We're having a discussion about whether to use NIH "author manuscript" versions of article to fulfill ILL requests at MPOW. As a staunch open access advocate, I'm all for it, but I'm getting some push back. The author manuscript versions, as far as I can tell, have gone through peer-review, but not the final copy edit.
too funny. colleagues just delivered this awesome detailed literature analysis to team here, first response back was "are you sure the chief scientist of the air force is a woman? that name is usually male"
Trying to do some background reading for some research projects that will look at user experience and the search process. I need to read some notable works on information seeking behavior and have begun reading Carol Kuhlthau. I'm looking for models that I can use in my analysis of usabilty test results. Who should I be reading also or instead?
i'm gonna cry or explode. this dude really, really wants an update of this graph i delivered and by COB today. gonna take going back and looking up a whole buncha data again. coworker offered to help, but she didn't get enough data or put it in the format i need so i'm going to have to go back and do her stuff
I get told my library doesn't exist by someone on our technical staff probably once a month. And today someone in my group said she didn't know we offered training or she would have come... i just don't even know.
I'm beginning to get a sense of how much effort it's worth spending to spell arΧiv that way rather than just arXiv, and "nobody notices or gives a damn about the difference" starts to look like a winner.