Literature DB >> 33031639

What every researcher should know about searching - clarified concepts, search advice, and an agenda to improve finding in academia.

Michael Gusenbauer1,2, Neal R Haddaway3,4,5.   

Abstract

We researchers have taken searching for information for granted for far too long. The COVID-19 pandemic shows us the boundaries of academic searching capabilities, both in terms of our know-how and of the systems we have. With hundreds of studies published daily on COVID-19, for example, we struggle to find, stay up-to-date, and synthesize information-all hampering evidence-informed decision making. This COVID-19 information crisis is indicative of the broader problem of information overloaded academic research. To improve our finding capabilities, we urgently need to improve how we search and the systems we use. We respond to Klopfenstein and Dampier (Res Syn Meth. 2020) who commented on our 2020 paper and proposed a way of improving PubMed's and Google Scholar's search functionalities. Our response puts their commentary in a larger frame and suggests how we can improve academic searching altogether. We urge that researchers need to understand that search skills require dedicated education and training. Better and more efficient searching requires an initial understanding of the different goals that define the way searching needs to be conducted. We explain the main types of searching that we academics routinely engage in; distinguishing lookup, exploratory, and systematic searching. These three types must be conducted using different search methods (heuristics) and using search systems with specific capabilities. To improve academic searching, we introduce the "Search Triangle" model emphasizing the importance of matching goals, heuristics, and systems. Further, we suggest an urgently needed agenda toward search literacy as the norm in academic research and fit-for-purpose search systems.
© 2020 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33031639     DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1457

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Synth Methods        ISSN: 1759-2879            Impact factor:   5.273


  4 in total

1.  Search where you will find most: Comparing the disciplinary coverage of 56 bibliographic databases.

Authors:  Michael Gusenbauer
Journal:  Scientometrics       Date:  2022-05-06       Impact factor: 3.801

2.  The age of abundant scholarly information and its synthesis- A time when 'just google it' is no longer enough.

Authors:  Michael Gusenbauer
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2021-09-07       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Literature searching methods or guidance and their application to public health topics: A narrative review.

Authors:  Andrea Heath; Paul Levay; Daniel Tuvey
Journal:  Health Info Libr J       Date:  2021-12-01

4.  Computational models predicting the early development of the COVID-19 pandemic in Sweden: systematic review, data synthesis, and secondary validation of accuracy.

Authors:  Philip Gerlee; Anna Jöud; Armin Spreco; Toomas Timpka
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 4.996

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.