Use and user perception of electronic resources in the United Arab Emirates University (UAEU)

Libri

Volumn 54, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 18-29

  Ibrahim, Ahmed Elhafiz ^a  

^a UNITED ARAB EMIRATES UNIVERSITY   (United Arab Emirates)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 21144443303     PISSN: 00242667     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/LIBR.2004.18     Document Type: Review

References (17)

1. Borgman, C. L., S. G. Hirsh and J. Hiller. 1996. Rethinking online monitoring methods for information retrieval systems: from search product to search process. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 47(7): 568-83.
2. Calhoun, K. and Z. Koltay. 1999. Library gateway focus group report. URL: http://www.library.cornell.edu/ staffweb/GateEval/contents.html [viewed February 22, 2004].
3. Finholt, T. A. and J. A. M. Brooks. 1997. Analysis of JSTOR: the Impact on Scholarly Practice of Access to On-line Journal Archives. Conference on Scholarly Communication and Technology April 24-25, Emory University. URL: http://www.arl.org/scomm/scat/finholt.html [viewed Feb. 07, 2004].
4. Hahn, S. E., C. Speier, J. Palmer, and D. Wren. 1999. Advantages and disadvantages of electronic journals: Business school faculty views. Journal of Business and Finance Librarianship 5(1): 19-31.
5. Harter, S. P. and H. J. Kim. 1996. Electronic journals and scholarly communication: A citation and reference study. Midyear Meeting of the American Society for Information Science. San Diego. Information Research, 2 (1) URL: http://informationr.net/ir/2-1/paper9a.html. [viewed Feb. 07, 2004].
6. Hiller, S. 2002. How different are they? A comparison by academic area of library use, priorities, and information needs at the University of Washington. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship (Winter). URL: http://www.istl.org/istl/02-winter/article1. html [viewed February 22, 2004].
7. Kidd, T. 2002. Electronic journal usage statistics in practice. Serials 15(1): 11-17.
8. Macias-Chapula, C. 1995. Development of a soft systems model to identify information values: Impact and barriers in a health care information system. Journal of Information Science 21(4): 283-88.
9. Palmer, J. P. and M. Sandler. 2003. What do faculty want? Netconnect (Winter): 26-28.
10. Ray, K. and J. Day. 1998. Student attitudes towards electronic information resources. Information Research 4(2). URL: http://informationr.net/ ir/4-2/ paper54.html [viewed Feb. 07, 2004].
11. Rowley, J. 2001. JISC user behaviour monitoring and evaluation framework. Ariadne 30. URL: http:// www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue30/jisc/intro.html [viewed Feb. 07, 2004].
12. Shim, W. J. et al. 2001. Measure and statistics for research library networked services: Procedures and issues (ARL E-Metrics Phase II Report). Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries. URL: http://www. arl.org/stats/newmeas/emetrics/phasetwo.pdf [viewed February 20, 2004]
13. Speier, C., J. Palmer, D. Wren and S. Hahn. 1999. Faculty perceptions of electronic journals as scholarly communication: A question of prestige and legitimacy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50(6): 537-43.
14. Tomney, H. and P. F. Burton. 1998. Electronic journals: A study of usage and attitudes among academics. Journal of Information Science 24(6): 419-29.
15. Tompsett, C. and G. Alsop. 1997. A study of human communication issues in interactive scholarly electronic journals: Final report. URL: http://www.ukoln.ac. uk/services/elib/papers/tavistock/kingston/ kingston.html [viewed Feb. 07, 2004].
16. st IFLA General Conference Proceedings. New York. URL: http://www. ifla.org/IV/ifla61/61-tony.htm [viewed February 22, 2204].
17. Voorbij, H. J. 1999. Searching scientific information on the Internet: A Dutch academic user survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50 (7): 598-615.