Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Austrheim, Folkestad, Mikki & Skagen - A scoping review of PhD-candidates’ information use in knowledge creation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Austrheim, Folkestad, Mikki & Skagen - A scoping review of PhD-candidates’ information use in knowledge creation


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. A Scoping Review ofPhD-candidates’ Information Usein Knowledge CreationbyGunhild Austrheim, HegeFolkestad, Susanne Mikki, andTherese Skagen
  • 2. Background:• The scoping review was undertaken as part of the project Information Management for Knowledge Creation• The project is a collaboration between five Nordic libraries: ▫ Bergen University Library ▫ Oslo University Library ▫ Aalborg University Library ▫ Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration ▫ Bergen University College Library• The project has received funding from the Norwegian Archive, Library and Museum Authority
  • 3. Aims:• The literature review was undertaken to improve our understanding of PhD students’ information behaviour and their information use• We chose to do a scoping review as this is a broad field of enquiry and with a varied corpus of literature• A scoping review can be used to determine core issues and research gaps
  • 4. Research question• What are the information needs of PhD students, what information behaviour do they display, and are there variations between disciplines?• How do PhD students publish and cite?• What services and training do libraries offer PhD students?• Is plagiarism a problem at this level?
  • 5. Methods:• Search strategy• Inclusion and exclusion criteria ▫ PhD students ▫ Published later than 1990 ▫ In English or the Scandinavian languages• Data extraction ▫ Topics ▫ Research methods ▫ Quality and relevancy
  • 6. b1 Topic Searches PhD student (phd* OR doctora* OR postdoc* OR ”post#doc*) Library instruction (”information literacy” OR ”user education” OR ”user training” OR ”bibliographic instruc*”) Information behaviour, (”information need” OR ”information behavio*r” OR ”user user studies and behavio*r” OR ”information seeking” OR ”information searching search*” OR ”database search*” OR ”search* strateg*” OR ”user stud*” OR ”information retrieval” OR ”reference chasing”) Library services (”information service*” OR (reference AND (service* OR interview* OR encount*)) OR ”library service*” OR ”academic librar*”) Publishing / citing (Scientometr* OR Bibliometr* OR "Citation analysis" OR "H-index" OR "performance indicator*" OR "research impact" OR "research evaluation" OR "research assessment") Plagiarism (plagiar* or "scientific dishonesty" or "scientific honesty" or "academic integrity" or "academic honesty" or "academic dishonesty" or self#plagiar*)
  • 7. Slide 6b1 Her burde vi vel ha teksten på engelsk? bubhf, 11/04/2011
  • 8. Search results• Initially our searces retrieved 5066 references• 1525 references were considered for inclusion by reading abstracts ▫ 201 references were included for further reading ▫ 28 references were included from reference lists and serendipitious findings• 55 references were included in this review ▫ Information behaviour – 35 ▫ Publishing and bibliometrics – 21 ▫ Library instructional services – 21
  • 9. General results:• PhD studens are often grouped with others, ie researchers or MA students• Studies are conducted within sciences and social sciences more often than in the humanities• User surveys was the dominant form of enquiry ▫ Case studies ▫ Statistical analysis ▫ Interviews ▫ Literature reviews
  • 10. Publication and bibliometric analysis• Bibliometry measures researcher visibility through publications and citations• The status of a research field, collaborators and publication channels influece the choices of PhD students• Impact or visibility increases through ▫ Participation in research networks ▫ Collaboration and co-authorship ▫ Publishing in open access sources
  • 11. Publication and bibliometric analysis 2• A conscious attitude towards ethical behaviour and copyright issues is important in co- authorship and citation practice• Improved knowledge of databases and the use of analytical functions would improve information handling• Better understanding of how to evaluate information would contribute to better quality, especially in the PhD students’ literature review
  • 12. Information behaviour• Disciplinary differences in information searching• Research questions decide the number of sources needed• Multi-disciplinary research questions require better information skills• PhD students feel confident in information searching ▫ Difficult to display lack of confidence
  • 13. Information behaviour 2• Citation practice show preference for digital material and reduced use of print sources ▫ Inaccuracies in citations and reference lists• The use of digital sources leads to a wider array of sources being used• PhD students obtain an overview of their field by reference chasing
  • 14. Library instructional services• The library must have an understanding of the research process, research methods, and research tools• A common attitude among librarians is that everyone needs guidance from the library to become information literate• PhD students’ literature review ▫ suitable for library interventions
  • 15. Library instructional services• PhD students are independent information users and rarely ask for help ▫ should be available when and where they need it• PhD students are not aware of the services offered by the library• Services must be relevant and tailored ▫ Timing ▫ Content ▫ Disciplin specific
  • 16. Conclusions• Our scoping review has given us an overview and will help us in developing our project• 55 studies in a broad field of enquiry – too few?• Our research questions in the literature ▫ Information behaviour  ▫ Publishing and citing  ▫ Instructional services • Research gaps ▫ Plagiarism ▫ Copyright issues
  • 17. Please visit us at