바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

A Study on Quality Evaluation of Discovery Central Index - the Case of EDS(EDSCO Discovery Service) -

Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society / Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, (P)2466-2542;
2014, v.45 no.3, pp.415-440
https://doi.org/10.16981/kliss.45.3.201409.415

  • Downloaded
  • Viewed

Abstract

This study intends to make a comprehensive inquiry into the meaning and limitations of Discovery, and to explore how to make full use of Discovery in library cataloging. To this end, first discussed is the meaning of Discovery, which has a variety definitions. For the quality evaluation, 5 criteria were developed on the basis of literature review. Then this study conducted the quality evaluation on the basis of previously developed 5 criteria and usefulness of Discovery in library catalogs is thoroughly discussed. Based on these, the final discussion includes strategies for Korean LIS scholars and library practitioners to consider when applying Discovery as an integrated search tool.

keywords
Discovery, Central index, Quality evaluation, EDS(EBSCO Discovery Service), 디스커버리, 통합색인, 통합검색, 품질평가

Reference

1.

구중억, 곽승진. 2007. 차세대 OPAC의 인터페이스와 기능에 관한 연구. 한국비블리아학회지, 18(2): 61-88.

2.

김예린, 정영미. 2011. 대학도서관의 차세대 OPAC 체크리스트 개발. 한국정보관리학회 학술대회논문집. 2011년 8월 26일. 서울: 한국교육학술정보원, 53-58

3.

김왕종. 2004. 통합정보시스템의 품질평가. 석사학위논문, 부산대학교 대학원 문헌정보학과.

4.

남영준, 양지안. 2010. 대학도서관 이용자의 메타서치시스템 이용행태 연구. 정보관리학회지, 27(3): 307-323.

5.

도태현, 정영미. 2013. 대학도서관의차세대OPAC기능채택과확산현황. 한국도서관·정보학회지, 44(2): 197-215.

6.

심경. 2008a. 차세대 도서관 목록. 도서관문화, 49(9): 22-28.

7.

심경. 2008b. 통합검색시스템. 도서관문화, 49(12): 31-38.

8.

윤정옥. 2010. 차세대 도서관 목록 사례의 고찰. 한국도서관·정보학회지, 41(1): 5-28.

9.

윤정옥. 2013. 차세대 도서관 목록의 제반 기능에 관한 분석. 한국문헌정보학회지, 47(4): 5-23.

10.

이제환. 2002. 공동목록 DB의 품질평가와 품질관리: KERIS의 종합목록 DB를 중심으로. 한국문헌정보학회지, 36(1): 61-89.

11.

조종민. 2011. 차세대 전자자료 통합검색 솔루션(discovery solution) 도입 검토 사례연구. 사대도협회지, 12: 41-57.

12.

최성진, 김태수. 2010. 연구도서관 디스커버리 환경에서의 MARC의 역할 연구. 지식처리연구, 11(1/2): 33-47.

13.

홍현진. 2005. 웹 기반 데이터베이스의 품질평가 기준 개발에 관한 연구. 한국문헌정보학회지, 39(2): 211-235.

14.

Babu, Preedip Balaji and M. Krishnamurthy. 2013. “Library Automation to Resource Discovery: a Review of Emerging Challenges." The Electronic Library, 31(4): 433-451.

15.

Breeding, Marshall. 2007. “Thinking about your next OPAC." Computers in Libraries, 27(4): 28-30.

16.

Breeding, Marshall. 2010. “The State of the Art in Library Discovery 2010." Computers in Libraries, 30(1): 31-34.

17.

Clarke, Eddie. 2006. Resource Discovery Tools Guide and Evaluation. <http://www.staffs.ac.uk/ COSE/DICE/ResDisToolsandEval.pdf> [cited 2014. 7. 28].

18.

Chickering, F. William and Sharon Q. Yang. 2014. “Evaluation and Comparison of Discovery Tools: An Update." Information Technology and Libraries, 33(2): 5-30.

19.

DeFelice, Barbara et al. 2009. An Evaluation of Serials Solutions Summon As a Discovery Service for the Dartmouth College Library. Dartmouth College Library.

20.

Delone, William H. and McLean, E. R. 2004. “Measuring e-commerce success: Applying the DeLone & McLean Information Systems Success Model." International Journal of Electronic Comerce, 9(1): 31-47.

21.

Emanuel, Jenny and Guest Columnist. 2009. “Next Generation Catalogs : What do They do and Why Should We Care?" Reference & User Services Quarterly, 49(2): 117-120.

22.

Fagan, Jody Condit et al. 2012. “Usability Test Results for a Discovery Tool in an Academic Library." Information technology and libraries, 31(1): 83-112.

23.

Foster, Anita K. and Jean B. MacDonald, 2013. “ATale of Two Discoveries : Comparing the usability of Summon and EBSCO Discovery Service." Journal of Web Lirarianship, 7(1): 1-19.

24.

Granick, Lois. 1991. “Assuring the Quality of Information Dissemination." Information Services and Use, 11(3): 117-136.

25.

Grophy, Jan and David Bawden. 2005. “Is Google enough? Comparison of an Internet Search Engine with Academic Library Resources." Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 57(6): 498-512.

26.

Nagy, Andrew. 2009. “A Conversation With Karen Schneider: VuFind and Summon." <http://www.wils.wisc.edu/events/wworld09/sessions/anagy.pdf.> [cited 2014. 7. 20].

27.

NISO ODI Working Group. ODI Survey Report: Reflections and Perspectives on Discovery Services. <http://www.niso.org/apps/group_public/document.php?document_id=9977> [cited 2014. 7. 17].

28.

OCLC. 2005. Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc.

29.

OCLC. 2010. Perceptions of Libraries, 2010: Context and Community. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc.

30.

Philip, Martin. 2010. Do Students Wants a One-stop-shop to Help Them Navigate Their Way Around the Maze of Library Resources? M. A. thesis. The university of sheffield.

31.

Pradhan, Dinesh R., Kruti Trivedi and Jagdish Arora. 2011. “Searching Online Resources in New Discovery Environment: A state-of-the-Art review." Proceedings of the 8th International Caliber, 132-145.

32.

Vaughan, Jason. 2011. “Web Scale Discovery: What and Why?" Library Technology Reports, 47(1): 5-11.

33.

Vaughan, Jason. 2012. “Investigations into Library Web Scale Discovery Service", Information Technology & Libraries, 31(1): 32-82.

34.

Way, Dong. 2010. “The Impact of Web-scale Discovery on the Use of a Library Collection." Serials Review, 36(4): 214-220.

35.

Williams, Sarah C. and Anita K. Foster. 2011. “Promise Fulfilled? An EBSCO Discovery Service Usability Study." Journal of Web Librarianship, 5(3): 179-198.

36.

Yang, Sharon Q. and Kurt Wagner. 2010. “Evaluating and Comparing Discovery Tools: How Close are We Towards Next Generation Catalog?" Library Hi Tech, 28(4): 690-709.

37.

Yang, Sharon Q. and Melissa A. Hofmann. 2010. “Evaluating and Comparing Discovery Tools: How Close AreWe Towards Next Generation Catalog?"Library Hi Tech, 28(4): 690-709.

38.

A도서관 디스커버리 업무담당 사서. 2014. 7. 28, 부산, [인터뷰].

Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society