MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2021021426

The Virtual Reference Handbook: Interview and Information Delivery Techniques for the Chat and E-Mail Environments

2007· article· en· W2021021426 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cees-Jan de Jong

Notice bibliographique

RevuePartnership The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDigital referenceComputer scienceThe InternetService (business)MultimediaReference modelSet (abstract data type)Asynchronous communicationWorld Wide WebChat roomSoftware engineeringTelecommunications
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Kovacs, Diane K. The Virtual Reference Handbook: Interview and Information Delivery Techniques for the Chat and E-mail Environments. New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers, 2007. 132 p. $78 CDN. ISBN 1-55570-598-7. The Virtual Reference Handbook by Diane K. Kovacs provides a comprehensive overview of the skill set needed to provide virtual reference, as well as instruction and exercises to obtain these skills. Kovacs covers everything from keyboarding skills, to the ability to handle multiple users in a virtual reference environment, to building reference skills. This volume is better suited for those with limited exposure to reference and a low level of technological skills. Virtual reference is used often to describe librarian-patron communication via the Internet, and can include asynchronous reference (e.g. e-mail, online forms) or synchronous reference (e.g. chat or instant messaging). Other terms, such as digital reference (a more encompassing term), or chat reference may also be used in the literature to refer to virtual reference. As this type of service has seen a proliferation in libraries in the last 10-15 years, reference librarians have had to pick up a new skill set. Ronan and Turner point out in their survey results published in Chat Reference: A SPEC Kit that 69% reported that staff require additional training, primarily in the use of the specific software and chatting techniques (p. 10). Since this survey, various organizations and researchers have identified core competencies needed by virtual reference staff to provide an effective service. Luo provides a solid review of virtual reference competencies in the literature, and discusses them in the context of competencies identified through librarian interviews (2007). Competency lists allow for the development of training resources, such as Virtual Reference Training: The Complete Guide to Providing Anytime, Anywhere Answers by Hirko and Ross (2004). Also, articles have been published providing support for training in this area (Carter, 2002/03; Fagan and Desai, 2002/03; Westbrook, 2006, etc.). Kovacs covers the competencies as described in the literature, provides methods to obtain the required skills, and context through librarian interviews. The book is divided into four chapters. The first chapter discusses the reference interview, highlights differences between face-to-face, chat, and email reference, and lists the technical, communications, and reference competencies to be discussed in the next three chapters. Chapter two covers technological competencies from basic keyboarding skills to more complex issues, such as the operation of chat software, and downloading and installing browser extensions. Chapter three focuses on communication competencies and addresses basic reference communication skills, and skills that are more specific to virtual reference, such as the ability to craft responses that communicate effectively with the patron. The last chapter discusses reference competencies associated more specifically with virtual reference, but most would also be applicable to face-to-face reference. As stated at every exercise, there is an online component to the book. However, after entering the URL provided, the instructions to log in to area chatrefbook on www.kovacs.com puzzled the reviewer as there appeared to be no area called chatrefbook. The writing is characterized by an informal tone and contains typographical errors and ungrammatical sentences: Because my experience is limited to specific kinds of patrons (university students and teachers in master or doctoral degrees) there is not much room left to make assumptions and the areas is clearly defined when the patrons identify themselves but! When I am talking about making assumptions, these are about the purpose of the research that can vary from a simple homework to a thesis or a field project and my answer will differ in depth based on this action, (p. 9). …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: Méthodes
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,997
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,239

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,018
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0060,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,002
Communication savante0,0030,006
Science ouverte0,0030,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0710,063

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,076
Tête enseignante GPT0,362
Écart entre enseignants0,285 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreMéthodes

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2007
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePartnership The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and ResearchMême sujetLibrary Science and Information LiteracyTravaux en français237 207