The impact of survey data: Measuring success

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 58, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 190-199

  Hamilton, Elizabeth C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOGRAPHIC RETRIEVAL SYSTEMS; DATA STRUCTURES; DECISION MAKING; ELECTRONIC PUBLISHING; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; ONLINE SEARCHING; PUBLIC POLICY;

DATA FILES; DATA SETS; KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER; SURVEY DATA;

DATABASE SYSTEMS;

EID: 33846373344     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20458     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. Alreck, P.L., & Settle, R.B. (1985). The survey research handbook. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
2. Bauer, K., & Bakkalbasi, N. (2005, September 5). An examination of citation counts in a new scholarly communication environment. D-Lib Magazine, 11 (9). Retrieved November 6, 2005, from http://www.dlib. org/dlib/september05/ bauer/09bauer.html
3. Birdsall, W.F., & Shearer, K. (2005). Towards an integrated knowledge ecosystem: A Canadian research strategy. Ottawa: Canadian Association of Research Libraries.
4. Birmingham, C.L., Muller, J.L., Palepu, A., Spinelli, J.J., & Anis, A.H. (1999). The cost of obesity in Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 180(4), 483-488.
5. Boyack, K.W., & Borner, K. (2003). Indicator-assisted evaluation and funding of research: Visualizing the influence of grants on the number and citation counts of research papers [Electronic version]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(5), 447-461. Retrieved October 10,2005, from the Wiley Interscience database.
6. Canada, Office of the Auditor General. (1999). Statistics Canada-Managing the quality of statistics. Report of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada (1999 ed.). Ottawa: Author.
7. Canada, Office of the Auditor General. (2002). Statistics CanadaManaging the quality of health statistics. Report of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada (2002 ed.). Ottawa: Author.
8. Chiu, W., & Ho, Y. (2005). Bibliometric analysis of homeopathy research during the period of 1991 to 2003. Scientometrics, 63(1), 3-23.
9. Day, A., & Peters, J. (1994). Quality indicators in academic publishing. Library Review, 43(7), 4-72. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/ViewContentServlet?Filenames Published/EmeraldFullTextAiticle/Aiticles/0350430701.html
10. Deis, L.F., & Goodman, D. (2005). Web of Science (2004 version) and SCOPUS. Charleston Advisor, 6(3), 5-21. Retrieved November 3, 2005, from http://www.charlestonco.com/comp.cfm?id=43
11. Dillman, D.A. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
12. Fosmire, M. (2004), Scan it and they will come ... but will they cite it? Science and Technology Libraries, 25(1-2), 55-72.
13. Frandsen, T.F. (2005). Journal interaction: A bibliometric analysis of economics journals. Journal of Documentation, 61(3), 385-401.
14. Geraci, D., Humphrey, C., & Jacobs, J. (in press), Data basics: Providing services for social science research data. Ottawa: Canadian Library Association and the American Research Libraries.
15. Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Bate, P., Kyriakidou, O., Macfarlane, F., & Peacock, R. (2004). How to spread good ideas: A systematic review of the literature on diffusion, dissemination and sustainability of innovations in health service delivery and organisation: Report for the national co-ordinating centre for NHS service delivery and organisation R & D (NCCSDO). London: University College London. Retrieved November 16, 2005, from http://www.sdo.lshtm.ac.uk/pdf/changemanagement_greenhalgh_report.pdf
16. Groves, R.M. (2004). Survey errors and survey costs. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
17. Hawkins, D.T. (2001). Information science abstracts: Tracking the literature of information science. Part 1: Definition and map. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(1), 44-53. Retrieved October 29, 2005, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1532-2890 (2000)52: 1〈44:AID-ASI1057〉3.0.OO;2-6
18. Helmer, D., Savoie, I., & Green, C.J. (1999). How do various fugitive literature searching methods impact the comprehensiveness of literature uncovered for systematic review? BCOHTA 1999:12C. Vancouver: British Columbia Office of Health Technology Assessment. Retrieved September 9, 2002, from http://www.chspr.ubc.ca/bcohta/pdf/bco99-10C.pdf
19. Hood, W.W., & Wilson, C.S. (2005), The relationship of records in multiple databases to their usage or citedness. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(9), 1004-1007. Retrieved November 7, 2005, from the Wiley Interscience database.
20. Jacso, P. (2004). Citation searching. Online Information Review, 28(6), 454-460. Retrieved September 13,2005, from IngentaConnect.
21. Jasco, P. (2005), As we may search - Comparison of major features of the Web of Science, SCOPUS, Google Scholar citation-based and citation enhanced databases. Current Science, 89(9), 1537-1547.
22. Kurtz, M., Eichorn, G., Accomazzi, A., Grant, C., Demleitner, M., Henneken, E., & Murray, S. (2005). The effect of use and access on citations. Information Processing & Management, 41(6), 1395-1402. Retrieved November 6, 2005, from ScienceDirect.
23. Landry, R., Amara, N., & Lamari, M. (2001). Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada. Research Policy, 30(2), 333-349.
24. Luzi, D. (1988). E-print archives: A new communication pattern for grey literature. Interlending and Document Supply, 26(3), 130-139.
25. MacAulay, J.B. (1985). An indicator of excellence in Canadian science (pp. 88-501). Ottawa: Statistics Canada.
26. Meho, L.I., & Spurgin, K.M. (2005). Ranking the research productivity of library and information science faculty and schools: An evaluation of data sources and research methods. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(12), 1314-1331. Retrieved October 7, 2005, from http://www.ias.ac.in/currscl/nov102005/1537.pdf
27. Nisonger, T.E. (2004). Citation autobiography: An investigation of ISI database coverage in determining author citedness. College & Research Libraries, March, 152-163.
28. Patsopoulos, N.A., Analatos, A.A., & Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2005). Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. Journal of the American Medical Association, 293(19), 2362-2366. Retrieved October 28, 2005, from http://www.jama.ama-assn.org
29. Ravichandra-Rao, I.K. (2001). Analysis of distributions of first citation data [First citation patterns]. Proceedings of the 8th international conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (pp. 565-572). Sydney, Australia.
30. Savoie, I., & Helmer, D. (2001). Extended systematic vs. conventional search methods: Weighing the quality of the literature retrieved. BCOHTA (2001:06C). Vancouver: British Columbia Office of Health Technology Assessment.
31. Schaffer, T. (2004). Psychology citations revisited: Behavioral research in the age of electronic resources. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 30(5), 354-360.
32. Schneider, J. (2005). About the bibliography of data-related literature. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium of Political and Social Research. Retrieved October 10, 2005, from http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/ citations/methodology.html
33. Singh, M.P., Tambay, J.L., & Krawchuk, S. (1994). National Population Health Survey: Design and issues in 1994. Proceedings of the Section on Survey Research Methods of the American Statistical Association (pp. 803-808). Retrieved September 12, 2005, from http://www.amstat. org/sections/srms/ Proceedings/
34. Sudman, S. (1967). Reducing the cost of surveys. Chicago: Aldine.
35. Swain, L., Catlin, G., & Beaudet, M.P. (1999). The National Population Health Survey - Its longitudinal nature. Health Reports, 10(4), 69-82.
36. Tsay, M., & Chen, Y. (2005). Journals of general & internal medicine and surgery: An analysis and comparison of citation. Scientometrics, 64(1), 17-30.
37. Vaughan, L., & Shaw, D. (2005). Web citation data for impact assessment: A comparison of four science disciplines. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(10), 1075-1087.
38. Retrieved November 6, 2005, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.20199
39. Walter, G., Bloch, S., Hunt, G., & Fisher, K. (2003). Counting on citations: A flawed way to measure quality. Medical Journal of Australia, 178, 280-281.
40. Warburton, R., & Warburton, W. (2004). Canada needs better data for evidence-based policy: Inconsistencies between administrative and survey data on welfare dependence and education. Canadian Public Policy, 30(3), 241-255.
41. Yeo, D. (1999). After the first steps: The evolution of a longitudinal survey. Workshop on Longitudinal Research in Social Science: A Canadian Focus, London, Ontario.
42. Zhao, D. (2005). Challenges of scholarly publications on the web to the evaluation of science - A comparison of author visibility on the web and in print journals. Information Processing & Management, 41, 1403-1418. Retrieved October 23, 2005, from ScienceDirect.