McClure and Samuels’ Study on Information Sources Used for Decision Making and the Connection to Organizational Climate Still Resonates Today
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A Review of: McClure, C. R., & Samuels, A. R. (1985). Factors affecting the use of information for academic library decision making. College & Research Libraries, 46(6), 483-498. Abstract Objective - To investigate the use of information sources for decision making within academic libraries; specifically looking at what sources of information are used, whether information use is related to organizational climate, and what organizational factors lead to optimal information use in decision making. Design - Cross-sectional survey on a random sample of libraries. Setting - 18 medium to moderately large academic libraries from across the United States. Subjects - 356 academic librarians holding a variety of positions and levels of responsibility within their organizations. Methods - A questionnaire was mailed to participants in order to measure relationships between four main variables: information acquisition, information dissemination, information evaluation, and library climate. All instruments were validated and tested for reliability. Participants were given 10 library decision situations to consider, together with a list of potential information sources to inform the decision, and then choose which information source they would use primarily in each situation. Participants’ perception of their library climate was measured with five scales covering innovation, support, freedom, democratic governance, and esprit. Main Results - The study found that academic librarians prefer internal sources of information, such as interpersonal communication with library staff, and library committees, for making decisions. However, paraprofessional staff members were not seen as meaningful sources of information within this grouping. The participants rarely chose to consult external information sources, such as other professionals outside of the library, or library users. Information sources such as conducting research, continuing education, past experience, or personal opinion were not found to be important to the participants’ decision making. Written documents such as articles, books, and brochures were also seldom used. Democratic governance was the organizational climate dimension found to be most closely linked to information dissemination. Conclusion - The authors conclude that the study suggests that academic librarians are not using a full complement of information sources to assist with their decision making, and that the “information that is used tends to be ‘opinion-based’ rather than empirically based” (p. 495). Proximity of information plays a role, with information that is closer and easier to obtain being used more frequently. The authors strongly stress, with concern, that, “current academic library decision-making processes encourage ineffective activities since they preclude or limit clientele input, empirical research, and additional environmental input” (p. 495).
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,032 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,007 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,014 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».