All urls were valid as of August 12, 2003


TIER 1

6.1.1 SuperJournal

Eason, K., S. Richardson, and L. Yu. 2000. Patterns of Use of Electronic Journals. Journal of Documentation 56(5): 477-504.

Eason, K.D. and S. Harker. 2000. Psychological Processes in the Use of Electronic Journals. Serials 13(2): 67-72.

Eason, K.D., L. Yu, and S. Harker. 2000. The Use and Usefulness of Functions in Electronic Journals. Program 34(1): 1-28.

Pullinger, David J. 1999. Academics and the New Information Environment: The Impact of Local Factors on Use of Electronic Journals. Journal of Information Science 25(2): 164-172.

Pullinger, David J. and Christine Baldwin. 2002. Electronic Journals and User Behaviour: Learning for the Future from the SuperJournal Project. Cambridge, England: deedot Press.

Pullinger, David J. 2002. Instant Linking: Delayed Use: Setting Provider Expectations. Learned Publishing 15(1): 21-25.

Pullinger, David J. 1994. The SuperJournal Project. Bristol: Institute of Physics Publishing.

Pullinger, David J. and C. Baldwin. 1997. SuperJournal: What Readers Really Want from Electronic Journals. Electronic Library and Visual Information Research. Proceedings of 4th ELVIRA Conference, May 6-8, 1997. London: ASLIB.

SuperJournal. 1999. SuperJournal Baseline Studies Report. Available at http://www.superjournal.ac.uk/sj/baserept.htm.

Yu, Liangzhi and Ann Apps. 2000. Studying E-Journal User Behavior Using Log Files: The Experience of Super Journal. Library & Information Science Research 22(3): 311-338.

6.1.2 DLF/CLIR/Outsell

Friedlander, Amy. 2002. Dimensions and Use of the Scholarly Information Environment: Introduction to a Data Set. Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information Resources. Available at https://clir.wordpress.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub110/contents.html

Healy, Leigh Watson, Lynn Dagar, and Katherine Medaglia Wilkie. 2002. Custom Report Prepared for the Digital Library Federation/Council on Library and Information Resources. Burlingame, CA: Outsell.

6.1.3 eJUST/HighWire

Institute for the Future. 2002. E-journal Usage and Scholarly Practice. Available at http://ejust.stanford.edu/findings/full_0801.pdf.

Institute for the Future. 2002. E-Journal User Study. Report of First Survey. Available at http://ejust.stanford.edu/findings/survey1.pdf.

Institute for the Future. 2002. E-Journal User Study. Report of Second Survey: The Feature User Survey. Available at http://ejust.stanford.edu/findings2/report_survey2.pdf.

Institute for the Future. 2002. E-Journal User Study. Report of Third (Follow-Up) Survey. Available at http://ejust.stanford.edu/findings3/report_survey3.pdf.

Institute for the Future. 2002. E-Journal User Study: Report of Web Log Data Mining. Available at http://ejust.stanford.edu/logdata.pdf.

Institute for the Future. 2002. Final Synthesis Report of the E-Journal User Study. Available at http://ejust.stanford.edu/SR-786.ejustfinal.html.

6.1.4 Pew/OCLC-Harris Survey/Urban Library Council

D’Elia, Geroge, Corinne Jorgensen, Joseph Woelfel, and Eleanor Jo Rodger. 2002. The Impact of the Internet on Public Library Use: An Analysis of the Current Consumer Market for Library and Internet Services. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53(10): 802-820.

Jones, Steve. 2002. The Internet Goes to College. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Available at http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=71.

Levin, Douglas and Sousan Arafeh. 2002. The Digital Disconnect: The Widening Gap Between Internet-Savvy Students and Their Schools. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Available at http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=67.

OCLC. 2002. How Academic Librarians Can Influence Students’ Web-Based Information Choices. OCLC White Paper on the Information Habits of College Students. Available at http://www2.oclc.org/oclc/pdf/printondemand/informationhabits.pdf.

6.1.5 OhioLINK

Diedrichs, Carol Pitts. 2001. E-journals: The OhioLINK Experience. Library Collections, Acquisitions and Technical Services 25(2): 191-210.

OhioLINK EJC Expands, Exceeds Expectations. 1999. Advanced Technology Libraries 28(10): 9.

Prabha, Chandra and Edward T. O’Neill. 2001. Interlibrary Borrowing Initiated by Patrons: Some Characteristics of Books Requested via OhioLINK. Journal of Library Administration 34(3/4): 329-338.

Sanville, Thomas J. and Barbara Winters. 1998. A Method Out of the Madness: OhioLINK’s Collaborative Response to the Serials Crisis. The Serials Librarian 34(1/2): 125-139.

Sanville, Thomas J. 2001a. A Method out of the Madness: OhioLINK’s Collaborative Response to the Serials Crisis Three Years Later: A Progress Report. The Serials Librarian 40(1/2): 129-155.

Sanville, T.J. 2001b. Changing Patterns of E-Journal Use at OhioLINK. Making Waves: New Serials Landscapes in a Sea of Change: Proceedings of the North American Serials Interest Group, Inc., in San Diego, California, June 22-25, 2000, pp.129-155. Joseph C. Harmon and P. Michelle Fiander, eds. New York: Haworth Information Press.

Schulz, Kathy. 2001. Your Place or Mine? Use of Patron-Initiated Interlibrary Loan vs. the Local Library Collection Among Undergraduates at OhioLINK Schools. Collection Management 26(4): 15-28.

6.1.6 Tenopir and King

King, Donald W. and Carol Tenopir. 2000. The Cost and Price Dilemma of Scholarly Journals. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Chicago, November 2000. Volume 37: 63-66.

King, Donald W. and Carol Tenopir. In press. Scholarly Journal and Digital Database Pricing: Threat or Opportunity? Chapter 3 in Jeffrey Mackie-Mason, ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

King, Donald W. and Carol Tenopir. 2000. Scholarly Journal and Digital Database Pricing: Threat or Opportunity? Conference on Economics and Usage of Digital Library Collections, Ann Arbor, Mich., March 2000.

King, Donald W. and Carol Tenopir. 2001. Using and Reading Scholarly Literature. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, pp. 423-477. Martha E. Williams, ed. Medford, N.J.: Information Today, Inc.

King, Donald W., Carol Hansen Montgomery, Peter Boyce, and Carol Tenopir. In press. Library Economic Measures: Examples of the Comparison of Print & Electronic Journal Collections. Library Trends.

Tenopir, Carol. 2002. Electronic or Print:ÊAre Scholarly Journals Still Important? Serials 15(2):Ê 111-115.

Tenopir, Carol. 2002. The Way Forward: An Overall Perspective. The Ingenta Institute Report Proceedings The Consortium Site Licence: Is it a Sustainable Model? 217-222.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2002. A Glimpse of the Future Use of Scholarly Journals with Data from the Past and Present. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Charleston Conference.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2001. Communication by Engineers: An Analysis of the Literature Focusing on 1994 through May 2001.ÊPrepared for the Engineering Information Foundation.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2002. E-Journals and Print Journals: Similarities and Differences in Reader Behavior. Proceedings of the Online Meeting, New York, May 2002 311-319.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2002. Reading Behaviour and Electronic Journals. Learned Publishing 15(4): 259-265.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2001. The Importance of Journals to the Scientific Endeavor. Revista de Biblioteconomia de Brasilia. 24(1): 15-26.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2001. Lessons for the Future of Journals. Nature 18(October): 672-674.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2000. Towards Electronic Journals: Realities for Scientists, Librarians and Publishers. Washington D.C.: Special Libraries Association.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2000. The Use and Value of Scholarly Journals. Proceedings of the 63rd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Chicago, November 2000. Volume 37: 60-62.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2001. The Use and Value of Scientific Journals: Past, Present and Future. Serials 14(2): 113-120.

Tenopir, Carol and Donald W. King. 2001. What Do We Know About Scientists’ Use of Information? Proceedings of the Online Meeting, London, December 2001.

Tenopir, Carol, Donald W. King, Peter Boyce, Matt Grayson, and Kerry-Lynn Paulson. Relying on Electronic Journals: Reading Patterns of Astronomers. Submitted to Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (JASIST), 2003.

Tenopir, Carol, Donald W. King, and Amy Bush. Medical Faculty’s Use of Print and Electronic Journals: Changes Over Time and Comparison with Other Scientists. Submitted to the Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA), 2003.

Tenopir, Carol, Donald W. King, Randy Hoffman, Elizabeth McSween, Christopher Ryland, and Erin Smith. 2001. Scientists’ Use of Journals: Differences (and Similarities) Between Print and Electronic. Proceedings of the Online Meeting, New York, May 2001, 469-481.

6.1.7 LibQUAL+

Arnau, R.C., R.L. Thompson, and C. Cook. 2001. Do Different Response Formats Change the Latent Structure of Responses?: An Empirical Investigation Using Taxonometric Analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement 61(1): 23-44.

Boykin, Joseph F. 2002. LibQUAL+TM As a Confirming Resource. Performance Measurement and Metrics 3(2): 74-77.

Cook, C. 2001. A Mixed-methods Approach to the Identification and Measurement of Academic Library Service Quality Constructs: LibQUAL+TM. Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University.

Cook, C. and F. Heath. 2000. The ARL LibQUAL+TM Pilot Project: An Update. ARL Newsletter: A Bimonthly Report on Research Library Issues and Actions from ARL, CNI, and SPARC (211): 12-14.

Cook, C. and F. Heath. 2001. Users’ Perceptions of Library Service Quality: A ‘LibQUAL+TM‘ Qualitative Study. Library Trends 49(4): 548-584.

Cook, C., F. Heath, and B. Thompson,. 2000. LibQUAL+TM: One Instrument in the New Measures Toolbox. ARL Newsletter: A Bimonthly Report on Research Library Issues and Actions from ARL, CNI, and SPARC (212): 4-7.

Cook, C., F. Heath, and B. Thompson. 2002. Score Norms for Improving Library Service Quality: A LibQUAL+TM Study. portal: Libraries and the Academy 2(1): 13-26.

Cook, C., F. Heath, and B. Thompson. 2001. Users’ Hierarchical Perspectives on Library Service Quality: A ‘LibQUAL+TM‘ Study. College and Research Libraries 62(2): 147-153.

Cook, C., F. Heath, B. Thompson, and R.L. Thompson. 2001. LibQUAL+TM: Service Quality Assessment in Research Libraries. IFLA Journal 27(4): 264-268.

Cook, C., F. Heath, B. Thompson, and R.L. Thompson. 2001. The Search for New Measures: The ARL ‘LibQUAL+TM‘ ProjectÐA Preliminary Report. portal: Libraries and the Academy 1(1): 103-112.

Cook, C., F. Heath, and R.L. Thompson. 2000. A Meta-analysis of Response Rates in Web- or Internet-based Surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement 60(6): 821-836.

Cook, C., F. Heath, R.L. Thompson, and B. Thompson. 2001. Score Reliability in Web- or Internet-based Surveys: Unnumbered Graphic Rating Scales Versus Likert-type Scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 61(4): 697-706.

Cook, C. and B. Thompson. 2000. Higher-order Factor Analytic Perspectives on Users’ Perceptions of Library Service Quality. Library Information Science Research 22(4): 393-404.

Cook, C. and B. Thompson. 2001. Psychometric Properties of Scores from the Web-Based LibQUAL+TM Study of Perceptions of Library Service Quality. Library Trends 49(4): 585-604.

Cook, C. and B. Thompson. 2002. ‘Reliability Generalization’ as a Measurement Meta-analytic Method: Are Tests Reliable? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Cook, C. and B. Thompson. 2001. Scaling for the LibQUAL+TM Instrument: A Comparison of Desired, Perceived and Minimum Expectation Responses Versus Perceived Only. Paper Presented at the 4th Northumbria International Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.

Cook, C. and B. Thompson. 2000. Reliability and Validity of SERVQUAL Scores Used to Evaluate Perceptions of Library Service Quality. Journal of Academic Librarianship 26(4): 248-258.

Crowley, Gwyneth H. and Charles L. Gilreath. 2002. Probing User Perceptions of Service Quality: Using Focus Groups to Enhance Quantitative Surveys. Performance Measurement and Metrics 3(2): 78-84.

Dole, Wanda. 2002. LibQUAL+TM and the Small Academic Library. Performance Measurement and Metrics 3(2): 85-95.

Guidry, Julie Anna. 2002. LibQUAL+TM Spring 2001 Comments: A Qualitative Analysis Using Atlas. Performance Measurement and Metrics 3(2): 100-107.

Heath, F., C. Cook, M. Kyrillidou, and B. Thompson. 2002. ARL Index and Other Validity Correlates of LibQUAL+TM. portal: Libraries and the Academy 2(1): 27-42.

Hitchingham, Eileen E. and Donald Kenney. 2002. Extracting Meaningful Measures of User Satisfaction from LibQUAL+TM for the University Libraries at Virginia Tech. Performance Measurement and Metrics 3(2): 48-58.

Huff-Eibl, R. and S. Phipps. 2002. Using LibQUAL+TM Results at the University of Arizona: Responding to Customer InputÐListening and Acting. ARL Newsletter: A Bimonthly Report on Research Library Issues and Actions from ARL, CNI, and SPARC (221): 12-13.

Kemp, J.H. 2001. Using the LibQUAL+TM Survey to Assess User Perception of Collections and Service Quality. Collection Management 26(4): 1-14.

Kyrillidou, Martha and Fred Heath, editors. 2001. Measuring Service Quality. Library Trends 49(4): 541-547.

Lincoln, Yvonna. 2002. Insights into Library Services and Users from Qualitative Research. Library & Information Science Research 24(1): 3-16.

McCord, Sarah K. and Mary M. Nofsinger. 2002. Continuous Assessment at Washington State University Libraries: A Case Study. Performance Measurement and Metrics 3(2): 68-73.

McNeil, Beth and Joan Giesecke. 2002. Using LibQUAL+TM to Improve Services to Library Constituents: A Preliminary Report on the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Experience. Performance Measurement and Metrics 3(2): 96-100.

Sessions, Judith A., Alex Schenck, and Aaron Shrimplin. 2002. LibQUAL+TM at Miami University: A Look from Outside ARL. Performance Measurement and Metrics 3 (2): 59-68.

Snyder, Carolyn A. 2002. Measuring Library Service Quality with a Focus on the LibQUAL+TM Project: An Interview with Fred Heath. Library Administration & Management 16(1): 4-7.

Spring 2002 LibQUAL+(TM) Analysis and Results from Brown University. Available at http://www.brown.edu/Facilities/University_Library/MODEL/lunt/libqual/discipline_means.xls.

Stein, Joan, Martha Kyrillidou, and Denise Davis, eds. 2001. Meaningful Measures for Emerging Realities. Proceedings of the 4th Northumbria International Conference on Performance Measurement in Libraries and Information Services.

Thompson, B., and C. Cook. 2002. Stability of the Reliability of LibQUAL+TM Scores: A ‘Reliability Generalization’ Meta-analysis Study. Educational and Psychological Measurement 62 (4) 735-743.

Thompson, B., C. Cook, and F. Heath. 2001. How Many Dimensions Does it Take to Measure Users’ Perceptions of Libraries?: A ‘LibQUAL+TM‘ Study. portal: Libraries and the Academy 1(2): 129-138.

Thompson, B., C. Cook, and F. Heath. 2000. The LibQUAL+TM Gap Measurement Model: The Bad, the Ugly, and the Good of Gap Measurement. Performance Measurement and Metrics 1(3): 165-178.

Thompson, B., C. Cook, and R.L. Thompson. 2002. Reliability and Structure of LibQUAL+TM Scores: Measuring Perceived Library Service Quality. portal: Libraries and the Academy 2(1): 3-12.

Thompson, R.L. 2000. Scalable Web-based User Survey Research Across Institutions: The LibQUAL+TM Experience. Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Measuring Service Quality Symposium on the New Culture of Assessment: Measuring Service Quality, Washington, D.C.

Wall, Tom. 2002. LibQUAL+TM As a Transformative Experience. Performance Measurement and Metrics 3(2): 43-48.

Waller, C. Askew and K. Hipps. 2002. Using LibQUAL+TM and Developing a Culture of Assessment in Libraries. ARL Newsletter: A Bimonthly Report on Research Library Issues and Actions from ARL, CNI, and SPARC (221): 10-11.

Webster, Duane and Fred M. Heath. 2002. LibQUAL+ Spring 2002 Aggregate Survey Results. Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries. Available at http://www.libraries.uc.edu/information/about/libqual/.

Webster, Duane and Fred M. Heath. 2002. LibQUAL+ Spring 2002 Survey Results -ARL. Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries. Available at http://www.libraries.uc.edu/information/about/libqual/.

Webster, Duane and Fred M. Heath. 2002. LibQUAL+TM Spring 2002 Survey Results-OhioLINK. Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries. Available at http://www.libraries.uc.edu/information/about/libqual/.

The LibQUAL+TM bibliography is also available at http://www.coe.tamu.edu/~bthompson/servqbib.htm.

6.1.8 JSTOR

Finholt, Thomas A. and JoAnn Brooks. 1999. Analysis of JSTOR: The Impact on Scholarly Practice of Access to On-line Journal Archive. Technology and Scholarly Communication, pp. 177-194. Richard Ekman and Richard E. Quandt, eds. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Guthrie, Kevin M. 2002. Lessons from JSTOR: User Behavior and Faculty Attitudes. Journal of Library Administration 36(3): 109-120.

Guthrie, Kevin M. 2001. What Do Faculty Think of Electronic Resources? ALA Annual Conference Participants’ Meeting Available at http://www.jstor.org/about/faculty.survey.ppt.

Guthrie, Kevin M. 2000. Revitalizing Older Published Literature: Preliminary Lessons for the Use of JSTOR. 2000. Available at http://www.jstor.org/about/preliminarylessons.html.

Seeds, Robert S. 2002. Impact of a Digital Archive (JSTOR) on Print Collection Use. Collection Building 21(3): 120-122.

6.2 TIER 2

Antoir, Anat. 2001. Electronic Journals in Small Libraries Source. One-Person Library 18(1): 7-8.

Association of Research Libraries. 2001 ARL Statistics and Supplementary Statistics. Available at http://www.arl.org/stats/arlstat/01pub/intro.html.

Association of Research Libraries. 2002 ARL Statistics and Supplementary Statistics. Available at http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/arl/index.htm.

Ashcroft, Linda, and Colin Langdon. 1999. The Case for Electronic Journals. Library Association Record 101(12): 706-707.

Bancroft, Audrey F., Vicki F. Croft, Robert Speth and Dretha M. Phillips. 1998. A Forward-Looking Library Use Survey: WSU Libraries in the 21st Century. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 24 (3): 216-223.

Battleson, Brenda, Austin Booth and Jane Weintrop. 2001. Usability Testing of an Academic Library Web Site: A Case study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 27 (3): 188-198.

Bell, I. and F. Rowland. 1997. E-journals in an industrial environment. Serials 10(1): 58-64.

Berteaux, Susan. S. and Peter Brueggeman. 2001. Electronic Journal Timeliness: Comparison with Print. The Serials Librarian 41(2): 101-118.

Bishop, Ann Peterson. 1999. Making Digital Libraries Go: Comparing Use across Genres. In 4th ACM Conference On Digital Libraries: 94-103. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.

Bishop, Ann Peterson. 1995. Scholarly Journals on the Net: A Reader’s Assessment. Library Trends 43(Spring): 544-570.

Bishop, Ann Peterson, Laura J. Neumann, Susan Leigh Star, Cecelia Merkel, Emily Ignacio, and Robert J. Sandusky. 2000. Digital Libraries: Situating Use in Changing Information Infrastructure. Journal of the American Society of Information Science 51 (4): 394-423.

Bonn, Maria S., Jeffrey K. MacKie-Mason, Wendy P. Lougee, and Juan F. Riveros. 1999. A Report on the PEAK Experiment: Context and Design. D-Lib Magazine 5(6). Available at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/june99/06bonn.html.

Brown, Cecelia M. 1999. Information Seeking Behavior of Scientists in the Electronic Information Age: Astronomers, Chemists, Mathematicians, and Physicists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50(10): 929-943.

Brockman, William. S., Laura Neumann, Carole L. Palmer, and Tonyia J. Tidline. 2001. Scholarly Work in the Humanities and the Evolving Information Environment. Washington, D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources Available at https://clir.wordpress.clir.org/pubs/abstract/pub104abst.html.

Brunskill, K. A. Morris, M. Kinnell and C. McKnight. 1998. Rising to the challenge and making the connection: Electronic serials in public libraries. In Electronic Publishing ’98: Towards the Electronic-rich Society, 190-198. Washington, D.C.: ICCC Press.

Burton, Vicki Tolar and Scott A. Chadwick. 2000. Investigating the Practices of Student Researchers: Patterns of Use and Criteria for Use of Internet and Library Sources. Computers and Composition 17 (3): 309-328.

Butler, H. Julene. 1995. Where Does Scholarly Electronic Publishing Get You? Journal of Scholarly Publishing 26(4): 174-186.

Buttenfield, Barbara Pfeil. 1999. Usability Evaluation of Digital Libraries. Science and Technology Libraries 17(3/4): 39-59.

Carrick, Anthony. 2002. E-Content Pricing & Usage Report. Stamford, CT: Simba Information Inc.

Chaney, Elaine, Catherine Bulliard, and Caroline Christiansen. 1999. The Electronic Journal Service at CERN, A First Evaluation: User Access Interfaces and Use Awareness. Vine 110: 223-29.

Cherry, Joan M. and Wendy M. Duff. 2002. Studying Digital Library Users Over Time: A Follow-up Survey of Early Canadiana Online. Information Research 7(2) Available at http://informationr.net/ir/7-2/paper123.html.

Chisman, Janet, Karen Diller, and Sharon Walbridge. 1999. Usability Testing: A Case Study. College and Research Libraries 60 (6): 552-561.

Christopher, Janice, Ibironke Lawal, and Steven J. Riel. 2002. Perceived Successes and Failures of Science & Technology E-Journal Access: A Comparative Study. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship. Available at http://www.istl.org/02-summer/article1.html.

Chu, Heting. 1998. Electronic Journals in American Academic Libraries: A View From Within. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Missions of Academic Libraries in the 21st Century. Available at http://library.brandeis.edu/beijingconference/HetingChu.doc.

Cochenour, Donnice and Tom Moothart. 2003. E-journal Acceptance at Colorado State University: A Case Study. Serials Review 29 (1): 16-25.

Cockrell, Barbara J. and Elaine Anderson Jayne. 2002. How Do I Find an Article? Insights from a Web Usability Study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 28(2): 122-132.

Costa, Sely. 2000. Changes in the Information Dissemination Process Within the Scholarly World: The Impact of Electronic Publishing on Scholarly Communities of Academic Social Scientists. In Electronic Publishing in the Third Millennium, 16-29. Washington, D.C., ICCC Press.

Council of Australian University Librarians. 2002. CAUL Statistics: 2001 Academic Libraries. Available at: http://www.caul.edu.au/stats/caul2001.xls.

Crawford, Brian. 2002. PSP/CLIR Meeting on Usage Data, July 16, 2002. Powerpoint presentation.

Curtis, Karen L., Ann C. Weller, and Julie M. Hurd. 1997. Information-Seeking Behavior of Health Sciences Faculty: The Impact of New Information Technologies. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 85(4): 402-410.

Davis, Philip M. 2002. Patterns in Electronic Journal Usage: Challenging the Composition of Geographic Consortia. College and Research Libraries 63(6): 484-497.

Davis, Philip M., and Leah R. Solla. Forthcoming. An IP-Level Analysis of Usage Statistics for Electronic Journals in Chemistry: Making Inferences about User Behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.

Dawson, Alan. 1999. Inferring User Behaviour from Journal Access Figures. The Serials Librarian 35(3): 31-41.

Day, M.P. 2001. Electronic Journal Usage and Policy at UMIST. Information Services & Usage 21(3/4): 135-137.

DeGroote, Sandra L. and Josephine L. Dorsch. 2003. Measuring Use Patterns of Online Journals and Databases. Journal of the Medical Library Association 91(2): 231-240.

DeGroote, Sandra L. and Josephine L. Dorsch. 2001. Online Journals: Impact on Print Journal Usage. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 89(4): 372-378. Available at http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/picrender.fcgi?action=stream&blobtype=pdf&artid=57966.

Dilevko, Juris, and Lisa Gottlieb. 2002. Print Sources in the Electronic Age: A Vital Part of the Research Process for Undergraduate Students. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 28 (6): 381-392.

Dillon, Irma F. and Karla L. Hahn. 2002. Are Researchers Ready for the Electronic-Only Journal Collection?: Results of a Survey at the University of Maryland. portal: Libraries and the Academy 2(3): 375-390.

Duff, Wendy M. and Joan M. Cherry. 2000. Use of Historical Documents in a Digital World: Comparisons with Original Materials and Microfiche. Information Research 6(1). Available at http://informationr.net/ir/6-1/paper86.html.

Duy, Joannna and Liwen Vaughan. 2003. Usage Data for Electronic Resources: A Comparison between Locally Collected and Vendor-Provided Statistics. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 29(1): 16-22.

Entlich, Richard, Lorrin Garson, Michael Lesk, Lorraine Normore, Jan Olsen, and Stuart Weibel. 1996. Testing a Digital Library: User Response to the CORE Project. Library Hi Tech 14(4): 99-118.

EPIC: Online Use & Cost Evaluation Program. 2001. The Use of Electronic Resources Among Undergraduate and Graduate Students. Available at http://www.epic.columbia.edu/eval/find03.html.

Ghaphery, James. 2002. My Library at Virginia Commonwealth University. D-Lib Magazine 8 (7/8). Available at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july02/ghaphery/07ghaphery.html.

Graham, Leah. 2003. “Of Course It’s True; I Saw It On the Internet!”: Critical Thinking In the Internet Era. Communications of the ACM 46(5): 71-75.

Gullikson, Shelley, Ruth Blades, Marc Bragdon, Shelley McKibbon, Marnie Sparling, and Elaine G. Toms. 1999. The Impact of Information Architecture on Academic Web Site Usability. The Electronic Library 17 (5): 293-304.

Hahn, Susan E., Cheri Speier, Jonathan Palmer, and Daniel Wren. 1999. Advantages and Disadvantages of Electronic Journals: Business School Faculty Views. Journal of Business and Finance Librarianship 5(1): 19- 31.

Hamilton, Richard. 1999. Patterns of Use for the Bryn Mawr Reviews. In Technology and Scholarly Communication, pp. 195-204. Richard Ekman and Richard E. Quandt, eds. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Harr, John M. 2000. Project PEAK: Vanderbilt’s Experience with Articles on Demand. The Serials Librarian 38(1/2): 91-99.

Hiller, Steve. 2002. How Different Are They? A Comparison By Academic Area of Library Use, Priorities, and Information Needs at the University of Washington. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship. Available at http://www.istl.org/istl/02-winter/article1.html.

Hutzler, Evelinde and Gerald Schupfner. 2002. The Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliotherk: A Successful Library Service for Electronic Journals in Germany. The Serials Librarian 41(3/4): 255-270.

Kidd, Tony. 2002. Electronic Journal Usage Statistics in Practice. Serials 15(1): 11-17.

King, Donald W. and Carol Hansen Montgomery. 2002. After Migration to an Electronic Journal Collection. D-Lib Magazine 8(12) Available at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/december02/king/12king.html.

Lenares, Deborah. 1999. Faculty Use of Electronic Journals at Research Institutions. Racing Toward Tomorrow. Proceedings of the 9th National Conference of the Association of College and Research Libraries, pp. 329-334. Hugh A. Thompson, ed. Chicago, Ill.: Association of College and Research Libraries.

Liew, Chern Li, Schubert Foo, and K. R. Chennupati. 2000. A Study of Graduate Student End-Users’ Use and Perception of Electronic Journals. Online Information Review 24(4): 302-315.

MacDonald, Brad and Robert Dunkelberger. 2000. Full-test Database Dependency: An Emerging Trend Among Undergraduate Library Users? Research Strategies 16(4): 301-307.

MacKie-Mason, Jeffrey K., Juan F. Riveros, Maria S. Bonn and Wendy P. Lougee. 1999. A Report on the PEAK Experiment. D-Lib Magazine 5(7/8). Available at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july99/mackie-mason/07mackie-mason.html.

Maclennan, Birdie. 1999. From Print to Cyberspace: Presentation and Access Issues for Electronic Journals in a Medium-Sized Academic Institution. Journal of Electronic Publishing 5(1) Available at http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/05-01/maclennan.html.

Mahe, Annaig, Christine Andrys, and Ghislaine Chartron. 2000. How French Research Scientists Are Making Use of Electronic Journals: A Case Study Conducted at Pierre et Marie Curie University and Denis Diderot University. Journal of Information Science 26(5): 291-302.

Majid, Shaheen and Alfia Fanilievna Abazova. 1999. Computer Literacy and Use of Electronic Information Sources by Academics: A Case Study of International Islamic University Malaysia. Asian Libraries 8(4): 100-111.

Majid, S. and A.T. Tan. 2002. Usage of information resources by computer engineering students: A case study of Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Online Information Review 26(5): 318-325.

Maughan, Patricia Davitt. 1999. Library Resources and Services: A Cross-Disciplinary Survey of Faculty and Graduate Student Use and Satisfaction. Journal of Academic Librarianship 25 (5): 354-366.

McGillis, Louise and Elaine G. Toms. 2001. Usability of the Academic Library Web Site: Implications for Design. College and Research Libraries 62(4): 355-368.

McKnight, Cliff. 1997. Electronic Journals: What Do Users Think of Them? Proceedings of the International Symposium on Research Development and Practice in Digital Libraries: ISDL ’97. Available at http://www.dl.ulis.ac.jp/ISDL97/proceedings/mcknight.html.

Mercer, Linda S. 2000. Measuring the Use and Value of Electronic Journals and Books. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 25(Winter). Available at http://www.library.ucsb.edu/istl/00-winter/article1.html.

Monopoli, Maria et al. 2002. A User-oriented Evaluation of Digital Libraries: Case Study: The ‘Electronic Journals’ Service of the Library and Information Service of the University of Patras Greece. Aslib Proceedings 54(2): 103-117.

Montgomery, C. H. and D. W. King. 2002. Comparing Library and User Related Costs of Print and Electronic Journal Collections. A First Step Towards a Comprehensive Analysis. D-Lib Magazine 8(10). Available at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/october02/montgomery/10montgomery.html.

Morrison, Heather G. 1999. Online Catalogue Research and the Verbal Protocol Method. Library Hi Tech 17(2): 197-206.

Morse, David H., and William A. Clintworth. 2001. Comparing Patterns of Print and Electronic Journal Use in an Academic Health Science Library. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship Fall 2001. Available at http://www.library.ucsb.edu/istl/00-fall/refereed.html.

Neal, James G. 1999. The Use of Electronic Scholarly Journals: Models of Analysis and data drawn from the project Muse experience at Johns Hopkins University. In Technology and Scholarly Communication, 250-257. Richard Ekman and Richard E. Quandt, eds. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Nelson, Dianne. 2001. The Uptake of Electronic Journals by Academics in the UK, Their Attitudes Towards Them and Their Potential Impact on Scholarly Communication. Information Services & Use 21(3/4): 205-214.

Nicolaides, Fraser. 2001. Decomate-II: Developing the European Digital Library for Economics: User Studies: Final Report. Available at http://www.bib.uab.es/project/eng/d82.pdf.

Nicholas, David and Paul Huntington. 2002. Big Deals: Results And Analysis From A Pilot Analysis Of Web Log Data. The Consortium Site License: It a Sustainable Model? Proceedings of a meeting held on September 24, 2002 at the Royal Society, London. Organized by the Ingenta Institute. 187-215.

Nicholas, David, Tom Dobrowolski, Richard Withey, Chris Russell, Paul Huntington, and Peter Williams. 2003. Digital Information Consumers, Players and Purchasers: Information Seeking Behaviour in the New Digital Interactive Environment. Aslib Proceedings 55(1/2): 23-31.

Palmer, Janet P. and Mark Sandler. 2003. What Do Faculty Want? Netconnect (Winter): 26-28.

Park, Soyeon. 2000. Usability, User Preferences, Effectiveness, and User Behaviors When Searching Individual and Integrated Full-Text Databases: Implications for Digital Libraries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51(4): 456-468.

Pedersen, Sarah, and Rosemary Stockdale. 1999. What Do the Readers Think? A Look at How Scientific Journal Users See the Electronic Environment. Journal of Scholarly Publishing 31(1): 42-52.

Pelzer, Nancy L., William H. Wiese, and Joan M. Leysen. 1998. Library Use and Information-seeking Behavior of Veterinary Medical Students Revisited in the Electronic Environment. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 86(3): 346-355.

Perkins, Gay Helen and Haiwang Yuan. 2000. Genesis of a Web-Based Satisfaction Survey in an Academic Library. The Western Kentucky University Libraries’ Experience. Library Administration and Management 14 (3) 159-166.

Quigley, Jane, David R. Peck, Sara Rutter, and Elizabeth McKee Williams. 2002. Making Choices: Factors in the Selection of Information Resources Among Science Faculty at the University of Michigan: Results of a Survey Conducted July-September, 2000. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship. Spring 2002. Available at http://www.istl.org/02-spring/refereed.html.

Ray, Kathryn and Joan Day. 1998. Student Attitudes Towards Electronic Information Resources. Information Research 4(2). Available at http://informationr.net/ir/4-2/paper54.html.

Ren, Wen-Hua. 2000. Library Instruction and College student Self-Efficacy in Electronic Information Searching. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 26 (5): 323-328.

Roes, Hans. 1999. Promotion of Electronic Journals to Users by LibrariesÐA Case Study of Tilburg University Library. Presented at the UK Serials Group Promotion and Management of Electronic Journals in London, 28 October 1999. Available at http://drcwww.kub.nl/~roes/articles/london99.htm.

Rogers, Sally A. 2001. Electronic Journal Usage at Ohio State University. College & Research Libraries 62(1): 25-34.

Rowley, Jenny. 2001. JISC User Behaviour Monitoring and Evaluation Framework. Ariadene 30. Available at http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue30/jisc/intro.html.

Rozic-Hristovski, Anamarija, Dimitar Hristovski, Ljupco Tosorovski. 2002. Users’ Information-seeking Behavior on a Medical Library Website. Journal of the Medical Library Association 90(2): 210-217.

Rudner, Lawrence M., Marie Miller-Whitehead, and Jennifer S. Gellmann. 2002. Who Is Reading On-line Education Journals? Why? And What Are They Reading? D-Lib Magazine 8(12). Available at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/december02/rudner/12rudner.html.

Rusch-Feja, Diann, and Uta Siebeky. 1999. Evaluation of Usage and Acceptance of Electronic Journals: Results of an Electronic Survey of Max Planck Society Researchers Including Usage Statistics from Elsevier, Springer and Academic Press. D-Lib Magazine 5(10). Available at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/october99/rusch-feja/10rusch-feja-summary.html.

Sathe, Nila A., Jenifer L. Grady, and Nunzia B. Giuse. 2002. Print Versus Electronic Journals: A Preliminary Investigation into the Effect of Journal Format on Research Processes. Journal of the Medical Library Association 90(2): 235-243.

Shemberg, Marian and Cheryl R. Grossman. 1999. Electronic Journals in Academic Libraries: A Comparison of ARL and Non-ARL Libraries. Library Hi Tech 17(1): 26-45.

Speier, Cheri, Jonathan Palmer, Daniel Wren, and Susan Hahn. 1999. Faculty Perceptions of Electronic Journals as Scholarly Communication: A Question of Prestige and Legitimacy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50(6): 537-543.

Spink, A., D. Wolfram, B.J. Jansen and T. Saracevic. 2001. Searching The Web: The Public And Their Queries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 52(3): 226-234.

Stewart, Linda. 1996. User Acceptance of Electronic Journals: Interviews with Chemists at Cornell University. College & Research Libraries 57(4): 339-349.

Summerfield, Mary and Carol A. Mandel. 1999. On-line Books at Columbia: Early Findings on Use, Satisfaction, and Effect. In Technology and Scholarly Communication, pp. 282-308. Richard Ekman and Richard E. Quandt, eds. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.

Tannery, Nancy Hrinya, Deborah L. Silverman, and Barbara A. Epstein. 2002. Online Use Statistics. Medical Reference Services Quarterly 21(1): 25-33.

Tenner, Elka and Zheng Ye (Lan) Yang. 1999. End-User Acceptance of Electronic Journals: A Case Study from a Major Academic Research Library. Technical Services Quarterly 17(2): 1-11.

Tenopir, Carol and Eleanor Read. 2000. Patterns of Database Use in Academic Libraries. College & Research Libraries 61(3): 234-246.

Tenopir, Carol and Eleanor Read. 2000. Patterns of Database Use in Public Libraries. Reference and User Services Quarterly 40(1): 39-52.

Tenopir, Carol, Richard Pollard, and Peiling Wang. 2003. Increasing Effective Student Use of the Scientific Journal Literature. Available at http://web.utk.edu/~tenopir/nsf/index.html.

Tenopir, Carol, Richard Pollard, Peiling Wang, Dan Greene, Elizabeth Kline, Julia Krummen, and Rachel Kirk. 2003. Undergraduate Science Students and Electronic Scholarly Journals. Proceeding of the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST), October 2003. In press.

Tomaiuolo, Nicholas G. 2001. Deconstructing Questia: The Usability of a Subscription to a Digital Library. Searcher 9(7): 32-39.

Tomney, Hilary and Paul F. Burton. 1998. Electronic Journals: A Study of Usage and Attitudes Among Academics. Journal of Information Science 24(6): 419-429.

TULIP: Final Report Elsevier Science. 1996. Available at http://www.elsevier.nl/homepage/about/resproj/trmenu.htm.

Voorbij, Henk, J. 1999. Searching Scientific Information on the Internet: A Dutch Academic User Survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50(7): 598-615.

Waldman, Micaela. 2003. Freshmen’s Use of Library Electronic Resources and Self-Efficacy. Information Research 8(2). Available at http://informationr.net/ir/8-2/paper150.html.

Whitmire, Ethelene. 2002. Disciplinary Differences and Undergraduates’ Information-Seeking Behavior. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53(8): 631-638.

Woodward, Hazel, Cliff McKnight, Jack Meadows, Carolyn Pritchett and Fytton Rowland. 1997. Café Jus: Commercial and Free Electronic Journals User Study. British Library Research and Innovation Centre.

Woodward, Hazel, Fytton Rowland, Cliff McKnight, Jack Meadows and Carolyn Pritchett. 1997. Electronic Journals: Myths and Realities. Library Management 18(3): 155-162.

Woodward, Hazel, Fytton Rowland, Cliff McKnight, Carolyn Pritchett and Jack Meadows. 1998. Café Jus: An Electronic Journals User Survey. Journal of Digital Information 1(3). Available at http://jodi.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Articles/v01/i03/Woodward/.

Worlock, Kate. 2002. Electronic Journals: User Realities—The Truth About Content Usage Among the STM Community. Learned Publishing 15(3): 223-226.

Zhang, Zhongdong. 1998. User’s Information Behaviour when Using an Electronic Journal. In Electronic Publishing ’98: Towards The Information-Rich Society, 24-32. Washington, D.C.: ICCC Press.

6.3 Methodology and Literature Reviews

Bailey, Charles W. Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography. Available at http://info.lib.uh.edu/sepb/sepb.html.

Bishop, Ann Peterson and Susan Leigh Star. 1996. Social Informatics of Digital Library Use and Infrastructure. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, p. 301. Martha E. Williams, ed. Medford, N.J.: Information Today, Inc.

Blecic, Deborah D. 1999. Measurements of Journal Use: An Analysis of the Correlation Between Three Methods. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 87(1): 20-25.

Bollen, Johan, Rick Luce, Soma Sekhara Vemulapalli, and Weining Xu. 2003. Usage Analysis for the Identification of Research Trends in Digital Libraries. D-Lib Magazine 9 (5). Available at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/may03/bollen/05bollen.html.

Calvert, Philip J. and Peter Hernon. 1997. Surveying Service Quality within University Libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 23: 408-415.

Chase, Lynne, and Jaquelina Alvarez. 2000. Internet Research: The Role of the Focus Group. Information and Library Science 22 (4): 357-369.

Connaway, Lynn Silipigni. 1996. Focus Group Interviews. A Data Collection Methodology for Decision Making. Library Administration and Management 10(4): 231-239.

Covey, Denise Troll. 2002. Usability and Usability Assessment: Library Practices and Concerns. Council on Library and Information Resources. Available at https://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub105/contents.html.

Epic. 2001. Research Methodology. Available at http://www.epic.columbia.edu/eval/eval02.html.

Giangrande, Rosaria. 2002. Electronic Journals: A Literature Review 1995-1999. Available at http://www.burioni.it/forum/giang-ej.pdf.

Griffiths, Jillian R., R.J. Hartley, and Jonathan P. Wilson. 2002. An Improved Method of Studying User-system Interaction by Combining Transaction Log Analysis and Protocol Analysis. Information Research 7(7). Available at http://informationr.net/ir/7-4/paper139.html.

Hernon, Peter, and Philip J. Calvert. 1996. Methods for Measuring Service Quality in University Libraries in New Zealand. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 22: 387-391.

Hurd, Julie M, Deborah D. Blecic, and Ann E. Robinson. 2001. Performance Measures for Electronic Journals: A UserÐcentered Approach. Science and Technology Libraries 20(2/3): 57-71.

Kling, Rob and Ewa Callahan. 2003. Electronic Journals, the Internet, and Scholarly Communication. In Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Blaise Cronin, ed. 37: 127-177. Medford, N.J.: Information Today, Inc.

Liu, Weiling and Fannie M. Cox. 2002. Tracking the Use of E-journals: A Technique Collaboratively Developed by the Cataloging Department and the Office of Libraries Technology at the University of Louisville. OCLC Systems & Services 18(1): 32-39.

Luther, Judy. 2000. White Paper on Electronic Journal Usage Statistics. Washington, D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources. Available at https://www.clir.org/pubs/abstract/pub94abst.html.

Macintyre, Ross. 2001. Moves to Standardise on Vendor-Based User Statistics. In The Future of Electronic Publishing Conference. Amsterdam, Holland. Available at http://epub.mimas.ac.uk/papers/UsageJan2001.html.

McClure, Charles R. and Cynthia Lopata. 1996. Part II: Collecting and Using Qualitative Data. Assessing the Academic Networked Environment: Strategies and Options. Available at http://www.cni.org/projects/assessing/mcclure/Part-II.html.

Molyneux, Robert E. and Robert E. Williams. 1999. Measuring the Internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. Martha E. Williams, ed. Vol. 34:287-339.

Nicholas, David, Paul Huntington, and Peter Williams. 2002. Evaluating Metrics for Comparing the Use of Web Sites: A Case Study of Two Consumer Health Web Sites. Journal of Information Science 28(1): 63-75.

Perkins, Gay Helen and Haiwang Yuan. 2001. A Comparison of Web-based and Paper-and-Pencil Library Satisfaction Survey Results. College and Research Libraries 62(4): 369-377.

Raney, A. A., J. R. Jackson, D. B. Edwards, K.L. Schaffler, J. B. Arrington, and M.R. Price. 2002. The Relationship Between Multimedia Features and Information Retrieval. The Journal of Electronic Publishing 7(3). Available at http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/07-03/raney.html.

Tenopir, Carol. 2003. Information Metrics and User Studies. Aslib Proceedings 55 (1/2): 13-17.

Tenopir, Carol, Donald W. King, Peter Boyce, Matt Grayson, and Keri-Lynn Paulson. Relying on Electronic Journals: Reading Patterns of Astronomers. Draft. Submitted for Publication, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology April 2003. Preprint available at http://web.utk.edu/~tenopir/.

Urquhart, Christine, Ann Light, Rhian Thomas, Anne Barker, Alison Yeoman, Jan Cooper, Chris Armstrong, Roger Fenton, Ray Lonsdale, Sian Spink. 2003. Critical Incident Technique and Explication Interviewing in Studies of Information Behavior. Library & Information Science Research 25: 63-88.

Veldof, Jerilyn R., Michael J. Prasse, and Victoria A. Mills. 1999. Chauffeured by the User: Usability in the Electronic Library. Journal of Library Administration 26(3/4): 115-140.

Wang, Peiling. 1999. Methodologies and Methods for User Behavioral Research. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. Martha E. Williams, ed. Vol. 34: 53-99. Yu, Liangzhi and Ann Apps. 2000. Studying E-Journal User Behavior Using Log Files: The Experience of Super Journal. Library & Information Science Research 22(3): 311-338.

Yu, Liangzhi and Ann Apps. 2000. Studying E-Journal User Behavior Using Log Files: The Experience of Super Journal. Library & Information Science Research 22(3): 311-338.