Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Carol Perryman is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Carol Perryman.


Internet Reference Services Quarterly | 2008

Exploring Virtual Librarianship: Second Life Library 2.0

Rebecca Hedreen; Jennifer L Johnson; Mack Lundy; Peg Burnette; Carol Perryman; Guus van den Brekel; Jj Jacobson; Matt Gullett; Kelly Czarnecki

ABSTRACT In April 2006, Alliance Library System and Online Programming for All Libraries partnered to start the Second Life Library 2.0 in the online world Second Life and in August 2006 purchased an island on the Teen grid of Teen Second Life. Second Life is a virtual world, a descendant of multiplayer online games. Educational institutions have recently been drawn into Second Lifes robust economy and vibrant cultural life. The Second Life Library 2.0 works with librarians from around the world and with other educational partners such as TechSoup, WorldBridges, and the New Media Consortium. Second Life Library 2.0 provides “traditional” library services such as ready reference, book discussions, and search assistance, but, at heart, it explores what it means to be a virtual library in a virtual world.


Journal of The Medical Library Association | 2016

Research engagement of health sciences librarians: a survey of research-related activities and attitudes

Susan Lessick; Carol Perryman; Brooke L. Billman; Kristine M. Alpi; Sandra L. De Groote; Ted D. Babin

INTRODUCTION The extent to which health sciences librarians are engaged in research is a little-studied question. This study assesses the research activities and attitudes of Medical Library Association (MLA) members, including the influence of work affiliation. METHODS An online survey was designed using a combination of multiple-choice and open-ended questions and distributed to MLA members. Responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics, content analysis, and significance testing. The authors used statistical tools and categorized open-ended question topics by the constant comparative method, also applying the broad subject categories used in a prior study. Pearsons chi-square analysis was performed on responses to determine significant differences among respondents employed in three different institutional environments. RESULTS Analysis showed that 79% of respondents read research articles at least once a month; 58% applied published research studies to practice; 44% had conducted research; 62% reported acting on research had enhanced their libraries; 38% had presented findings; and 34% had authored research articles. Hospital librarians were significantly less likely than academic librarians to have participated in research activities. Highly ranked research benefits, barriers, and competencies of health sciences librarians are described. CONCLUSIONS Findings indicate that health sciences librarians are actively engaged in research activities. Practice implications for practitioners, publishers, and stakeholders are discussed. Results suggest that practitioners can use published research results and results from their own research to affect practice decisions and improve services. Future studies are needed to confirm and extend these findings, including the need for intervention studies to increase research and writing productivity.


Evidence Based Library and Information Practice | 2009

Thematic Categorization and Analysis of Peer Reviewed Articles in the LISA Database, 2004-2005

Carol Perryman

A Review of: Gonzalez-Alcaide, Gregorio, Lourdes Castello-Cogolles, Carolina Navarro-Molina, et al. “Library and Information Science Research Areas: Analysis of Journal Articles in LISA.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59.1 (2008): 150-4. Objective – To provide an updated categorization of Library and Information Science (LIS) publications and to identify trends in LIS research. Design – Bibliometric study. Setting – The Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA) database via the CSA Illumina interface. Subjects – 11,273 item records published from 2004-2005 and indexed in LISA. Methods – First, a search was set up to retrieve all records from 2004-2005, limited to peer review items (called “arbitrated works” by the authors (150)) and excluding book reviews. Second, thematic descriptor terms used for the records were identified. Frequency counts for descriptor term occurrence were compiled using Microsoft Access and Pajek software programs. From the results of this search, the top terms were analyzed using the Kamada-Kawai algorithm in order to eliminate descriptor term co-occurrence frequencies under 30. A cluster analysis was used to depict thematic foci for the remaining records, providing a co-word network that visually identified topic areas of most frequent publication. Conclusions were drawn from these findings, and recommendations for further research were provided. Main Results – The authors identified 18 “thematic research core fields” (152) clustered around three large categories, “World Wide Web”, “Education”, and “Libraries”, plus 12 additional peripheral categories, and provided a schematic of field interrelationships. Conclusion – Domains of greatest focus for research “continue to be of practical and applied nature,” (153) but include increased emphasis on the World Wide Web and communications technologies, as well as on user studies. A table of the most frequently occurring areas of research along with their top three descriptor terms is provided (Table 1, 152) (e.g., “World Wide Web” as the top area of research, with “online information retrieval” (268 occurrences), “searching” (132 occurrences), and “web sites” (115 occurrences)).


Evidence Based Library and Information Practice | 2008

Further Study is Needed to Define and Measure the Use of Reflective Practice in Library and Information Science

Carol Perryman

A review of: Grant, Maria J. “The Role of Reflection in the Library and Information Sector: A Systematic Review.” Health Information and Libraries Journal (2007) 24: 155-166. Objectives - To identify and review the literature of reflective practice in Library and Information Science (LIS) in order to understand its role, particularly with regard to health libraries. Design - Systematic review Setting - LIS English-language articles indexed in the Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA) database and published between 1969 and 2006. Subjects - 929 citations retrieved from the LISA database. Methods - The author conducted free text searches in the LISA database for the terms ‘reflective’ or ‘reflection*’ or ‘reflexion*.’ An initial search series was conducted in 2004 in order to retrieve items published between 1969-2003, then in 2007, for articles published between 2004-2006. In all, 929 article citations were retrieved. Exclusion criteria included those articles addressing the facilitation of reflective practices in others, as well as non-English language, and materials predating 1969. After review, 55 articles met the author’s relevance standard. Citation tracking then added 10 articles to the total. From this dataset, full text articles were obtained where possible, if determined on initial scrutiny to be deserving of further examination. Thirteen articles (.013%) were ultimately selected for analysis. These articles were categorized as analytical or non-analytical, with respect to perspective (individual or organizational), and recency of events (retrospective or recent). In addition, a determination was made about whether the articles’ focus was reflection occurring on (in retrospect to) or in (during) practice. Main results - Of 13 articles, 5 were found to be non-analytical, with the other 6 being analytical. Three of the non-analytical items were the reflections of an individual, while the remaining 2 offered an organizational perspective. The non-analytical accounts were found to be mostly descriptive accounts by an individual, mostly retrospective and offering no consideration of implications for LIS practice. Analytical reflective accounts attempt to systematically appraise events from the recent past, and draw conclusions in order to improve future actions. Conclusion – A gradual increase in the use of analytical reflective practice is demonstrated over the period from 1969-2006, although insufficient examples of the practice were found in the published literature. Reflective practice is likely to be beneficial to LIS practitioners, especially when time is spent in considering the implications of lessons learned from practice.


Evidence Based Library and Information Practice | 2015

Assessment Related Skills and Knowledge Are Increasingly Mentioned in Library Job Postings

Carol Perryman

A Review of: Passoneau, S., & Erickson, S. (2014). Core competencies for assessment in libraries: A review and analysis of job postings. Library Leadership & Management, 28(4):1-19. https://journals.tdl.org/llm/index.php/llm/article/view/7080 Abstract Objective – The authors sought to determine whether existing definitions of assessment agree with assessment-related skills sought in job postings, and to identify key assessment-related skills, needs for training, and trends in assessment. Design – Content analysis. Setting – Job postings from six library-specific websites: the American Library Association, the Library & Information Technology Association, the Society of American Archivists, the Council on Library and Information Resources, the Association of Research Libraries, and Library Assessment job announcements at http://libraryassessment.info/?cat=13. Subjects – Job titles and descriptions published during an 18-month period between Summer 2012 and Winter 2013 that met the inclusion criteria (n=231). Methods – Job postings were searched and analyzed in two separate sets whose inclusion criteria is as follows: First, job postings with the term assessment in the position title or as the main focus of the position (n=44) were retrieved; of these, three postings were too old to contain descriptions, so were excluded from analysis. Second, job postings were retrieved with the terms assessment, evaluation, metrics, and strategic in the descriptive text of postings with position titles that did not specifically mention assessment (n=187). The full text of both sets was downloaded to ATLAS.ti software for analysis using a grounded theory approach. Mutually exclusive terms emerging from the coding process were documented and defined; from this analysis, networks of code “families” or co-relational groupings helped to create categories and sub-categories. The context of terms was closely examined to understand the meaning of assessment-related terms in job descriptions. Following this step, Microsoft Excel was used to generate tables and pivot tables, aiding understanding and illustrating data. Main Results – All 44 job posts containing the term assessment as part of the position title were from research universities or four year colleges; of these, most were ARL member libraries. For these postings, the concept of assessment was more clearly aligned with definitions of assessment as an ongoing process. The positions described, requiring a minimum of three years’ of experience, ranged from entry-level to administrative in nature. In the second set (187 postings), the interchangeable use of the terms “assessment” and “evaluation” was particularly evident in job postings unrelated to library instruction. No library types other than academic were recruiting for assessment librarians, but related skills, usually referred to as evaluation in public and special libraries, were mentioned in all areas of library practice including instruction, administration, public services, user behavior, and to a lesser extent, access services, archives, information technology, cataloging, and more. While less prominent, these less often mentioned areas of practice also appear to be increasing their awareness of assessment. Key skills and knowledge areas needed for assessment in libraries emerged from content analysis of the job postings. These were grouped under eight main areas of competency and were augmented by the authors’ own experiences as assessment librarians: background in library assessment, research methods, statistical and analytic skills, visualization and presentation skills, and project management and people skills. Conclusions – Based upon analysis of this set of documents, a culture of assessment in libraries appears to be emerging, demonstrating a possible upward trend when contrasted with the earlier research of Walter and Oakleaf (2010). Overall, assessment related skills and knowledge were increasingly evident across all library types and positions. Suggestions for aiding the development of an emerging culture of assessment include fostering liaisons between ALA divisions and library schools to persuade the schools of the need for related coursework, workshops focused on assessment-related skills, certification programs, and a proposed minor in library assessment. Opening avenues for discussion between library types could enhance the growth of an assessment culture beyond academic librarianship. Additional research to better understand the diffusion of assessment culture and practice into non-academic libraries is also recommended.


Evidence Based Library and Information Practice | 2014

Diagnoses, Drugs, and Treatment Are the Main Information Needs of Primary Care Physicians and Nurses, and the Internet Is the Information Source Most Commonly Used to Meet These Needs

Carol Perryman

A Review of: Clarke, M. A., Belden, J. L., Koopman, R. J., Steege, L. M., Moore, J. L., Canfield, S. M., & Kim, M. S. (2013). Information needs and information-seeking behaviour analysis of primary care physicians and nurses: A literature review. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 30(3), 178-190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hir.12036 Abstract Objective – To improve information support services to health practitioners making clinical decisions by reviewing the literature on the information needs and information seeking behaviours of primary care physicians and nurses. Within this larger objective, specific questions were 1) information sources used; 2) differences between the two groups; and 3) barriers to searching for both groups. Design – Literature review. Setting – SCOPUS, CINAHL, OVID Medline, and PubMed databases. Subjects – Results from structured searches in four bibliographic databases on the information needs of primary care physicians and nurses. Methods – Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) and keyword search strategies tailored to each of four databases were employed to retrieve items pertinent to research objectives. Concepts represented in either controlled or natural language vocabularies included “information seeking behaviour, primary health care, primary care physicians and nurses” (p. 180). An initial yield of 1169 items was filtered by language (English only), pertinence to study objectives, publication dates (2000-2012), and study participant age (>18). After filtering, 47 articles were examined and summarized, and recommendations for further research were made. Main Results – Few topical differences in information needed were identified between primary care physicians and nurses. Across studies retrieved, members of both groups sought information on drugs, diagnoses, and therapy. The Internet (including bibliographic databases and web-based searching) was the source of information most frequently mentioned, followed by textbooks, journals, colleagues, drug compendiums, professional websites, and medical libraries. There is insufficient evidence to support conclusions about the differences between groups. In most research, information needs and behaviours for both groups have been discussed simultaneously, with no real distinction made, suggesting that there may not be significant differences even though a few studies have found that nurses’ emphasis is on policy and procedures. Barriers to access include time, searching skills, and geographic location; for the last, improvements have been made but rural practitioners continue to be adversely affected by limited access to people and resources. Conclusion – Both primary care physicians and nurses seek information on diagnosis and treatment. The Internet is of increasing utility for both groups, but all resources have advantages and disadvantages in identifying evidence based information for use in practice. Further research is required to support access and use of evidence based resources, and to explore how focused, evidence based information can be integrated into electronic health record systems.


Evidence Based Library and Information Practice | 2013

For Non-expert Clinical Searches, Google Scholar Results are Older with Higher Impact while PubMed Results Offer More Breadth

Carol Perryman

Objectives – To compare PubMed and Google Scholar results for content relevance and article quality Design – Bibliometric study. Setting – Department of Internal Medicine at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center. Methods – Four clinical searches were conducted in both PubMed and Google Scholar. Search methods were described as “real world” (p. 216) behaviour, with the searchers familiar with content, though not expert at retrieval techniques. The first 20 results from each search were evaluated for relevance to the initial question, as well as for quality. Relevance was determined based on one author’s subjective assessment of information in the title and abstract, when available, and then tested by two other authors, with discrepancies discussed and resolved. Items were assigned to one of three categories: relevant, possibly relevant, and not relevant to the question, with reviewer agreement measured using a weighted kappa statistic. The quality of items found to be ‘relevant’ and ‘possibly relevant’ was measured by impact factor ratings from Thomsen Reuters (ISI) Web of Knowledge, when available, as well as information obtained by SCOPUS on the number of times items were cited. Main Results – Google Scholar results were judged to be more relevant and of higher quality than results obtained from PubMEed. Google Scholar results are also older on average, while PubMed retrieved items from a larger number of unique journals. Conclusion – In agreement with earlier research, the authors recommended that searchers use both PubMed and Google Scholar to improve on the quality and relevance of results. Searches in the two resources identify unique items based upon the ranking algorithms involved.


Evidence Based Library and Information Practice | 2008

The Information Practices of Physical Science Librarians Differ from Those of the Scientific Community: More Research is Needed to Characterize Specific Information Seeking and Use

Carol Perryman

A Review of: Brown, Cecilia M. and Ortega, Lina. “Information-Seeking Behavior of Physical Science Librarians: Does Research Inform Practice?” College & Research Libraries (2005). 66:231-47. Objective – As part of a larger study exploring the information environments of physical science librarians (Ortega & Brown), the authors’ overall objective for this study is to profile physical science librarians’ information behaviours. The authors’ two-part hypothesis was that first, peer-reviewed journals would be preferred over all other sources for research dissemination, resembling the preferences of scientists, and second, that peer-to-peer consultation would predominate for practice-oriented decisions. Design – Mixed methods: survey questionnaire followed by citation and content analysis. Setting – Five internationally disseminated professional association electronic mailing lists whose readership comprised those with interests in science librarianship: the American Library Association (ALA) Science and Technology Section; the American Society for Information Science & Technology (ASIST) Science and Technology Information Special Interest Group; the Special Library Association (SLA) Chemistry Division and its Physics-Astronomy-Mathematics Division; and the American Geological Institute Geoscience Information Society. Subjects – Seventy-two physical science librarians voluntarily responding to an online survey. Methods – A questionnaire was distributed to inquire about physical science librarians’ professional reading practices as well as their perceptions about the applicability of research to their work. Participants were asked to rank preferences among 11 resource types as sources supporting daily business, including personal communication, conference attendance, electronic mailing lists, and scholarly journals. Differences between the mean rankings of preferences were tested for significance by applying the Friedman test with p>0.0005. Journals identified most frequently were analyzed using the Institute for Scientific Information’s (ISI) Web of Science index and Ulrich’s Periodical Index to measure proportions of research and non-research citations, as well as the general topic areas covered by the journals. Next, content analysis was performed for the years 1995, 1997, and 2000 in order to characterize research methodologies used in the previously identified journals according to a previously tested schema (Buscha & Harter). Results from this portion of the study were compared with participants’ responses about journal usage. Main Results – Librarians reported using personal communication (both face-to-face and electronic mailing lists) more frequently as a means of information gathering than professional journals, Web sites, conferences, trade publications, monographs, or ‘other’ resources. Variations in responses appeared to correlate with years in the profession and in the respondents’ time in their current positions, although there are indications that the importance of all information resources to practice and research declines over time. The relative importance of resources is also shown in time spent reading journal literature, less than 5 hours per week for 86% of participants. Conclusion – For the first hypothesis, the authors found that unlike scientists, survey participants did not prefer research publications as vehicles for dissemination of their research results. For the second, librarians ranked peer-reviewed journals third in preference after personal communication and electronic mailing lists as sources of information supporting daily practice, supporting the second hypothesis that respondents would emulate the information use practices of mathematicians.


Evidence Based Library and Information Practice | 2017

AAU Library Directors Prefer Collaborative Decision Making with Senior Administrative Team Members

Carol Perryman

A Review of: Meier, J. J. (2016). The future of academic libraries: Conversations with today’s leaders about tomorrow. Portal: Libraries and the Academy, 16(2), 263-288. Retrieved from http://muse.jhu.edu/article/613842 Abstract Objective – To understand academic library leaders’ decision making methods, priorities, and support of succession planning, as well as to understand the nature, extent, and drivers of organizational change. Design – Survey and interview. Setting – Academic libraries with membership in the Association of American Universities (AAU) in the United States of America and Canada. Subjects – 62 top administrators of AAU academic libraries. Methods – Content analysis performed to identify most frequent responses. An initial survey written to align with the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) 2014-2015 salary survey was distributed prior to or during structured in-person interviews to gather information about gender, race/ethnicity, age, time since terminal degree, time in position, temporary or permanent status, and current job title. 7-question interview guides asked about decision processes, strategic goals, perceived impacts of strategic plan and vision, planned changes within the next 3-5 years, use of mentors for organizational change, and succession planning activities. Transcripts were analyzed to identify themes, beginning with a preliminary set of codes that were expanded during analysis to provide clarification. Main results – 44 top academic library administrators of the 62 contacted (71% response rate) responded to the survey and interview. Compared to the 2010 ARL Survey, respondents were slightly more likely to be female (55%; ARL: 58%) and non-white (5%; ARL: 11%). Approximately 66% of both were aged 60 and older, while slightly fewer were 50-59 (27% compared to 31% for ARL), and almost none were aged 40-49 compared to 7% for the ARL survey. Years of experience averaged 33, slightly less than the reported ARL average of 35. Requested on the survey, but not reported, were time since terminal degree and in position, temporary or permanent status, and current job title. Hypothesis 1, that most library leaders base decisions on budget concerns rather than upon library and external administration strategic planning, was refuted. Hypothesis 2, that changes to the academic structure are incremental rather than global (e.g., alterations to job titles and responsibilities), was supported by responses. Major organizational changes in the next three to five years were predicted, led by role changes, addition of new positions, and unit consolidation. Most participants agreed that while there are sufficient personnel to replace top level library administrators, there will be a crisis for mid-level positions as retirements occur. A priority focus emerging from interview responses was preparing for next-generation administrators. There was disagreement among respondents about whether a crisis exists in the availability of new leaders to replace those who are retiring. Conclusion – Decisions are primarily made in collaboration with senior leadership teams, and based on strategic planning and goals as well as university strategic plans in order to effect incremental change as opposed to wholesale structural change.


Evidence Based Library and Information Practice | 2016

Evaluation of Self-Ratings for Health Information Behaviour Skills Requires More Heterogeneous Sample, but Finds that Public Library Print Collections and Health Information Literacy of Librarians Needs Improvement

Carol Perryman

A Review of: Yi, Y. J. (2015). Consumer health information behavior in public libraries: A qualitative study. The Library Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy, 85(1), 45-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/679025 Abstract Objective – To understand public library users’ perceptions of ability to locate, evaluate, and use health information; to identify barriers experienced in finding and using health information; and to compare self-ratings of skills to an administered instrument. Design – Mixed methods. Setting – Main library and two branches of one public library system in Florida. Subjects – 20 adult library users purposively selected from 131 voluntary respondents to a previously conducted survey (Yi, 2014) based on age range, ethnicity, gender, and educational level. Of the 20, 13 were female; 11 White, 8 Black, 1 Native American; most had attained college or graduate school education levels (9 each), with 2 having graduated from high school. 15 respondents were aged 45 or older. Methods – Intensive interviews conducted between April and May 2011 used critical incident technique to inquire about a recalled health situation. Participants responded to questions about skill self-appraisal, health situation severity, information seeking and assessment behaviour, use of information, barriers, and outcome. Responses were compared to results of the short form of the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA) test, administered to participants. Main Results – On a scale of 100, participants’ S-TOFHLA scores measured at high levels of proficiency, with 90% rating 90 points or above. Self-ratings of ability to find health information related to recalled need were ”excellent” (12 participants) or “good” (8 participants). Fourteen participants did not seek library assistance; 12 began their search on the Internet, 5 searched the library catalogue, and 3 reported going directly to the collection. Resource preferences were discussed, although no frequency descriptions were provided. 90% of participants self-rated their ability to evaluate the quality of health information as “good” or “excellent.” Participants selected authority, accuracy, and currency as the most important criteria of quality evaluation; however, other important criteria such as editorial review of content were not mentioned. Participants rated their ability to use health information as either “excellent” (17) or “good” (3). Conclusion – Use of health information enabled health behaviour change for participants, although conflicting information tended to increase anxiety. Barriers to success in all areas of inquiry include difficulties with terminology, collection limitations, asking a librarian for assistance, and lack of awareness of resources. Librarians should improve their health literacy skills in order to advise on all aspects of health information seeking, evaluation, and use. Collaborative efforts are suggested, such as special libraries and public library efforts, and health professional workshops or seminars offered to public library patrons.

Collaboration


Dive into the Carol Perryman's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jj Jacobson

Georgia Institute of Technology

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Kristine M. Alpi

North Carolina State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Peg Burnette

University of Illinois at Chicago

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Rebecca Hedreen

Southern Connecticut State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Sandra L. De Groote

University of Illinois at Chicago

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Susan Lessick

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ted D. Babin

Texas Woman's University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge