Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Faculty input in book selection: a comparison of alternative methods.

J A Bell1, P J Bredderman, M K Stangohr

  • 1Health Sciences Library, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina 27858.

Bulletin of the Medical Library Association
|July 1, 1987
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Phylogenetic position of <i>Sphincterodiplostomum</i> Dubois, 1936 (Digenea: Diplostomoidea) with description of a second species from Pantanal, Brazil.

Journal of helminthology·2021
Same author

Fashionable dentitions.

British dental journal·2020
Same author

Webinar popularity.

British dental journal·2020
Same author

Healthy obesity as an intermediate state of risk: a critical review.

Expert review of endocrinology & metabolism·2018
Same author

Can the use of an inclinometer improve the positioning of the acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty?

The bone & joint journal·2018
Same author

First Record of Leucocytozoon (Haemosporida: Leucocytozoidae) in Amazonia: Evidence for Rarity in Neotropical Lowlands or Lack of Sampling for This Parasite Genus?

The Journal of parasitology·2018

Academic medical libraries face funding challenges. This study found faculty subject ratings do not predict their actual book selections, suggesting alternative collection development strategies are needed.

Area of Science:

  • Library and Information Science
  • Academic Medicine
  • Collection Development

Background:

  • Academic medical libraries require cost-effective resource collection strategies.
  • Faculty input is valuable but burdensome for ongoing collection development.
  • Alternative methods for assessing user needs are essential.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate an alternative method for determining faculty needs in academic medical libraries.
  • To compare faculty subject preferences with their actual book selections via approval plans.
  • To assess librarian selections against faculty preferences and choices.

Main Methods:

  • Compared faculty ratings of discipline-specific subjects with their selections on vendor-provided approval slips.
  • Evaluated collection development librarian selections against both faculty subject ratings and book choices.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Utilized formal selection criteria for librarian-made acquisitions.

    • Main Results:

    • Faculty members' subject ratings did not accurately predict their book choices.
    • Discrepancies were observed between stated subject preferences and actual book selections.
    • Librarian selections showed varying alignment with faculty preferences and choices.

    Conclusions:

    • Relying solely on faculty subject ratings is an unreliable method for collection development.
    • Academic medical libraries may need to explore diverse methods to understand faculty needs effectively.
    • Findings have implications for optimizing resource allocation and collection management in libraries.