. Lee Jones,et al.  Scientific Journals in the United States: Their Production, Use, and Economics , 1983 .

[23]  Simon Inger,et al.  Library technology in content discovery – evidence from a large-scale reader survey , 2013 .

[24]  Barrie Gunter,et al.  The Google generation: the information behaviour of the researcher of the future , 2008, Aslib Proc..

[25]  Judith Emde,et al.  A Comparison of E-Book and Print Book Discovery, Preferences, and Usage by Science and Engineering Faculty and Graduate Students at the University of Kansas , 2014 .

[26]  Karen Marie Øvern.  Information use among first-year students in health sciences: Is an intervention needed? , 2018 .

[27]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Use and Users of Electronic Library Resources: An Overview and Analysis of Recent Research Studies , 2003 .

[28]  W. Nwagwu.  Open Access Initiatives in Africa — Structure, Incentives and Disincentives , 2013 .

[29]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  No scholar is an island: The impact of sharing in the work life of scholars , 2017, Learn. Publ..

[30]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Scholarly article seeking, reading, and use: a continuing evolution from print to electronic in the sciences and social sciences , 2015, Learn. Publ..

[31]  Suzie Allard,et al.  Perceived value of scholarly articles , 2011, Learn. Publ..

[32]  Pertti Vakkari,et al.  Cross Country Comparison of Scholarly E-Reading Patterns in Australia, Finland, and the United States , 2010 .

[33]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  How scholars implement trust in their reading, citing and publishing activities: Geographical differences , 2014 .

[34]  Anatoliy A. Gruzd,et al.  Connected scholars: Examining the role of social media in research practices of faculty using the UTAUT model , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[35]  Brian A. Nosek,et al.  How open science helps researchers succeed , 2016, eLife.

[36]  A. Abrizah,et al.  Scholarly communication and matters of trust and authority: A comparative analysis of Malaysian and Chinese researchers , 2017 .