journal of indian library association · vadodara (gujarat), december 1-4, 2004. edited by dr...

1 Journal of Indian Library AssociationVol. L No. 3, July - September 2014

JOURNAL OF INDIAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATIONA Peer - Reviewed Quarterly Journal

Vol. L No. 3, July - September 2014

Contents

5 Use of OPAC in Law University Libraries of South India: A Study

Dr. Devendra & Dr.(Mrs.) Khaiser Nikam

12 User Satisfaction and Library Performance: A Survey of Jayawant Library, Rajarshi ShahuCollege of Engineering, Tathawade, Pune

Gudi, S P, Paradkar, P M & Deshpande, R M

19 Research Publication Trend among the Scientists of Central Leather Research Institute(CLRI), Chennai, India: A Scientometric Study

Dr. R. Jeyshankar & K.S. Abu

27 Technology and its relevance for Society-an overview

Partha Bhattacharya & Dr. Pravin Kr. Choudhary

31 A Study on International Standard Serial Number

Abhijit Chakrabarti

35 Citations of Journal of Indian Library Association: An Analytical Study

Dhiman Mondal


ORDERFORM

To,The General Secretary,Indian Library Association,A/40-41, FlatNo.201, Ansal Building,Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, New Delhi, 110009

Dear Sir,Please publish our advertisement in the forthcoming issue (s) of your publication as per the enclosed sample.Relevant details are as under:1. Short Title/brief description of the material (enclosed) for advertisement:

2. To be published in: Journal of ILA ILA Newsletter

3. AdvertisementCode............................................................................................................................

4. Cheque/DDNo..................... Date: ....................... Name of the Bank: ........................................................................................................... for Rupees ......................................... DrawninfavourofIndian

Library Association, payableat New Delhi.

Authorised SignatureAddress & Seal of the Firm

INDIAN LIBARAY ASSOCIATIONADVERTISEMENT RATES

ILA NEWSLETTER1/4 Page Single Insertion ` 500/-1/4 Page 6 Insertions ` 2800/-1/4 Page. 12 Insertions ` 5000/-

Half Page Single Insertion ` 800/-Half Page 6 Insertions ` 4500/-Half Page 12 Insertions ` 8000/-

Full Page Single Insertion ` 1500/-Full Page 6 Insertions ` 8000/-Full Page 12 Insertions ` 15000/-

Journal of Indian Library AssociationBack Cover ` 2500/-Inner Covers ` 1500/-Full Page ` 1000/-Half Page ` 750/-Quarter Page ` 500/-


EDITORIAL

The recent advances in information technology and exponential growthof data in digital form have created the need for advanced indexingtechniques to assist the users in locating desired data. The digital librariesare built around Internet and web technologies with electronic databases/journals as their building blocks. The advent of World Wide Web(WWW), its ever-increasing usage; availability of software, hardwareand networking technology and highly evolved browsers have pavedthe way for the creation of a global digital library. The libraries havetaken up digitization process as a way to maximize the use andaccessibility of their resources and facilitated the greater access to theireducational, cultural, and scientific materials.

The integrated library automation software packages have servedwell in providing access to documents at bibliographic level. With rapiddevelopments in information technology, the world of digital informationresources has expanded quickly and exponentially. The most significantshift in building digital collections is due to greater interoperability amonginformation systems across the country and internationally. Building-updigital collections and providing infrastructure required to access themhave posed a greater challenge to all libraries. Recent developments ininformation and communication technologies, especially the Internetand web, have brought significant changes in the ways we generate,distribute, access and use information.

The research papers published in this issue are covering broaderaspects on digital library, web OPAC, scientometric studies and usageof Digital Libraries. Authors of the papers are initiating discussion onemerging trends in Digital Libraries and technologies.

Prof. Muttayya KoganuramathCentre for Library and Information Science

Central university of GujaratGandhinagar 382030

EDITORIAL BOARD

Chief Editor:Dr. Muttayya KoganuramathProfessor, Centre for LibraryandInformation Science CentralUniversity of GujaratGandhinagar

Members:Prof. Jagtar SinghDeptt. of Lib. & Inf. Sc.Punjabi University, Patiala (Punjab)Email: [email protected]

Dr. A.R.D. PrasadProfessorDRTC, Indian Statistical Institute8th Mile, MysoreMysore Rd., Bangalore 560059

Prof. Sabahat HussainDeptt. of Lib. & Inf.Sc.Aligarh Muslim UniversityAligarh

Prof. (Mrs) Ashu ShokeenDeptt. of Lib. & Inf.Sc.Kurukshetra UniversityKurukshetra (Harayana)

Dr. RameshaAssociate ProfessorDept. of Library & Inf.Sc.Bangalore University,JnanabharathiCampusBangalore - 560056E-mail:[email protected]

JOURNAL OF INDIAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION(OFFICIAL ORGAN OF INDIAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION)

Vol. L July - September 2014 No. 3

Send Papers & Advertisements to : General Secretary,Indian Library Association, A40-41,Flat No.201, Ansal Building, Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-9

Tel-fax:011-27651743, e-mail: [email protected], Website:www.ilaindia.net, Printed at: Anand Sons, Delhi-92


! 59th ILA International Conference Proceedings on “Managing Libraries in the changing information world....." edied byDr B.Ramesha,Dr N.S.Shokeen, Dr O.N.Chaubey, Dr.Pravin Kr. Choudhary, Dr.Pradeep Rai,Yogander Singh, Rs3000/,US$175.

! 58th ILA International Conference Proceedings on “Next Generation Libraries: New Insights and Universal Access to Knowledge, Edited by Dr B.Ramesha, Dr. B.D. Kumbar, Dr N.S. Shokeen , Dr O.N. Chaubey, Dr. Pradeep Rai, Dr. Pravin Kr. Choudhary, Ms. Hemavathi, Dr. Abhijeet Sinha,Rs 3000/-, US $ 175.

! 57th All India Library Conference Proceedings on “Knowledge Society : Innovations in Librarianship (ILAKSIL 2012), Edited by Dr B. Ramesha,Sh Sanjeev Dutt Sharma, Dr O.N. Chaubey, Dr N.S. Shokeen, Dr B.K. Vishala, Dr Anuradha Gupta, Rs 3000/-, US $ 175.

! 56th All India Library Conference Proceedings on “Public Libraries of Future : Opportunities & Challenges” Sonepat, July 21-23, 2011, Edited byDr. O.N. Chaubey, Sh Sanjeev Dutt Sharma, Dr N.S. Shokeen, Sh B.P. Chauhan, Sh P.K. Choudhary, Rs 1500/-, US $ 75.

! 55th All India Library Conference Proceedings on “Library & Information Science in the Digital Era” Greater Noida, January 21-24, 2010, Editedby Sh D.V. Singh, Dr (Mrs) R Chandra, Dr O.N. Chaubey, Dr B. Ramesha, Dr N.S. Shokeen, Dr Maliknath Kumbar, Dr Rishi Tiwari, Sh SanjeevDutt Sharma, Rs 2000/-, US $ 150.

! 54th All India Library Conference TISS 2008 on “Role of Libraries and Information Centres” Mumbai, November 12-15, 2008 , Edited by Dr MuttayyaKoganuramath, Dr (Mrs) R Chandra, Dr Sangayya Sirurmath, Dr Mallikarjun Angadi, Dr Satish Kanamadi, Dr N.S. Shokeen, Mr Puttaraj C. Rs1600/-, US $ 100.

! 53rd All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Developing Library and Information Resources and Services in the Internet Era” Hyderabad,Andhra Pradesh, December 13-16, 2007, Edited By Prof. Jagtar Singh, Shri D. V. Singh, Dr. N. S. Shokeen, Dr. (Mrs) R. Chandra, Dr. TrishanjitKaur, Dr. O. N. Chaubey, Nirmal K. Swain, Rs. 1000/- (Hardbound); US $ 100.

! 52nd All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Information Commons : Impact on and Implications for Libraries and Information Centres”Srinagar, Uttaranchal, December 26-29, 2006, Edited By Dr. AL Moorthy, Shri D.V. Singh, Dr. (Mrs) R. Chandra, Shri Manoj Kumar, Dr. S.K. Sharma,Shri V. Srinivasulu, Rs. 1000/- (Uttaranchal); US $ 100.

! 51st All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Libraries, Information Literacy and Lifelong Learning”, Kurukshetra December 16-18, 2005,Edited By Dr. (Mrs) R. Chandra, Shri N.K. Bar, Dr. M. Madhusudhan, Ms. Meera, Shri Krishan Gopal, Shri D.V. Singh Rs. 1000/- (Hardbound);US $ 100.

! 50th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Knowledge Organization in Digital Enviroment in Libraries (KODEL): Introspects and Prospects”.Vadodara (Gujarat), December 1-4, 2004. Edited by Dr (Mrs.) Ashu Shokeen, Dr M. Madhusudan and D V Singh. Rs. 1000/- (Hardbound); US$ 100.

! 49th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Responding to Users’ Need in Changing Information Landscapes: Sojourn of Librariesfrom Palm- Leaf to Palm-Top”. Jhansi (UP), December 29, 2003 to January 1, 2004. Edited by Prof (Dr) N Laxman Rao, Dr (Mrs.) Ashu Shokeen,Dr U C Sharma, D V Singh and Dr R K Bhatt. Rs. 800/- (Hardbound); US $ 100.

! 48th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Electronic Information Environment and Library Services: A Contemporary Paradigm”.Bangalore, January 22-25, 2003. Edited by Dr Pandey S K Sharma, Akhtar Parvez, Dr (Mrs) Ashu Shokeen and D V Singh. Rs. 1000/- (Hardbound);US $ 100.

! 47th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Library Practices for Effective Management”. Warangal, December 20-23, 2001. Editedby Kalpana Das Gupta. Rs. 995/- (Paperback); US $ 99.50.

! 46th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Quest for Quality: Quality Assurance in Library and Information Services: The Need ofthe Hour for Survival”. Ahmedabad, Jan 3-6, 2001. Edited by S M Dhawan. Rs. 995/- (Paperback); US $ 99.50.

! 45th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Indian Libraries and Librarianship in Retrospect and Prospect”. Edited by J L Sardana.Rs. 760/- (Paperback); US $ 75 & Rs. 950/- (Hardbound); US $110.

! National Seminar on “Challenges before the University Libraries in India in the 21st Century”. M S University of Baroda. August 9-12, 1999. Editedby J L Sardana. Rs. 700/-; US $ 70.

! 44th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Libraries and Information Services in the Electronics Information Era”. Hyderabad, February25-28, 1999. Edited by J L Sardana. Rs. 700/-; US $ 70.

! 43rd All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Sustainable Library and Information Services”. Chandigarh, November5-8, 1997. Edited by T A V Murthy, N Datta and R P Kumar. Rs. 650/-; US $ 65.

! 42nd All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Role of Libraries in National Development”. Calicut, December 21-24, 1996. Edited byR P Kumar, Divya Srivastava and S P Gupta. Rs 650/-; US $ 65.

! 41st All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Human Relations is Librarianship”. Vijayawada, January 7-10, 1996. Edited by P S G Kumarand C P Vashishth. Rs 600/-; US $ 60.

! 40th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Preparing Libraries for the 21st Century”. Goa. January 5-8, 1995. Edited by C V Subbarao.Rs. 600/-; US $ 60.

! 39th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Library Movement and Library Development in India”. 1994. Edited by C P Vashishth. Rs.600/-; US $ 60.

! 38th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Library and Information Technology: In Pursuit of Excellence”. Bhubaneswar, November21- 24,1992. Edited by C P Vashishth, O P Sharma, A P Gakhar, and Dr Dev Raj Singh. Rs. 500/-; US $ 55.

! Model Public Libraries Act 1991. Rs 100/-; US $ 20.! 37th All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “National Information Policies and Perspective”. 1991. Edited by K S Raghvan. Rs. 400/

-; US $ 50.! All India Conference Seminar Papers on “Computerization and Library Network”. Edited by C P Vashishth. 1990. Rs. 400/-;

US $ 50.! 35th All India Conference Seminar Papers on “Standardisation in Library and Information Work and Services”. Edited by C P Vashishth. Rs. 400/

-; US $50.! College Libraries in India: Proceedings of National Seminar. Edited by Krishan Kumar and J K Anand. 1988. Rs. 250/-; US $ 40.! 33rd All India Library Conference Seminar Papers on “Modernisation in Libraries”. 1988. Edited by C P Vashishth. Rs. 500/-;

US $ 50.! Year’s Work in Indian Librarianship 1987. Written and Edited by T S Rajagopalan. 1988. Rs 250/-; US $40.! Journal of Indian Library Association, Quarterly, Annual subscription. Rs 1500/-;for individual & Rs.2000/- for institutional) and US $ 55

The rate of discount applicable on the above publications would be as follows(i). 20%; for the publications published from 2005-onward (ii) 40%, forthe publications published before 2005 from the office of the Indian Library Association A/40-41, Flat No 201, Ansal Building, Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-110 009 (India). Telefax No. 011-27651743. Cheques/DD should be drawn in favour of Indian Library Association, payable at Delhi.

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS


JOURNAL OF INDIAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION 2014, 50(3) 5-11

Use of OPAC in Law University Libraries of South India: A Study

Dr. DevendraLibrarian,Poornaprajna Institute of Management, Udupi-76 101,

Email: [email protected].

Dr.(Mrs.) Khaiser NikamProfessor, Department of Library & Information Science,

Mysore University, Manasagangothri,Mysore – 570 006, Email: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

This study examines the use of Online Public Access Catalogue (OPAC) in Law University libraries of South

India. The sample population was chosen by using the convenience sample method. The investigator distributed

839 sample instruments to members of the teaching staff, research scholars, LLM students and LLB students

and received 671 filled - in usable questionnaires making a moderate response rate of 79.97% which was

found adequate for the analysis. Descriptive and inferential statistics were utilized in this research study.

Major findings of the study include: 53 (7.9%) respondents did not use OPAC. Majority of the respondents

strongly agreed that they search for book(s) (mean=4.28) and reference book(s) (mean=4.01) in their library

OPAC. This study also observed that 175 (28.3%) of the respondents use OPAC quite a lot.

Keywords: South India, Online Public Access Catalogue, Law University Libraries, Use of OPAC.

1. IntroductionIn the early 1980s, catalogues only displayed the

bibliographic information for monographs and serialtitles physically held in a library. Now, onlinecatalogues provide access to abstracting and indexingdatabases, as well as information on physical locationin libraries. It is connected to the Local Area Network(LAN) and the Internet. Recently, the behavior oflibrary users has been undergoing change, as they relyincreasingly on web search engines and internetservices, rather than libraries, to fulfill their informationneeds. Today India has sixteen Law Universities. Thefirst law University setup in Bangalore was named theNational Law School of India University (NLS). It wastherefore for the first time that a law degree other thanLLB or BL was granted in India. The next in line wasNational Law Institute University setup in Bhopal in

1997. It was followed by NALSAR university of Lawin 1998.

2. Literature ReviewGuha and Saraf (2005)4 conducted a study which aimsto examine the ‘OPAC usability: assessment throughverbal protocol’. The work of Bailey and Back (2006)‘Libx a firefox extension for enhanced library access’,identified the Libx, a software module that enhanceslibrary access for users by integrating access to the OnlinePublic Access Catalogue (OPAC) and to the open URLlinking server info the firefox browser2. Ortiz-Repiso,Virginia, Ponsati, Agnes, Cottereau and Mario (2006)7

studied “How researchers are using the OPAC of theSpanish Council for Scientific research Library Network”Yushiana and Rani (2007) carried out a study aboutOPAC heuristic evaluation of interface usability for a web


–based OPAC8. ‘A study on help users search,prototyping an online help system for OPACs’ byGreifeneder3 (2008) revealed the difference between thebeginners and the experienced and how their mentalmodels fit a particular system. Kumar and Vohra (2011)presented their article Online Public Access CatalogueUsage at Panjab University Library, Chandigarh6.

3. MethodologyThis study covers four states (Karnataka, Kerala,Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu) located in differentparts of South India. Present study is confined to sixLaw university libraries in South India. They are: NationalLaw School of India University library, Bangalore,Karnataka; Karnataka State Law University library,Hubli, Karnataka; Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar LawUniversity library, Chennai, Tamil Nadu; NationalUniversity of Advanced Legal Studies library, Cochin,Kerala; NALSAR University of Law library,Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh and Andhra PradeshUniversity of Law library, Vishakapatnam, AndhraPradesh. The study covers the sample such as facultymembers, full time doctoral or M.Phil research scholarspost graduate students and graduate students. Asampling of 839 members of the teaching staff, researchscholars, LLM students and LLB students of six LawUniversities in South India was randomly selected forthe survey. 671 filled in usable questionnaires werereturned making a moderate response rate of 79.97%which was found adequate for the purpose of analysis.The sample population was chosen by using theconvenience sample method. Descriptive and inferentialstatistics were utilized to generate responses to theresearch questions guiding the study. The StatisticalPackage for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16.1 andsoftware, Microsoft Excel were employed for dataanalysis.

4. Objectives• To get to know the use of OPAC by the users.

• To study the relation if any, between the use ofOPAC by the users and the status, gender, and ageof the users.

• To examine the type of documents searched in theOPAC by the users

• To examine the extent of use of OPAC by the users.

5. HypothesesFollowing are the tentative assumptions of the study.

Hypothesis 1:There is a significant relationship between the Use ofOPAC and Status of respondents.

Hypothesis 2:There is a significant relationship between the Use ofOPAC and Age Group of respondents.

Hypothesis 3:There is a significant relationship between the extent ofuse of OPAC and Status of respondents.

Hypothesis 4:There is a significant relationship between the extent ofuse of OPAC and Age Group of respondents.

6. Results And DiscussionThe results and discussion of the present study are shownbelow:

6.1. Demographic DataOf the 671 total respondents a little more than halfscoring 387(57.7%) are LLB students; nearly 221(32.9%) are LLM students, 27 (4%) are teaching facultyand the remaining 36 (5.4%) of them are researchscholars. Nearly half of the respondents scoring 329(49%) are in the age of 19 – 22 years, followed bythose who are in the age of 23 – 26 years (196;29.2%). Those who are in the age of 27 – 30 yearsrepresent 60(8.9%). There are only 45 (6.7%)respondents who are under 18 years of age. Theremaining 41(6.1%) of them are above 30 years of age.Nearly 50.4 percent of the users numbering 338 aremale and 333 (49.6%) of them are female users

6.2. Use of OPACThe OPAC facilitate law library users in searching andretrieving bibliographic records through several accesspoints. An OPAC uses a graphical user interface



accessible through local area network/ intranet or WorldWide Web, as opposed to a text based interfaceaccessible through telnet. The use of OPAC in LawUniversity libraries of South India is presented in table 1.It is observed that 618 (92.1%) respondents were usedto OPAC. On the other hand, only 53 (7.9%)respondents did not use OPAC.

Table 1: Use of OPACS.N. Type of Response No. of Responses Percentage1. Yes 618 92.1

2. No 53 7.9

Total 671 100.0

6.3 Using OPAC VS. Status of respondentsThe use of OPAC in relation to the status of therespondents is presented in table 2. The figures as shownin the table indicate that about 90.7% (351) of the LLBstudents are using OPAC. Similarly LLM students

(92.8%), members of the teaching staff (100%) andresearch scholars (97.2%) are using OPAC. But 9.3percent of LLB students, 7.2 percent of LLM studentsand 2.8 percent of research scholars do not use OPAC.It is also observed that above 90 percent of respondentsfrom different statuses are using OPAC and below 10percent of the respondents from different statuses do notuse OPAC. The results indicate that there is no significantdifference among respondents using OPAC betweenstatus wise respondents.

Hypothesis 1:There is a significant relationship between the Use ofOPAC and Status of respondents.

The statistical test reveals that there is no significantrelationship between the use of OPAC and the statusof the respondents (c2=4.793; df= 3; n = 671; P>0.05NS). Hence the hypothesis is rejected.

Table 2: Using OPAC VS. Status of respondents

S.N. Use of OPAC Status Total

LLB Students LLM Students Teaching staff Research scholar

1 Yes 351 (90.7%) 205 (92.8%) 27 (100.0%) 35 (97.2%) 618 (92.1%)

2 No 36 (9.3%) 16 (7.2%) 0 (.0%) 1 (2.8%) 53 (7.9%)

Total 387 (100.0%) 22 (100.0%) 127 (100.0%) 36 (100.0%) 671 (100.0%)

χ2=4.793; df= 3; P>0.05 NS

6.4. Use of OPAC VS. Gender of RespondentsThe use of OPAC in relation to the gender of therespondents is presented in table 3. It may be seenthat 317(90.7%) male respondents are using OPACand 301(90.4%) female respondents are use OPAC.21(6.2%) male and 32(9.6%) female respondents donot use OPAC.

Table 3: Use of OPAC VS. Gender of RespondentsS.N. Use of Gender distribution Total

OPAC Male Female

1 Yes 317(93.8%) 301(90.4%) 618(92.1%)

2 No 21(6.2%) 32(9.6%) 53(7.9%)

Total 338(100.0%) 333(100.0%) 671(100.0%)

χ2 = 2.660; P>0.05 NS

It is therefore, seen that there is no differencebetween male and female respondents in the use ofOPAC. The statistical test conducted indicates thatthere is no significant relationship between the use ofOPAC and the gender of the respondent (χ2=2.660;n = 671; P>0.05 NS).

6.5. Age Group of Respondents VS. Use ofOPACOne other variable which influences the use of OPAC byusers is the age. The relation between age group ofrespondents and the use of OPAC is presented in table4. The study reveals that majority (178) of the OPACusers are in the age of 23-26 years. It is indicated thatmore than 90 percent of the respondents using OPAC



are from all the age groups and below 10 percent of therespondents using OPAC are not from all the age groups.

Hypothesis 2:There is a significant relationship between the Use ofOPAC and Age Group of respondents.

6.6. Types of Documents Searched from the lawlibrary OPACTypes of documents searched in the OPAC by therespondents are presented in table 5. It may be seenfrom the table, that 341 (55.2%) respondents stronglyagreed that they search for book(s) in their library OPACand 17 (2.8%) respondents did not agree that they searchfor book(s) in their library OPAC and the majority of therespondents strongly agreed that they search for book(s)

in their library OPAC (mean=4.28). It may be observedthat 263 (42.6%) respondents agreed to express theiropinion that they search reference book(s) in their libraryOPAC and 14 (2.3%) respondents disagreed to expresstheir opinion that they search for reference book(s) intheir library OPAC. Most of the respondents stronglyagreed that they search for reference book(s) in theirlibrary OPAC (mean=4.01).

The chi-square test indicates that there is nosignificant difference in the statistical values fromdifferent sets (χ2 = 7.898; df = 4; P>0.05 NS). Hencethe hypothesis is rejected.

Table 5: Types of Documents Searched in the OPAC by the Respondents

S.N. Documents N = 618 Mean SD1 2 3 4 5

1 Book (s) 22(3.6) 17(2.8) 69(11.2) 169(27.3) 341(55.2) 4.28 1.009

2 Reference book(s) 23(3.7) 14(2.3) 106(17.2) 263(42.6) 212(34.3) 4.01 0.970

3 Reports 65(10.5) 70(11.3) 226(36.6) 145(23.5) 112(18.1) 3.27 1.192

4 Theses 120(19.4) 100(16.2) 208(33.7) 146(23.6) 44(7.1) 2.83 1.197

5 Journals 37(6.0) 38(6.1) 95(15.4) 223(36.1) 225(36.4) 3.91 1.138

Codes: 1=Strongly Disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Neutral, 4=Agree, 5= Strongly Agree

Table 4: Age Group of Respondents VS. Use of OPAC

S.N. Use of OPAC Age Group Total

<18 19 - 22 23 -26 27 -30 >301 Yes 41(91.1%) 299(90.9%) 178(90.8%) 59(98.3%) 41(100.0%) 618(92.1%)2 No 4(8.9%) 30(9.1%) 18(9.2%) 1(1.7%) 0(.0%) 53(7.9%)

Total 45(100.0%) 329(100.0%) 196(100.0%) 60(100.0%) 41(100.0%) 671(100.0%)

χ2 = 7.898; df = 4; P>0.05 NS

Majority of (341; 55.2%) respondents are neutralabout the question if they search for report(s) in theirlibrary OPAC and 65 (10.5%) respondents stronglydisagreed expressing their view the that they search forreport(s) in their library OPAC and the majority of therespondents agreed that they search for report(s) intheir library OPAC (mean=3.27). 208 (33.7%)respondents are neutral about searching for theses intheir library OPAC and 44 (7.1%) respondents strongly

agreed that they search theses in their library OPACand the majority of the respondents disagreed that theysearch for theses in their library OPAC (mean=2.83).Similarly 225 (36.5%) respondents strongly agreed thatthey search journal(s) in their library OPAC and 37(6%) respondents strongly contradicted with the viewthat they search for journal(s) in their library OPACand the majority of the respondents agreed that theysearch journal(s) in their library OPAC (mean=3.91).



6.7. Extent of the Use of OPACThe extent of use of the OPAC facility by the respondentsis shown in table 6. The result shows that 148 (23.9%)respondents were using OPAC to a very great deal, 131(21.2%) of the respondents use OPAC to a great deal.It is also observed that 175 (28.3%) of the respondentsuse OPAC quite a lot. Similarly 143 (23.1%) of therespondents use OPAC not very much and 21(3.4%)respondents not at all use OPAC.

Table 6: Extent of Use of OPAC by the Respondents

S/N Extent of use N = 618No. of Responses Percentage

1 A very great deal 148 23.92 Great deal 131 21.23 Quite a lot 175 28.34 Not very much 143 23.15 Not at all 21 3.4

Hypothesis 3:There is a significant relationship between the extent ofuse of OPAC and Status of respondents.

The chi-square test indicates that there is veryhigh significant relationship between the extent of useof OPAC and the respondent status (χ2=36.885;df= 12; n = 671; P<0.001 VHS). Hence the researchhypothesis is supported.

6.9. Extent of Use of OPAC VS. Gender ofRespondentsThe extent of the use of OPAC in relation to thegender of respondents is presented in table 8. It is

seen from the table that 42.3 percent of therespondents are use OPAC to a very great deal.Nearly 31.6 percent of the respondents use OPACnot very much or not at all in the male group. About40.8 percent of the respondents use OPAC to avery great deal or to a great deal. Nearly 30.9percent of the respondents use OPAC not verymuch or not at all in the female group. The statisticaltest (chi-square) indicates that there is no significantdifference between the extent of use of OPAC andthe gender of respondents (χ2 = 7.350; df = 4;P>0.05 NS).

6.8. Extent of Use of OPAC VS. Status ofRespondentsStatus of the users is considered as one of thevariables which influence the extent of use of OPACby the users. The relation between the extent of useof OPAC and the status of the respondents ispresented in table 7. It is evident from the table thatnearly 44 percent of the LLB students use OPAC toa great deal, About 35 percent of the LLM studentsuse OPAC to a great deal, 48 percent of the facultymembers use OPAC to a great deal and 50 percentof the research scholars use OPAC to a great deal.On other hand nearly 23.3 percent of the LLBstudents, 24.9 percent of the LLM students, 18.5percent of the members of teaching staff and 16.7percent of the research scholars do not make muchuse of OPAC.

Table 7: Extent of Use of OPAC VS. Status of Respondents

S.N. Enternal Use of Status Total

OPAC LLB LLM Teaching staff Research scholar

1 A very great deal 109(28.2%) 26(11.8%) 4(14.8%) 9(25.0%) 148(22.1%)

2 A Great deal 61(15.8%) 52(23.5%) 9(33.3%) 9(25.0%) 131(19.5%)

3 Quite a lot 90(23.3%) 72(32.6%) 8(29.6%) 12(33.3%) 182(27.1%)

4 Not very much 90(23.3%) 55(24.9%) 5(18.5%) 6(16.7%) 156(23.2%)

5 Not at all 37(9.6%) 16(7.2%) 1(3.7%) 0(.0%) 54(8.0%)

Total 387(100.0%) 221(100.0%) 27(100.0%) 36(100.0%) 671(100.0%)

χ2 = 36.885; df = 12; P<0.001 VHS



Table 8: Extent of Use of OPAC VS.Gender of Respondents

S.N. Extent of Gender distribution Total

Use of OPAC Male Female

1 A very great deal 69(20.4%) 79(23.7%) 148(22.1%)

2 A great deal 74(21.9%) 57(17.1%) 131(19.5%)

3 Quite a lot 88(26.0%) 94(28.2%) 182(27.1%)

4 Not very much 86(25.4%) 70(21.0%) 156(23.2%)

5 Not at all 21(6.2%) 33(9.9%) 54(8.0%)

Total 338(100.0%) 333(100.0%) 671(100.0%)

χ2 = 7.350; df = 4; P>0.05 NS

6.10. Extent of Use of OPAC VS. Age Group ofRespondentsThe extent of use of OPAC in relation to age group ofrespondents is presented in table 9. It is seen from thetable that 13.3 percent and 20.0 percent of therespondents in <18 years age group use OPAC to a

very great deal or to a great deal. It is observed that28.3 percent and 17.0 percent of the 19-22 years agegroup use OPAC to a very great deal or to great deal.It is seen that 16.3 percent and 18.9 percent of the 23-26 years age group use OPAC to a very great deal orto a great deal. Similarly 18.3 percent and 30.0 percentof the 27-30 years age group use OPAC to a very greatdeal or to a great deal and 14.6% and 26.8% of the>30 years age group use OPAC to a very great deal orto a great deal.

Hypothesis 4:There is a significant relationship between the extent ofuse of OPAC and Age Group of respondents.

The chi-square test indicated that there is veryhigh significant relationship between the extent of theuse of OPAC and respondent age (c2 = 40.260; df =16; P<0.001 VHS). Hence the research hypothesis issupported.

7. ConclusionWeb OPAC and OPAC are the order of the day isthe modern and fully automated digital libraries. TheOPAC/Web OPAC users use various types ofdocuments through the OPAC and Web OPAC.They are: Books, reference books, journal papersand so on. There are differences is the usage ofOPAC and Web OPAC among the type of users,and in the gender and age differences. It is foundthat there is a significant relationship between theextent of the use of OPAC and the age of the

respondents (χ2 = 40.260; df = 16; P<0.001 VHS).It is not the same with regard to the use of OPACand the status and age of the respondents. Thus, thefuture of the usage of libraries is largely based onthe effectiveness of the OPAC and the Web OPAC,rather than status, age and gender variables.

References1. Ansari , Mehtab Alam and Amita. Awareness and

use of OPACs in five Delhi libraries. The ElectronicLibrary, 2008, 26(1), 111-129.

Table 9: Extent of Use of OPAC VS. Age Group of Respondents

S.N. Extent of use Age Group Total

of OPAC <18 19 - 22 23 -26 27 -30 >30

1 A very great deal 6(13.3%) 93(28.3%) 32(16.3%) 11(18.3%) 6(14.6%) 148(22.1%)

2 Great deal 9(20.0%) 56(17.0%) 37(18.9%) 18(30.0%) 11(26.8%) 131(19.5%)

3 Quite a lot 14(31.1%) 75(22.8%) 58(29.6%) 16(26.7%) 19(46.3%) 182(27.1%)

4 Not very much 14(31.1%) 72(21.9%) 51(26.0%) 15(25.0%) 4(9.8%) 156(23.2%)

5 Not at all 2(4.4%) 33(10.0%) 18(9.2%) 0(.0%) 1(2.4%) 54(8.0%)

Total 45(100.0%) 329(100.0%) 196(100.0%) 60(100.0%) 41(100.0%) 671(100.0%)

χ2 = 40.260; df = 16; P<0.001 VHS



2. Bailey, Annette and Back, Godmar. LibX – aFirefox extension for enhanced library access.Library Hi Tech, 2006, 24(2), 290-304.

3. Greifeneder, Elke. Help Users Search! Prototypingan Online Help System for OPACs. BOBCATSSS-Conference, 2008, 129-136. http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/conferences/bobcatss2008/

4. Guha, Tamal Kumar and Saraf, Veena. OPACusability: assessment through verbal protocol. TheElectronic Library, 2005, 23(4), 463-473.

5. Khalid Mahmood. Library web OPACs inPakistan:an overview, electronic library andinformation systems. Program: electronic libraryand information systems, 2008, 42(2), 37-149.<www.emeraldinsight.com/0033-0337.htm>.

6. Kumar, Shiv and Vohra, Ranjana. Online PublicAccess Catalogue Usage at Panjab UniversityLibrary, Chandigarh. DESIDOC Journal ofLibrary & Information Technology, 2011, 31(4), 302-310

7. Ortiz-Repiso, Virginia. Bazan, Virginia. Ponsati,Agnes and Cottereau, Mario. How researchers areusing the OPAC of the Spanish Council forScientific Research Library Network. ElectronicLibrary, 2006, 24(2), 190-211.

8. Yushiana, Mansor and Abdul Rani. OPACHeuristic evaluation of interface usability for a web-based OPAC. Library Hi Tech, 2007, 25(4),538-549.



User Satisfaction and Library Performance:A Survey of Jayawant Library,

Rajarshi Shahu College of Engineering, Tathawade, Pune

Gudi, S P1Sr Librarian, Jayawant Library, JSPM’S Rajarshi Shahu College of Engineering,

Tathawade, Pune-411033. E-mail:[email protected]

Paradkar, P MLibrarian, GS College of Commerce and Economics Nagpur, E-Mail:[email protected]

Deshpande, R MLibrarian, Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, Nagpur, E-Mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

The main objective of this paper is to know the student’s satisfaction level regarding main library services.

The survey is based on a questionnaire containing both open and close ended questions. The study reveals

that, on the whole the students are satisfied with the library services. The analysis of the data shows that,

the students were extremely satisfied with library environment, circulation system and reference books and

were satisfied with remaining library services. The library users have also highlighted some suggestions.

Findings of the study can be helpful for the library authorities to improve their library services and sources.

Keywords: Library service, Users satisfaction, Library performance, Jayawant Library, Pune.

1. Introduction:Academic libraries are service oriented sections in everycollege. Students are the main stakeholders of collegelibrary. Hence it is obvious that they should be satisfied.To know the satisfaction of students with existingservices every library required to take feedback to checkwhether they are satisfied and if not, take correctivemeasures. It is true that, majority of academic librariesprovide notable services to their users. But simultaneouslyit is also important to check whether users are happywith services they are getting. To serve efficiently, thelibrary should identify the community and their needswhich will be helpful to develop the services systematicallyand plan for suitable services and achieve highest usersatisfaction.

2. About Rajarshi Shahu College ofEngineering:The institute has been established in 2001 to meet thegrowing demand for technical man power from industry.The Rajarshi Shahu College of Engineering, Pune is oneof well-known institute and its establishment has fulfilledthe aspirations of people of country. Initially the instituteoffered UG programs in three branches of engineeringviz. Electronics and Telecommunications Engineering,Computer Engineering, and Information Technology withintake capacity of 150 students, Subsequently UGprograms such as Mechanical Engineering (2002) andCivil Engineering (2003) have been introduced. Post-graduate programs leading to Masters Degree inElectronics with specialization in Digital System and for



Mechanical Engineering with specialization in Heat Power

have been introduced in 2006, Civil Engineering with

Structure specialization in 2008 and Computer

Engineering and Mechanical Engineering with Design

specialization during 2011 and Electronics in VLSI

Embedded System in 2013. Apart from this polytechnic

courses in Electronics and Telecommunication,

Mechanical Engineering introduced in 2012 and Civil

Engineering in 2013 and Computer Engineering in 2014

respectively. Thus currently in a short span of just 13

years the college now conducts five under graduate, six

post graduate courses under Engineering Program, Two

Management Post Graduate Program (MBA & MCA),

four Diploma Engineering Program in E&TC and

Mechanical. The college also has been recognized as

Research Center in the field of Electronics Engineering,

Mechanical Engineering and Civil Engineering.

3. About Jayawant Library:The college has well-established computerized Library

(Jayawant Library) with a large collection of

textbooks, reference books, technical journals,

educational CDs/DVDs for all courses offered

through RSCOE. In addition to print copies of

relevant journals, the library has also subscribed

international online journals databases like IEEE,

ASME, ASCE, ACM, EBSCO, Science Direct,

ASTM, J-Gate (JET and JSMS), which can be

accessed and articles, conference paers can be

downloaded through internet facility provided in

digital library. NPTEL video Lectures delivered by

India’s best teachers from IITs and IISc are also

available in Library. Library has taken membership

of British Council Library, Pune, Automotive

Research Association of India, Pune, and IIT

Mumbai Central Library for providing resources

which are not available. The Library has separate

reading area, reference section, digital library room,

audio visual room, Periodicals section etc to facilitate

maximun utilization of the available resources by the

students and staff. In order to facilitate all the

readers in selecting the reading materials of their

interest, the open access has been provided to all

users. The books have been classified based on

Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). It works as a

nerve center of the institution by keeping the

knowledge of students updated. The Information and

resources are constantly updated and the facilities are

added periodically to keep pace with the recent

developments in the various areas of knowledge.

4. Literature Review:Several studies have been carried out in the past to find

out the factors related to students satisfaction to improve

the Library services in academic institutes. In this

connection it may be noted that, Library services are

very important to increase the Library use. Quality of

Library services is directly related to the user satisfaction.

A number of people have examined various factors that

can affect the library services and have targeted the library

services and its various aspects with their own objectives

and limitations.

Felcy Lewis ,2014 assessed the the satisfaction

level on various library resources. He found that

,inadequate e-books,textbooks, theses and

dissertations is the main reason for dissatisfaction of

students, N Krishna Dass and S Jayaraman,2014examines satisfaction level about e-resources,e-

databases and services provided by library. The

authors revealed mismatch between user’s priorities

and the services available in the libraries and

recommended to upgrade the services to match the

user’s needs. Junaida Ismail, 2010 focused on five

dimensions of service quality for academic library. They

are Library as a place, access, collection, reliability

and empathy. Shafiq Ur Rehman, 2011 strongly

mentioned the importance of reference section, its staff

and services to provide richer information to



researchers due to information explosion. SitiKhairiyah Nordin, 2012 examined the digital

reference services based on its responsiveness, style

and scope of answer, communication process and

quality of answer. He also concluded that library needs

to apply digital reference guidelines from International

Federation of Library Associations (IFLA). RaviKumar Merugu1 ,2014 took a survey to observethe place of BRGM Public Library in Mumbai.and tobring a high level of library services. He foundthat,partial Online services, program (talk) facility werethe drawbacks of BRGM library and needs to beimproved and opined to provide state of art facilitiesto users. Kaushal Chauhan,2014 evaluate the userssatisfaction about ICT based services in engineeringcollege library. He found that accurate ICTinfrastructure is essential for proper utilization ofservices of library.

The libraries with abundant resources andservices also finds decreasing use of their library. Inthis regard we can understand the user awarenessabout library resources and services. Users shouldalso be aware of how different electronic resourcescan be utilized. Connected to this ChamaniGunasekera, 2010 depicted that, conduction ofinformation literacy program is necessary to promotethe use of e-resources and diverse strategies can bedeveloped to serve the user group by understandingtheir needs. M Thangapandy 2014 depicted thathelp of library staff is essential for students to locateresources and orgaisation of user education programsare necessary. Application of Internet hasrevolutionized the sources and services in a library.Owolabi K A 2000 reveals that getting libraryconnected to the Internet is a need to academicinstitutions in this digital era. Due to introduction ofInformation technology the role of library and librarystaff has been accelerated. According to PaulineAdeniran, 2011 updation of library services and itsquality to face the challenges of information explosionin 21st century is very much necessary. Mahaptra &Gayatri (2006) envisages that online access services,

offline digital sources and Internet services are themost popular library services in upcoming electronicculture. Perhaps it is due to the frequent use of digitalresources and relatively their quick adoption to newtechnologies and devices.

5. Objectives of the Study:• To examine the usge pattern of Jayawant library by

its students.

• To find out the level of users’ satisfaction with mainlibrary services.

• To know the users’ requirement regarding libraryservices.

5. Data Analysis.

5.1. Distribution of Respondents according toGender:Out of total 100 respondents 72 (72%) are malesand 28 (28%) are females.(Table 1). Differentdepartment students responded forquestionnaire.(Table2) represents the frequencydistribution of responses collected from differentdepartments. Maximum responses were received frommechanical department (34%) followed by computerdepartment (24%). The questionnaire were distributedby hand with the help of library staff members tostudents within library reading hall.

Table 1. Frequency distribution of Gender

Gender Frequency Percentage

Male 72 72%

Female 28 28%

Total 100 100%

Table 2 Frequency distribution of respondentsfrom different departments

Name of Department Frequency Percentage

Electronics and Telecommunication 20 20%

Computer Engineering 24 24%

Information technology 12 12%

Mechanical Engineering 34 34%

Civil Engineering 10 10%

Total 100 100%

User Satisfaction and Library Performance: A Survey of Jayawant Library


5.2. Library Usage Pattern:Frequency of Library Visits: Table 3 indicates therespondent’s frequency of visit to library. Out of 100respondents 96 have responded for this question.Analysis has been done on the basis of number ofrespondents. The response shows little bit good trendof library visits because, major 45( 46.88%)) of themvisit library everday. On the other hand the results showthat quite number of students 43 (44.79%) were visitingthe library once in a week. Only 5 (5.21%) were visitingit monthly and very less 03 (3.12%) said they are notvisiting library.

Table 3 Frequency of Library Visit N=96

Period Frequency Percent

Every day 45 46.88%

Weekly 43 44.79

Monthly 05 05.21

Not at all 03 03.12

96 100%

Table 4 reveals the amount of time spent in library

by respondents as and when they visit. It shows that

equal number of respondents 47, (47.47%) stay and

use the library for one hour and three hours when they

visit. Very less number of students (04 (4.04%) says

that, they use library for five hours and only one

student stated 01, (01.01%) that he/she use library

for more than five hours during his/her visit.

Table 4 Time spent in Library N=99

Time in Hours Frequency Percent

One hour 47 47.47%

Three Hours 47 47.47

Five Hours 04 04.04

More than five hours 01 01.01

99 100%

Table 5 depicts that,the most preferable periodfor the students to use library. The students wereasked this question to know their preferableperiod and make arrangement to open the library

for extended hours as per their requirements. Asper table 5 maximum (39 (39%) students says theyprefer evening hours to use library for theirstudies. Nearest percentage 35(35%) of studentsstated that, they prefer afternoon hours to uselibrary. Whereas 16(16%) of respondents saysthey prefer morning hours. and 10(10%) says theyprefer night hours to use and visit library.

Table 5 Preferable period for studentsto visit library N=100

Preferable Period Frequency Percent

Morning Hours 16 16%

Afternoon Hours 35 35%

Evening Hours 39 39%

Late night hours 10 10%

100 100%

Table 6. The author was interested to know forwhich purpose the students come to library and askedrelated question. The respective question has beenmade multi choice by observing the students as theyuse resources of different sections of library whenthey visit. By observing Table 6 it is clear that, themain purpose of students to visit library is study (87)followed by to use internet (40). Quite number ofstudents stated that, they visit library for issue/returnof books (29) and to prepare notes and to readnews papers (27). Whereas some (10) students saysthey visit library to read e-journals. Very less frequency(4) of students stated to read print journals was theirpurpose to visit library.

Table 6 Purpose of students to visit library

Purpose of library visit Frequency

For study 87

To issue/Return of books 29

To read e-journals 10

To use internet 40

To read print journals 04

To prepare notes 27

To read news papers 27

Any other purpose 00



As it is common scenario that, in these days most

of the students are not utilizing the library in spite of

having sufficient resources. The author was eager to

know the reason from students for less use of library.

This question also made multi choice question to enable

the students to state more than one reason. It is

remarkable to know that maximum (60) students says

the main reason for less visit of library is that, they

are having continuous lectures. Some (16) students

stated they find less seating capacity in library reading

hall. Very less (05) number of students says the reason

library is not having relevant study resources for not

visiting and using library. In any other reason three

students mentioned that, they are not allowed to sit in

library during their lecture hours.

Table 7 Reason behind for less use of library

Reason for not visiting library Frequency

Continuous lectures 60

Relavant study resources are not 05

available in library

Seating capacity is less in library 16

Any other reason specify 03

5.3. User Satisfaction with main Library ServicesRespondents were asked to give their view about

main library services, i.e. infrastructure, opening hours,

circulation, reference and collection etc. The likert

scaling technique was used for this purpose. Five

opinions constitute scale.At one extreme of the scale

there is extreme satisfaction with the given service

and at the other not at all satisfied and between

them lie intermediate points as under

Extremely satisfied (5) Satisfied (4) Uncertain (3)

Not Satisfied (2) Not at all satisfied (1)

Each point on the scale assigned a score.

Response indicating most favorable answer given

highest score (5) and response indicating least

favorable answer given least score(1).This way the

score calculated for each service.

The results presented in Table 8 shows that,

the respondents of the survey were extremely

satisfied with some library services i.e. Infrastructure

(mean = 4.02), Circulation (mean = 4.14),

reference books (mean = 4.04) and satisfied with

Opening hours (mean = 3.82), Collection (mean =

3.97), Library organization (mean = 3.96), Print

and Electronic journals-(mean = 3.79), Current

awareness service (mean = 3.54), Bibliographical

service (mean = 3.63), Library staff support (mean

= 3.89), feedback mechanism (mean = 3.87),

Internet facility (mean = 3.18), Ease of OPAC

(mean = 3.53), Library information on website

(mean = 3.69). Overall satisfaction of students with

library services (mean = 3.87).

Table 8 Satisfaction with Library Services:

Name of Service Number Mean

Library environments is encouraging for study 100 4.02

Library opening hours meet my needs 98 3.82

Library collection is sufficient for my 94 3.97study needs

Library collection are well organized 94 3.96and easy to find

Library subscribed sufficient print and 89 3.79electronic journals

Borrowing books from library is easy 92 4.14

Library has proper reference books for 94 4.04locating information

Library provides information about new 94 3.54addition of resources and facility

Library provides list of study resources 90 3.63on request

Library staff is helpful 92 3.89

Library feedback mechanism is good 91 3.87

Library provides good Internet facility 90 3.18

Electronic catalog is easy to use 88 3.53

Library information on college web site is 91 3.69informative and helpful

Overall satisfaction with library services 100 3.87



5.4. Services which Respondents Would Like theLibrary to OfferTable 9.The author made effort to know about theservices which students would like library to offer. Themulti choice options were provided and asked studentsto select the service. The students were suggested forsome services the library requires to offer. The resultspresented in Table 9.Out of 100 respondents 62(62%)respondents recommended for enhancement of internetspeed in library. Similarly 59 (59%) recommended forpurchase of rich and updated resources, 58(58%) forintroduction of more internet based services, 53(53%)for maintenance of silence in reading hall, 48(48%) forimprovement of library staff behavior, 44(44%) forextension of library opening hours, 32(32%) for properarrangement of library books, 28(28%) for addition ofmore print and electronic journals and also for E-books.(Table 9).

Table 9 Frequency Distribution ofResponses about the services

Name of Service Number

Rich and updated study resources need to be added. 59

Staff should behave well with students 48

Internet speed needs to be enhanced 62

Silence shall be maintained in reading hall 53

Arrangement of library books shall be proper. 32

More print journals/e-journals and E-books 28

should be added by the library

Library timings should be increased 44

More number of internet based services 58require to introduced.

5.5. Additional Comments and SuggestionsProvided by the RespondentsTable 8. Out of 100 respondents, 28 (28%) respondentsprovided with additional comments and suggestions. Theysuggested that, internet facility in digital library needs tobe enhanced (n= 11); library time require to be increased(n=5) ,Technical interview books shall be added(n=4),students should allow to sit in library during lecturehours (n=8) (Table10)

Table 10 Frequency Distribution of SuggestionsProvided by the Respondents

Service Frequency Percentage

Internet speed 11 39.29

Library time 05 17.86

Technical interview books 04 14.28

Permission for Library use during 08 28.57

lecture hours

Total 28 100%

6. ConclusionThe study reveals that, although respondents have showntheir overall satisfaction with the library services. Theanalysis of the data reveals that, the satisfaction level ofstudents with library environment circulation system, andavailability of reference books, were showing trendtowards extremely satisfied scale (5). And remaining allservices except internet facility showing trend towardsalmost near to satisfied scale (4). It is encouraging tonote that most 47((47.4%) of the users were using thelibrary every day and once in a week and nearly 50%of students spent on an average three hours in librarywhen they visit. It is also worthy to note that, most ofthe students 43(39%) prefer evening hours to use library.It may be perhaps students are busy in attending lecturesand practical during morning and afternoon hours. Thestudy also depicts that, the students were using thelibrary mainly for study and to access internet and theyhave also expressed the main reason for less visit oflibrary is having continuous lectures. The better use oflibrary services might be due to the availability of richlibrary infrastructure and separate section for differentstudy resources available in library. Satisfaction withelectronic journals and E- books, beside the printjournals might be the impact of available E-journal andE-Books databases mandated by AICTE and facilitatedfor subscription of the same on consortia based pricesfor all engineering colleges. A review of open endedsuggestions/comments indicates that the users havehighlighted some problems, which need attention of thelibrary administration. These problems could be



recognized as the cause of their not showing extremelysatisfied status with the library services.

References:1. Thangapandy, M (2014). Utilization of library

resources by the students of G D institutions: Acase study. Indian Journal of Research, 3(7), 1-4.

2. Ravi Kumar Merugu (2014). User satisfaction withlibrary services of Bai Ratanbai Gharda Memoriallibrary: A study, Asian Journal of MultidisciplinaryStudies, 2(7), 85-92.

3. Kaushal Chauhan. (2014). Application of ICT inMM engineering college library : A case study.International Journal of Technical & Non-Technical Research, (2014), 5(4), 73-76.

4. Krishnadass, N (2014). Utilization of e-resourcesby faculty members and research scholars inmanagement institutions affiliated to BharathiarUniversity, Coimbatore: A study, Indian Journalof Research, 3(7), 215-219.

5. Felcy Lewis (2014). Utilization of e-resources byfaculty members and research scholars inmanagement institutions affiliated to BharathiarUniversity, Coimbatore: A study. Annals of Libraryand Information Studies, 61, 142-152.

6. Shafiq Ur Rehman (2011). A survey of userperception and satisfaction with reference servicesin university libraries of Punjab. Library Philosophyand Practice (e-journal) Paper 624.

7. Chamani Gunasekeraf (2010). Students usage ofan academic library: a user survey conducted atthe main library university of Peradeniya. Journalof the University Librarians Association of SriLanka, 14(1), 43-60.

8. Pauline Adeniran. (2011). User satisfaction withacademic libraries services: academic staff andstudents perspectives. International Journal ofLibrary and Information Science, 3(10), 209-216.



Research Publication Trend among the Scientists ofCentral Leather Research Institute (CLRI), Chennai, India:

A Scientometric Study

Dr. R. JeyshankarAssistant Professor, Department of Library and Information Science

Alagappa University, Karaikudi, Tamil Nadu – 630 003. India

K.S. AbuDepartment of Library and Information Science

Alagappa University, Karaikudi, Tamil Nadu – 630 003. India

ABSTRACT

This study illustrates the bibliographic details of the research articles of CLRI during the period of 14 years

(1999-2012). The total number of articles published are1874. It is found that in the year 2012, maximum

numbers of articles (195) were published. In the collaborative research in CLRI, the degrees of collaboration

of the scientist are 0.97. Most of the contributions are made by multi-authors with 1828(97.5%) publications.

USA has published 78 articles which is the highest number of publications in collaborating with CLRI. Journal

of the American leather chemists association is in the top of the table with 140 publications (7.47%). Further

the study examines about relative growth rate (RGR), Doubling time, Co-authorship Index and highly preferred

Journals by the scientists of CLRI.

Keywords: RGR, Doubling time, Leather Research. CSIR, CLRI.

1. IntroductionScientific research output in the form of intellectualcontributions communicated in a written form ofcommunication is important to the scientific community.It is measured through publications and citation data.Scientometrics involves quantitative studies of scientificresearch outputs on particular subjects or journals orinstitutions.

The World’s largest Leather Research Institutewas founded on 24 April, 1948. CLRI made aninitiative with foresight to link technology system withboth academy and industry. CLRI, today, is a centralhub in Indian leather sector with direct roles ineducation, research, training, testing, designing,forecasting, planning, social empowerment and leading

in science and technology relating to leather. State-of-art facilities in CLRI support innovation in leatherprocessing, creative designing of leather products viz.leather garment, leather goods, footwear anddevelopment of novel environmental technologies forleather sector.

2. Review of LiteratureA number of quantitative studies based on scientometrictechniques have been reported to evaluate the researchproductivity of individuals, institutions, countries, etc.Studies are also available to verify the fitness of classiclaws of bibliometrics, factors of productivity and impactof research conducted in various countries. These studiesare very much helpful to assess the development of scienceas well as in their application to library and information



resource management also. Many studies have not beeninvestigated on CSIR laboratories. Hence this study isadopted on CLRI, one of the most famous laborites ofCSIR. Kademani etal.. (2005)1 analyzed 475 paperspublished by the Bio-Organic Division of Bhabha AtomicResearch Centre during 1972-2002 on various subjectareas like Synthesis (202), Bio-organic Chemistry (loo),Biotechnology (70), Natural Products (53), WasteManagement (30). Supra-molecular Chemistry (18) andOrganic Spectroscopy (2), The study found that themaximum (38) number of paper were published in theyear 2001. The average number of publications per yearwas 15.3 and also they identified the most prolific authorsand core journals preferred by the scientist. Maheswaran,Kumar and Sridharan (2009)2 conducted a study on theresearch publications generated by Structural EngineeringResearch Centre (SERC) during the years 2002-2006.They analysed Normalized Impact Factor (NIF) perpaper, number of papers in the proceedings of nationaland international conferences / workshops / seminars /symposia etc., category-wise distribution of papers indifferent NIF ranges, the proportion of high NIF papersand papers above the average NIF.

A bibliometric study of research publication trendamong scientists of Central Potato Research has beenstudied by Sharma (2009)3. The study covered 2603research articles published by the scientists of CPRIduring 1991 to 2007 were collected by scanning ofannual reports and Journal of the Indian PotatoAssociation. Jeyshankar, Ramesh Babu and Rajendran(2011)4 analysed bibliographical details of 1282research articles published by the scientists of CECRlduring the period 2000-2009. It was found that 2009was the most productive year with 194 articles andcollaborative research was dominant with the highestdegree of collaboration being 0.98 in the year 2005.

Jeyshankar and Ganesan (2011)5 conducted thestudy growth of research output by the scientists ofTuberculosis Research Centre, Chennai, Tamil Nadu.They covered the Tuberculosis Research Centre listof publications belong to the period of 1985-2009 forthe study. It indicated the patterns of communicationsof Tuberculosis Research Centre scientists and studies

the extent of concentration and scattering of theirresearch output of core journals. Growth of literatureby year-wise, authorship pattern, ranking of authors,and ranking of journals have been analysed. Kaushik(2012)6 identified various bibliometric aspects of thescientific contributions of the researchers and facultyof National Dairy Research Institute (NDRI), Karnalpublished during 2001-2011. The average number ofauthors per contribution was 3.61 and degree ofcollaboration 0.98. The NDRI scientists had foreigncollaboration with nineteen countries and collectiveresearch trend is predominant among the scientists.Sudhier and Priyalakshmi (2013)7 studied bibliographicdetails of 1076 research articles obtained from theannual reports published by Central Tuber CropsResearch Institute (CTCRI). They found that thehighest number of 169 papers was published in theyear 2006 and the average publications per year was97.82. Most of the contributions were multi authored(87.68%). The degree of collaboration of scientists ofCTCRI was 0.87 and most of the articles publishedby the scientists were in the foreign journals (51.89%).And also they found that most of the articles 125(39.30%) published in the Journal of Root Crop wereby Indian Society of Root Crops.

Aswathy and Gopikuttan (2013)8 have analysedthe publication pattern of faculty members of threeuniversities in Kerala viz., University of Kerala,Mahatma Gandhi University and University of Calicut.They studied authorship pattern, degree ofcollaboration, the year-wise and designation-wisedistributions of the university faculty in Kerala. It isalso found that multi-authorship dominates amonguniversity teachers and there is no statistically significantdifference between the experience and productivity.Designation-wise Degree of Collaboration shows thatProfessors are having a high Degree of Collaborationwhich indicates that increase in the age and experienceresults in more collaborative papers. The Lotka’sinverse square law seems to be rejected for the presentdata set. Balasubramani and Parameswaran (2014)9

studied growth and contribution of research carriedout by the scientists of Banaras Hindu University



(BHU). They collected data from Web of Scienceonline database published by Institute for Scientificinformation (ISI) period from 2000-2011 and analyzedthe pattern of communications of authors and scatteringof their research output in different journals andanalysed the strong and weak areas of universityresearch. It was found that annual average researchoutput of BHU was 578 records and the researchoutput of the scientists was fairly collaborative.

The review of literature reflects that there werenot many studies based on research institutions anduniversities in India especially in the area ofpublication productivity of scientist and facultypublication productivity. Therefore this study attemptsto study and analyse the publication productivity ofleather scientist of Central Leather Research Institutein Chennai.

3. Scope and MethodologyThe main objective of the study is to make an assessment,in quantitative terms with respect to the publications fromCLRI during the period 1999 - 2012. The data collectedfrom Web of Science (WoS) annual reports of the centrefor the period from 2000 - 2010 were used as the mainsource of data. Since the annual reports of academic aswell as research organizations usually present a synopticappraisal of research publications, the same have beenused as the source data. Moreover these are the authenticsource of information which reflects the overall activitiesof the institution. A total of 1076 publications of theCTCRI scientists during 2000 - 2010 formed the basicdata for this study. All the bibliographic details ofpublications were transferred to a spreadsheetapplication. After validation, the data was analyzed asper the requirement of the study. The bibliographic datawas analyzed by normal count procedure usingscientometric techniques.

4. Objectives• To ascertain the research output of CLRI during

1999-2012;

• To examine the year-wise distribution to identifyvarious forms;

• To determine the degree of collaboration, RGR anddoubling time;

• To determine the authorship pattern and mostproductive authors and

• To determine the most productive source in whichthe scientists publish their articles.

5. Results and Discussions

Table 1: Year - wise distribution of publications

Sl. No Year No. of Publications Percentage

1 1999 74 3.95

2 2000 92 4.91

3 2001 92 4.91

4 2002 93 4.96

5 2003 129 6.88

6 2004 141 7.52

7 2005 136 7.26

8 2006 143 7.63

9 2007 126 6.72

10 2008 158 8.43

11 2009 171 9.12

12 2010 151 8.06

13 2011 173 9.23

14 2012 195 10.41

Total 1874 100

The table 1 shows the increasing trend ofresearch publications for 14 years, Ranging from74 to 195, comprising the total of 1874publications. It clearly indicates that, during theyear 2000 and 2001 the number of publicationsare found to be same (92),The increased numberof publications, when compared to the previousyears is highest in the year 2003 (129-93=33).The highest number of publications during the 14year period was2012 with 195 publications. Thistable clearly indicates that the publications ofresearch articles are encouraged by CLRI.

Research Publication Trend among the Scientists of Central ...


Table 2: Distribution Forms -wise

Sl. No Forms No. of Publications Percentage

1 Articles 1797 95.891 %

2 Proceedings 38 2.028 %

3 Review 36 1.921 %

4 Meeting Abstract 23 1.227 %

5 Letter 10 0.534 %

6 Editorial Material 4 0.213 %

7 Correction 3 0.160 %

Total 1874 100

The table 2 categorizes the forms of publicationsunder seven broad headings namely Articles,Proceedings, Review, Meeting Abstract, Letter,Editorial material and Correction. There are 1874publications in total. The maximum numbers ofpublications are found in the form “Articles” with 1797publications (95.891%) and the least number ofpublications are found in the form “Correction” with 3(0.160%) publications. The publications in the forms

namely Letter, Editorial Material and correction arefound to be less than 1% of total publications. Thistable clearly advocates that the researchers of CLRI(researchers) are showing more interest in publishingarticles.

Growth of publicationsThe growth of publications was analyzed by using twoparameters Relative Growth Rate and Doubling time(Mahapatra 1985)10. RGR is a measure to study theincrease in number of articles of time. It is calculated as

Log e 2

W- Log

e 1W

Relative Growth Rate (RGR) = ———————

2 T - 1 T

Doubling time (DT):New value=initial value*2t /T double where

T double=doubling time

t=time elapsed since the initial value at time t=0

Table 3: Relative Growth Rate (RGR) and Doubling Time (Dt)

Sl. No Year No. of Records Cumulative log1 log2 RGR Doubling Time

1 1999 74 74 0.00 4.30 4.30 0.16

2 2000 92 166 4.30 5.11 0.81 0.86

3 2001 92 258 5.11 5.55 0.44 1.57

4 2002 93 351 5.55 5.86 0.31 2.25

5 2003 129 480 5.86 6.17 0.31 2.21

6 2004 141 621 6.17 6.43 0.26 2.69

7 2005 136 757 6.43 6.63 0.20 3.50

8 2006 143 900 6.63 6.80 0.17 4.01

9 2007 126 1026 6.80 6.93 0.13 5.29

10 2008 158 1184 6.93 7.08 0.14 4.84

11 2009 171 1355 7.08 7.21 0.13 5.14

12 2010 151 1506 7.21 7.32 0.11 6.56

13 2011 173 1679 7.32 7.43 0.11 6.37

14 2012 195 1874 7.43 7.54 0.11 6.31

The table 3 examines the Relative Growth Rate(RGR) and Doubling Time (Dt) calculated from

research output of CLRI. It is clearly observed thatRGR is not in decreasing and increasing trend every



year, but in the periods 2002-2003 and 2010-2012show the same growth rate; whereas Doubling timeis increasing every year. The RGR is highest in theyear 1999 with 7.06 and lowest during the year

2010 - 2012 with the 0.11. The Doubling time ishighest in the year 2010 with 6.56. It is noticed thatthe RGR value is less than 1 in the research outputfor nine years.

Table - 4 Degree of Collaboration

S. N. Year Single Two Three More than three authors Degree of collaboration Total

1 1999 1 8 23 42 0.99 74

2 2000 1 19 30 42 0.99 92

3 2001 2 23 20 47 0.98 92

4 2002 34 59 0 0 0.63 93

5 2003 0 129 0 0 1.00 129

6 2004 0 119 22 0 1.00 141

7 2005 0 0 136 0 1.00 136

8 2006 0 0 143 0 1.00 143

9 2007 0 0 102 24 1.00 126

10 2008 0 0 0 158 1.00 158

11 2009 0 0 0 171 1.00 171

12 2010 3 25 43 80 0.98 151

13 2011 2 26 44 101 0.99 173

14 2012 3 34 45 113 0.98 195

Total 46 442 608 778 13.54 (Mean Value) 1874

A mathametical formula for calculating author’sdegree of colloboration in a discipline is suggestedby Subramaniyam (1983)11. The degree ofcolloboration among authors is the ratio of thenumber of colloborative publications to the totalnumber of publications published in a disciplineduring certain period of time. The degree ofcolloboration expressed mathametically as:

N

m C = ————————

Nm+ N

s

C = Degree of colloboration of a discipline

Nm = Number of multi authored papers

Ns = Number of single authored papers

The table 4 reveals about the dgree ofcolloboration in CLRI. It clearly indicates thatdegree of n is increasing every year. Thepublication published by single author during thrperiod of ten years is 46 and publcations bymultiple authors during the same period is 1828.The degree of colloboration is maximum in the yearwith 1.00 during the period 2003 - 2009. Themean value of degree of colloboration is 13.54.



Table - 5 Co-Authorship Index

S. N. Year Single CAI Two CAI More CAI Totalthan two

1 1999 1 55.05 8 45.84 65 118.76 74

2 2000 1 44.28 19 87.56 72 105.82 92

3 2001 2 88.56 23 106.00 67 98.47 92

4 2002 34 1489.39 59 268.98 0 0.00 93

5 2003 0 0.00 129 423.98 0 0.00 129

6 2004 0 0.00 119 357.83 22 21.10 141

7 2005 0 0.00 0 0.00 136 135.21 136

8 2006 0 0.00 0 0.00 143 135.21 143

9 2007 0 0.00 0 0.00 126 135.21 126

10 2008 0 0.00 0 0.00 158 135.21 158

11 2009 0 0.00 0 0.00 171 135.21 171

12 2010 3 80.94 25 70.20 123 110.14 151

13 2011 2 47.10 26 63.72 145 113.33 173

14 2012 3 62.68 34 73.93 158 109.55 195

Total 46 442 1386 1874

Table - 6 Top 15 Authors

S. N. Author’s No. of Publication Percentage

1 Nair Bu 248 13.23

2 Perumal PT 237 12.65

3 Rao JR 171 9.12

4 Subramanian V 166 8.86

5 Mandal Ab 128 6.83

6 Ramasami T 116 6.19

7 Reddy Bsr 91 4.86

8 Jayakumar R 91 4.86

9 Sekaran G 73 3.90

10 Thanikaivelan P 72 3.84

11 Parthasarathi R 70 3.74

12 Dhathathreyan A 66 3.52

13 Radhakrishnan G 57 3.04

14 Madhan B 52 2.77

15 Sehgal PK & Sreeram KJ 50 2.67

Others 186 9.93

Total 1874 100

Table 6 highlights the publications of 25 authors.There were only 3 female authors. All the 15 authorshave published 1874 publications in total. The highestnumber of publications was published by Nair Bu with

248 publications and he is followed by Perumal PT.with 237 publications. Srhi chandrasekaran B haspublished the least number of publications (37). Thethree female authors have published 136 publicationsin total which constitutes to 7.25%. All the threeauthors have published more or less equally (46, 46,44) same no of articles.

Table - 7 Collaborative Researches Institution-wise

S. N. Institution No. of Percentage Publications

1. University of Madras 96 5.12

2. IIT (M) 83 4.43

3. Anna University 70 3.74

4. Madras Vet College 27 1.44

5. Loyola College 21 1.12

6. Indian Institute Chemical 19 1.01Technology

7. Natl Inst Technol 18 0.96

8. Presidency College 16 0.85

9. Max Planck Inst Bioanorgan 15 0.80Chem & Stanford Univ,

10. Dept Sci Technol, Natl Chem 14 0.75Lab & Sri Ramachandra Univ

Table 7 reveals the CLRI research publicationsof top 10 collaborative research institutions. It clearlyindicates that the maximum number of collaborativepublication is by University of Madras (96) followedby, Indian Institute of Technology (Madras) (83) andAnna University (70).

Table - 8 Collaborative Researches Country-Wise

Sl. No Country No. of Publication Percentage

1. USA 78 4.16

2. Germany 46 2.45

3. Malaysia 13 0.69

4. Australia 10 0.53

5. Canada 10 0.53

6. England 10 0.53

7. Japan 9 0.48

8. South Korea 9 0.48

9. Taiwan 9 0.48

10. Belgium 8 0.43

11. Spain 8 0.43



12. Sudan 7 0.37

13. France 5 0.27

14. Singapore 5 0.27

15. Mexico 2 0.11

16. Poland 2 0.11

17. Saudi Arabia 2 0.11

Table 8 shows the CLRI research publications oncollaboration with 17 countries. It shows that USA isin the first with 78 publications (4.16%) and 3countries namely Poland, Mexico, and Saudi Arabiaare found to be lowest with 2 publications each (0/11%). Many countries have published identical numberof publications. 11 countries have found to bepublished less than 10 publications. This table givesthe result that the CLRI has published maximum numberof publications in collaboration with USA.

Table - 9 Source –wise Distribution

S. N Source No. of PercentagePublications

1. Journal of The American Leather 140 7.47Chemists Association

2. Acta Crystallographica Section 49 2.61E Structure Reports Online

3. Journal of Applied 42 2.24Polymer Science

4. Journal of The Society of 41 2.19Leather TechnologistsAnd Chemists

5. Tetrahedron Letters 39 2.08

6. Journal of Physical Chemistry A 37 1.97

7. Chemical Physics Letters 29 1.55

8. Tetrahedron 26 1.39

9. Colloids and Surfaces B 25 1.33Biointerfaces & IndianJournal of Chemistry

10. Synlett 24 1.28

11. Journal of Scientific 22 1.17Industrial Research

12. Synthetic Communications 21 1.12

13. Current Science 20 1.07

14. Journal of Hazardous Materials 19 1.01

15. Journal of Chemical Sciences, 18 0.96Journal of CleanerProduction & Langmuir

Others 1322

Table 9 depicts a list of 25 sources where thepublications are published. The maximum number ofpublications is published in the journal of the AmericanLeather Chemists Association with 140 (7.47%)publications and minimum numbers of publications areshared by three sources namely Bio-organic medicinalchemistry Letters, Journal of colloid and InterfaceScience and journal of polymer sciences Part Apolymer chemistry 15(0.80%) publications. Manysources have published identical number ofpublications. Table 6 also indicates that the helpinghand extended by USA is encouraging.

6. ConclusionThe criterion used to assess the research output of theinstitutional research was productivity of the publication.The publication of CLRI shows the increasing trend duringthe period of 14 years. Totally 7 forms were publishedand their publications aggregates to 1874. The form of“Article” was preferred by many scientists who contributes94.8% of the publications which reveals high degree ofcollaboration. It also shows that the contributions madeby female authors were only 7.25% of the totalpublications. The nations America have published morenumber of publications in collaboration with CLRI. Theresearch output of CLRI shows that the nature of theresearch is collaborative.

References1. Kademani, B S et. al (2005). Publication

Productivity of the Bio-Organic Division At BhabhaAtomic Research Centre: A Scientometric Study.Annals of Library and Information Studies,52(4):135-146.

2. Maheswaran, S, Kumar, R.D. Sathish andSridharan, K.R. (2009). Scientometric analysis ofarea-wise publications in the field of structuralengineering: a case study of SERC, India. Annalsof Library and Information Studies, 56(1):22-28.

3. Sharma, R.M. Research Publication trend amongscientists of Central Potato Research Institute: A



Bibliometric Study, Annals of Library andInformation Studies, 56(1):29-34.

4. Jeyshankar R, Ramesh Babu B and Rajendran P,(2011). Research output of CSIR-Central ElectroChemical Research Institute (CECRI): A Study,Annals of Library and Information Studies, 58(4):301-306.

5. Jeyshankar, R. & Ganesan, P. (2011). Researchoutput of scientist of Tuberculosis Research Centre(TRC), Chennai, Tamil Nadu: A scientometric study.Indian Journal of Information Sources andServices, 1(2):27-33.

6. Kausik, S.K. Research contributions on nationalDairy Research Institute, Karnal: A ScientometricStudy. In. Devika P Madali, Saiful Amin, AnilaSulochana (eds), Interantional Conference onTrends in Knowledge and Information Dynamics,10-13 July, 2012. DRTC-ISI, Bangalore, 170-178.

7. Sudhier, K. G. Pillai and Priyalakshmi, V. (2013).Research publication trend among the scientists of

Central Tuber Crops Research Institute (CTCRI),Thiruvananthapuram: A Scientometric Study.Annals of Library and Information Studies,60(1):7-14

8. Aswathy, S and Gopikuttan, A (2013). Productivitypattern of universities in Kerala: A scientometricanalysis. Annals of Library and InformationStudies, 60(3):176-185.

9. Balasubramani, R and R. Parameswaran, R (2014).Mapping the Research Productivity of BanarasHindu University: A Scientometric Study. Journalof Theoretical and Applied InformationTechnology, 59(2):367-371.

10. Mahapatra, M. (1985). On the validity of the theoryof exponential growth of scientific literature.Proceedings of the 15th IASLIC Conference,Bangalore, 61-70. Bangalore.

11. Subramanianm, K. (1983). Bibliometrics studies ofresearch collaboration: A review. Journal ofInformation Science, 6, 35-37.



Technology and its relevance for Society-an overview

Partha BhattacharyaJoint Director- DITT, Amity University, NOIDA, U.P

Dr. Pravin Kr. ChoudharyAssistant General Manager(Doc.)

DLF Ltd. Gurgaon, E-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT

The paper has touched upon the various facets of technology & its importance for the nation. For any

country cutting edge technologies are imperatives for the growth and progress of the nation. Importance of

Innovation and technology transfer finds mention in the paper.

Keywords: Technology, Society, Technology catalyst, Change agent

1. IntroductionTechnology is great catalyst for change. It hasfostered some of the greatest inventions of moderntimes, many of which have altered our livescompletely for the better. In the modern age,technology is perhaps every nation’s most importantresource. Technology and its management are todaymatters of global primacy. Technology is beingdeveloped, improved, combined, refined, brought, sold,and traded around the world at unprecedented levels.To maintain their competitive edge, companies areincreasingly looking beyond their immediate sphere ofactivity. They adopt and assimilate new technology,improve and refine existing technology, and combine bothin their quest for success in the world market. Themanaging of such an important resource, both at nationaland enterprise levels is vital; it has to be properlyplanned, cultivated and developed. This calls for aneffective technology management for sustained growth ofthe enterprise and for greater competitiveness.

2. Technology-a few definitions:This refers to the theoretical and practical knowledge,skills and artifacts that can be used to develop product

and services as well as their production and deliverysystems. Technology can be embodied in people,materials, cognitive and physical processes, plant,equipment and tools.

In a simple language a technology can be definedas the application of knowledge for some usefulobjectives.

3. Arrival of Technology:In general there are four stages at the arrival ofTechnology. They are as follows: (i) Discovery; (ii)Invention (iii) Innovation & (iv) Technology

The arrival of Technology can be shown with thefollowing example:

Discovery Atoms

Invention Machine to split Atoms

Innovation Splitting of atom

Technology Atom Bomb

In the creativity/Discovery stage is basicallythinking about a new idea or concept which nobody has thought before; It is basically an abstractstage;



Invention:It is basically the codification/documentation of the ideasinto some tangible form which can be worked outsubsequently.

Innovation:At this stage the market perspective to the Invention isadded up. Only Invention may not make much senseunless it is marketable & has commercializable potential.

Technology:It is basically the ultimate stage of development fromideas to the market. Examples could be Biotechnologyapplication in the manufacturing of Drugs, IT applicationsfor the creation of Electronic equipments etc. Technologyis a combination of four basic components-facilities,abilities, facts and frameworks.

4. Technology Life Cycle:The stages in Technology Life cycle (TLC) are asfollows:

4.1. The embryonic stage:In this period the application of invention takes placethrough innovation, in which technological capabilitiesare built through the exploration activities that has thepotential to initiate new market preferences (technologydriven) or to fulfill emerging market preferences(technology driven) or to fulfill emerging marketpreferences (market driven). The new product orprocess that opens a new market can be radical innature and introduced through radical technology.

4.2. The growth stage:Within time the use and the processes behind thetechnology are improving. By mastering the knowledgeand doing activities more efficient and in an active way,the technological capabilities are building the competitiveadvantage.

4.3. The maturity stage:The technology reaches the highest levels of efficiencyand effectiveness and becoming highly reutilized.Improvement of the product or process is moreincremental in nature in which the technology is steadilymaintained. This phase marks the profitability of the

firm with the technology. However, the technology willreach its physical limit in which the technology will becomevulnerable for substitution or will become obsolete.

4.4. The aging stage:Technological capabilities reach the maturity at the physicallimit. In this stage, the utility of the technology is declining.Thus, the technology needs to be modified in order toavoid the products or processes becoming obsolete.

5. Technology management:Managing new technology entails using the newtechnology to create competitive advantages. Technologymanagement is the capacity of a firm, or a group, or asociety to master the management of factors thatcondition technological change with the purpose ofimproving its economic, social and cultural environmentand increasing its wealth quotient. The successfulmanagement of technology requires the capacity toorchestrate and integrate functional and specialist groupsfor the implementation of innovations, continuousquestioning of the appropriateness of exploitation ofexisting technology and a willingness to take a long-termview of technological accumulation within the firm. Theoverall process of technology management may bedivided into the following eight phases:

• Forecasting and Assessment;

• Planning and Strategy ;

• Acquisition and Development;

• Transfer;

• Adoption and Adaptation;

• Diffusion and Substitution;

• Utilization;

• Phasing-out

6. Technology Transfer:Transfer of technology means the transfer of knowledge,generally through the purchase of technology for gainfulapplication. In other words, technology transfer is definedas the process by which the embodied as well as thedisembodied knowledge contained within an organizationare acquired by another.



This transfer can take place via publications,patent disclosure, personnel interaction, joint ventures,turnkey projects, R&D companies, consultants, andresearch companies. Transfer, unlike its common one-way movement of relocation, often represents a two-way, multilateral learning process. Technology transfercan serve as a tool for strengthening the localproduction system; providing information and training; serving as a stimulant for further development;facilitating a more competitive position in theInternational market place; and assisting in closingthe gap between developed and developing nations.Technology transfer can take place within theorganization, within a group, within an industry,between industries, between governments, betweenindustry and government, or between industry anduniversity.

Based on the above transfer levels, the transferof technology may be classified into two main streams:horizontal and vertical. Horizontal technology transferimplies the transfer of technology from one firm toanother, generally located in different countries, mainlydue to reasons of completion or near-maturity oftechnologies. Vertical technology transfer entails thetransfer of technology from an R&D organization to afirm. Such transfers are mostly within the country, andthe technologies are new, and may often require furtherefforts in terms of establishing commercial viability.

In a knowledge based economy the issues oftechnology transfer and management of technologyespecially in sensitive strategic industries are of majorconcern.

The transfer of technology is a complexmultidisciplinary area of technology managementinvolving technology transfers from overseas developingagencies and internal technology transfers. Technologyeconomics of scale and complexities in technologies,especially in major weapon systems, would increasinglyrender the concept of self sufficiency and even self –reliance impossible ideals to achieve, even by thedeveloped countries. In such scenario, transfer oftechnology will continue to be used as a powerful tool

of global geopolitical power projection by developedcountries as an extension of their foreign policies. Fornations like India, there is no option but to invest inthe indigenous R&D and S&T base in sensitive/strategic industries. Experience in the transfer oftechnology with those of space, defense research,atomic energy, scientific and industrial research mustbe pooled into knowledge bank to achieve synergy.

7. Strategic issues in TechnologyManagement:Traditionally business firms are defined by markets theyserve. Who are our customers? What are their needs?During 1970’s and 1980’s management wereconcentrated on industry environment of the firm. Itscompetitive rivals need to know and how to satisfy thecustomers. This perspective is known as Market-basedperspectives. It tends to play the role of internal capacitiesof firms. In recent year’s resource-based view of firmshave been developed. It depends upon the bundle ofresources, capabilities which are most stable and usedfor long-term decision making. The general technologydevelopment strategy principles can be kept in view ;1) It is important to be selective in self development oftechnology. Emphasis should be given to total integrationof all activities in the technology production chain toachieve self reliance.

An example of strategic technology managementby organizations is that of auto componentsmanufacturers. Normally there are three phases instrategic Technology management:

Invention:At this stage company works out on solutions forinnovative problem solving exercise to come out withnew products;

Innovation:At this stage it is the incremental changes in the productdesign or components. The objective at this stage is thereduction in manufacturing cost of the product;

Commoditization:At this stage the objective of the company is the reductionof processing cost, so that mass production of the

Technology and its relevance for Society-an overview


materials are done at a cheaper & affordable costs tothe general customers.

8. Economic advantages of Technology:Some of the important economic advantages ofTechnology may be:

Competitiveness:Competitive technologies are a boom for the economy.All the Licensee companies & others would look foreconomically advantageous technologies. If aCorporation can sustain that lead, it will have a goodimpact on the economy.

Revenue generation:A robust technology always attracts revenue. Unless atechnology becomes obsolete or stagnant it can fetchgood revenue for some years for the Corporation

Market leadership:A high ranking or highly rated technologies normallydominate the market share.

Bargaining power advantages in InternationalNegotiations field:Companies in foreign countries shall normally look forthe economically viable technologies available in othercountries. They will try to cover up the costs throughacquisitions of technologies for their advantages.

Views of the Experts:The venerable doyen of management gurus, Peter F.Drucker, was the first prescient observer to commenton the emergence of knowledge as the prime sourceof an industrialized nation’s competitive advantage, andpower of knowledge workers, in this post industrialborderless global economy that is evolving since mid-1980s. The second industrial revolution as someobservers have termed current, knowledge-based rapidadvances in IT, genetic engineering, biotechnology and

allied fields, would be dominated by those nations thatpossess the highest quality workforce of knowledgeworkers.

Peter F. Drucker:Goes to the extent of insisting that only competitiveadvantage of the developed countries is the supply ofknowledge workers as the knowledge constantly makesitself obsolete, with the result that today’s advancedknowledge is tomorrow’s ignorance, a stand supportedby other experts in the fields like Prof. Michael E.Porter.

9. Conclusion:The paper has attempted to make a generalized

view of the importance of technologies for a nation,industries & societies at large. For any nation’sprogress improved and advanced technologies playsa pivotal role in developing the economy, generationof employment, creation of trained manpower etc.Technology has very important strategic role whetherfor the security of the country, indicator of progressof the nation, economic wealth creations etc. Forencouraging FDI in Technology sectors of the Nation,the country needs to have strong IPR regime. It is awell established fact that FDI & Technology areinterlinked, whether in high tech sectors like Pharmacy,Biotech, and ICT etc. The policy makers of thecountry need to think seriously about the importanceof Technologies for nation’s development and createa needful facilitating environment through policymeasures and appropriate legislations.

References:1. www.ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk/research/ctm/ctmresearch/

stm/

2. sloanreview.mit.edu/article/managing-technology-as-a-business-strategy



A Study on International Standard Serial Number

Abhijit Chakrabartilibrary Professional, DUS,University of Calcutta

Email: [email protected].

ABSTRACT

To study the International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) and its applications, prospects and problems in

India and in the world also. The article discusses the advantages of ISSN and also states how to apply for

ISSN and where to apply.

Keywords: ISSN, international Standard Serial Number

1. IntroductionIn recent times we are acquainted with the very word‘Standard’ more or less. Starting from commoditiesavailable in the market or in the case of library or inthe field of information, the very word ‘Standard’ isused extensively. So, library standard means accordingto Allen Kent “The criteria by which ... .. Libraryservices may be measured and assessed. They aredetermined by professional librarians in order to attainand maintain the objectives they have set themselves.Standard may be interpreted variously as t he patternof an ideal, a model procedure, a measure forappraisal, a stimulus for future development andimprovement and as an instrument to assist decisionand action not only by librarians themselves, but by thelaymen concerned indirectly with the institution, planningand administration of library services”.

However, the application of a standard is usedextensively in various fields of library and informationScience. These fields are-

a. Library work and equipment

b. Library Science layout of documents

c. Reprography and computer related activities

d. Terminology.

In the field of serial publication the libraryprofessionals and publishers had felt the need for astandard for easy and quick identification of serial. Atthat time CODEN system was adopted. But CODENnumber has some mnemonic feature and was not easyto use. Moreover bibliographic control is necessarydue to Information explosion and increase of mediumof information. As a result the ISSN system was firstdrafted by ISO in 1971 and published as ISO 3297in 1975. The ISO subcommittee TC 46/SC 9 isresponsible for the standard. Besides, ISSN wasconstructed based similarly on ISBN. So it becamean international system for numbering serials.

What is ISSN?ISSN is a unique eight-digit number used to identify aserial. ISSN is a unique identification code used bypublishers, suppliers, libraries, information services, barcoding systems, union catalogues, etc. for citation andretrieval of serials. Serials include journals, newspapers,newsletters, directories, yearbooks, annual reports &monograph series, magazines, memoirs} proceedings}transactions of societies, collections, websites} databases,blogs etc. 50 an 155N (International Standard SerialNumber) identifies all continuing resources, irrespectiveof their medium (print or electronic).



Advantages of ISSN:• To help world wide publicity and inclusion of the

serial in the International Serials Directory Database.

• To differentiate a particular serial from others.

• To help library users, libraries, and others whohandle large numbers of serials.

• After getting ISSN the journal will be recognizedas one of the standard journals with internationalreputation. It is helpful for collection management.

• At present ISSN helps in Bibliographic controluniversally.

Distinguishing features of ISSN:• Unlike the ISBN; which contains country and

publisher prefixes; the ISSN contains no inherentmeaning.

• Serials often undergo changes of publisher;frequency; format; edition; country of origin; but itdoes not affect the ISSN. If the title of a serialchanges sign if it can; a new ISSN will be assigned.

• No fee is charged for the assignment of the ISSN;or for the use of an ISSN once assigned.

• One ISSN for each tit le under which it has beenpublished is sufficient .

• One will probably require a separate ISSN for eachedit ion if the serial is published in differentlanguages; regional; or physical editions i.e. eitherin print or electronic format.

• The ISSN is printed on the lower right-hand cornerof the cove of a serial.

• The ISSN may be printed in the masthead area;the copyright page; or in the publishing statementwhere information about t he publisher; frequency;and other publication facts is available.

• The ISSN is general printed on a title screen orhome page if the serial is non-printed. Otherlocations on non-print serials are on externalsources such as micro fiche headers; cassette ordisc labels; or other containers.

• An ISSN and an ISBN should be printed where apublication has both an ISSN and an ISBN. Thissituation occurs most commonly with books in aseries and with annuals or biennials. The ISBNidentifies the individual book in a series or a specificyear for an annual or biennial. The ISSN identifiesthe ongoing serie or the ongoing annual or biennialserial.

• If a publication is in a series which has its ownISSN; both ISSN should be printed, accompaniedby the title to which it pertains.

• A separate ISSN is not assigned to each issue.ISSN is assigned on an existing Serial publicationwhich does not have ISSN and also the changedserial title (s) whose ISSN has been assigned onold title

• ISSN is assigned on a new print or electronicjournal whose first issue is either published or readyfor publication When a periodical is published; withthe same content; in two or more different media,a different ISSN is assigned to each media- printISSN (p-ISSNI is assigned for print media andelectronic ISSN (e-ISSN or eISSN) is assignedfor electronic media. To assign a unique identifierto the serial as content (linking among the differentmedia), ISSN-L must be used, as defined by ISO3297:2007.

• The ISSN is used in several bar codes as the titleidentifier portion of the code. One such code, theSISAC bar code symbol, used by libraries andlibrary-affiliated organizations, is generally found onscholarly, technical, medical and other subscription-based serials. The symbol represents articles withinjournals. The other major bar code that uses theISSN is the EAN (International Article Number).

Structure:The ISSN standard numeric code consists of 8 digits:which includes a group identifier and check digit. Thegroup identifier identifies the nation, geographic location.The publisher identifier indentifies a particular publisher



in a group which is assigned by Serials Data System.The title identifier identifies a particular title or edition ofa title published by a particular publisher. The check digitis calculated from the preceding digits. Hyphens are givento separate the groups of digits. The ISSN code is printedin machine-readable OCR-A characters.

For example:OLD ISSN 0123-4560

NEW ISSN 977(prefix for ISSN) 0123456 (ISSNnumber minus check digit)

OO (Sequence variant 8(Check digit} 01 (lssue number}

When a publisher selects ISSN barcode symblogyhe or she should type 9 digits with 2 hyphens to yielda complete barcode. When encoded in an EAN-13bar code, the ISSN is prefixed by the digits 977 andthe ISSN check-digit (the last of the 8 digits) is notencoded. A two digit price code, almost always “00”,is added to the end, finally the EAN check digit isadded. As for example the number 0123-4560 as aserial publication’s ISSN. The true ISSN is 0123456(0 is the ISSN check digit). The EAN-13 numberwould then be 9770123456008 for normal issues. The“DO” is the normal issue code and the “8” is the EAN-13 check digit). A special issue could receive a 2-digit numbers other than “OO”. Some serialpublications also have an add-on 2-digit code thatrepresents the issue number.

The format of the ISSN is an eight digit number,divided by a hyphen into two four-digit number Thelast digit, which may be 0-9 or an X, is a check digit.

The ISSN of a journal is 0378-5955, where thefinal 5 is the check digit. If anyone wants to calculatethe check digit, algorithm may be used as follows:

Step one:One will calculate the sum of the first seven digits of theISSN multiplied by its position in the number, countingfrom the right-that is, 8, 7, 6} 5} 4,3, and 2, respectively:

0·8+3·7+7·6+8·5+5· +9·3+5 ·2

= 0 + 21 + 42 + 0 + 20 + 27 + 10

= 160

Step two:The modulus 11 of this sum will be calculated and thenone will divide the sum by 11 and determine the remainder:

160/11 = 14 remainder 6 = 14 + 6/11

Step three:If there is no remainder the check digit will be O (zero),otherwise the remainder value will be subtracted from 11to give the check digit.

11 - 6 = 5

So here 5 is the check digit. It is important toremember that an upper case X in the check digitposition indicates a check digit of 10. If anyone wantsto confirm the check digit, he or she should calculatethe sum of all eight digits of the ISSN multiplied by itsposition in the number, counting from the right (if thecheck digit is X, then add 10 to the sum). The modulus11 of the sum must be O.

Rules for applying ISSN:ISSN is assigned by a network of over 60 centersworldwide managed by the ISSN International Centrelocated in Paris. ISSN International Centre assigns ISSNfor serials published in country where there is no ISSNnational Center. For assigning ISSN in India there is anational lSSN centre.

The publisher may obtain ISSN by applyingthrough filled datasheet downloaded fromwww.niscair.res.in along with a specimen copy of theserial in case of print version, or printed copy andinformation regarding publisher, any other pages givinginformation about the serial. The publisher does notneed to send each issue of published serial to the ISSNoffice. The ISSN office only needs to see onepublished issue of serial either at the time ofregistration, or after publication. If the serial has notyet been published, a provisional IS will be assigned.The assignment of ISSN will be validated after thereceipt of a sample issue or photocopy of thepublication. If the publishers failed to do so, provisionalISSN may be cancelled. If there is a change in thetitle of serial, publisher need to apply for a new ISSNat least one month in advance.

Abhijit Chakrabarti


On the other hand, a copy of homepage (URL)in case of online version must be sent to ISSN office.The online journal should have at least 5-6 originalarticles. If the serial has not yet been published, aprovisional ISSN will be assigned. Contact informationof publisher and contact details of editor’s addressshould also be dispatched on the website. Theassignment of ISSN will be validated after the receiptof a sample issue or photocopy of the publication. Ifthe publishers failed to do so, provisional lSSN maybe cancelled.

For assigning ISSN in India the publisher willhave to send all necessary documents with filled indatasheet to Head, National Science Library,National Institute of Science Communication andInformation Resources (NISCAIR), 14 Satsang ViharMarg, New Delhi -110067. Contact No. 011-26516672. Now ISSN agency is publishing thenames of journals along ISSN number assigned to thejournal and issue date of ISSN.

Conclusion:In a nutshell ISSN has played an important role in USB(universal Bibliographic Control).It is not only machine-readable unique number but also it is used as an approachterm for searching serials. At first the use of ISSN is notso commendable, but at present its use has beenincreased in India. Now-a-days the research activities inall the fields have been increased. As a result of this thepublications through journals have also been increased.50 the 15SN is assigned on more and more journals inIndia for both printed and online publications.

References:-1. Guha (B). Documentation and information: Services,

techniques and system. 2nd ed. rev. Calcutta, worldpress; 1983;311-313.

2. http://nsl.niscair.res.in/issn.jsp retrieved on 06-08-2014.

3. http://www.issn.org on 06/08/2014.

4. http://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/ln temationa_Standard_Serial-Number on 06/08/2014.



Citations of Journal of Indian Library Association:An Analytical Study

Dhiman MondalLibrarian

National Institute for the Orthopaedically HandicappedBon-hooghly, Kolkata, [email protected]

ABSTRACT

The present citation study analyses 81 articles The Journal of Indian Library Association published during

2009-2013. Results show that total 81 articles referred 1085 citations in which journals are the most favorable

form of documents with the contribution of 49.21% The study also examines the applicability of Bradford’s

law of scattering and lists the core cited journals in LIS discipline. Moreover, the period wise distributions

of cited journals are made and then the half-life of journals are estimated.

Keywords: Citation Analysis; Journal of Indian Library Association; Library & InformationScience.

1. Introduction:The citations in scholarly works mean the documentswhich are referred and quoted by the author for hiswriting. Citations given by authors provide anindication of what form of material and how much ofthem are being used to support their findings. Thesereferences are supposed to identify those earlierresearchers whose concepts the author has used toshape his own research (Deshmukh, 1998). Thecitations appear in various forms such as references,bibliographies, notes, further readings. CitationAnalysis is a technique which involves the process ofcollection, counting, analysis and interpretation ofcitations given in research writing and thereby helpingin identification of significant sources of information. Itcan be used for identifying the core periodicals andthe characteristics features of a discipline such asauthorship pattern and scattering of literature indifferent bibliographical forms etc (Kumar & kumar,2008). Citation studies reveal much about scholarlycommunication. The present study is an attempt to

analyze the characteristics of cited references in theJournal of Indian Library Association (JILA) whichhas been recognized as one of the most importantIndian journal sources in the field of Library &Information Science.

Journal of Indian Library Association (JILA) isa peer reviewed quarterly journal published byIndian Library Association (ILA), New Delhi.Since 2011, it changed its title from ‘ILA Bulletin’to ‘Journal of Indian Library Association’ to catchup with the emerging digital environment. It bringsrecent developments in library and informationtechnology to the notice of LIS professionals. Italso published high quality research and focusedarticles in the areas of librarianship and changingeducational scenario. At present, Prof. MuttayyaKoganuramath is the chief editor of the journal.Since 2009, the full text of the articles is availableas open access mode on internet at http://www.ilaindia.net/.



2. Review of Literature:Deshmukh (1998) in his thesis examined agriculturaldoctoral theses through citation analysis and showedthat the average number of citation per thesis is131.43 and the journals are the most favoureddocuments for the researchers. The citations of thedocuments published in India amount to 58.46%followed by USA with 21.91%. Ramesh and Nagaraju(2000) showed that more citations were from thebooks and periodicals than the other type ofmaterials. Besides, Dr. S.R. Ranganathan toped the listof cited authors and more than 90% citations werefrom library and Information science journals. Chikateand Patil (2008) stated that LIS doctoral studentsused a multitude of disciplines including science,medicine, economics, psychology etc for their researchstudy. Furthermore, it was found that College andResearch Libraries is the most cited journal, followedby Scientometrics. Kumar and Kumar (2008) in theirstudy on “Citation Analysis of Journal of OilseedResearch” showed that journals were most cited formof documents with 70.48% citations and IndianJournal of Agronomy contributed maximum references.They also inferred that references from web are notcommon at the present research. Riahinia (2009)examined 130 contributions of ‘Library Herald’ journaland depicted that the topic ‘Digital issues andresources’ is preferred subject during the study periodfollowed by ‘Web related articles’. Deshmukh (2011)in his study showed that ‘Annals of Library andInformation Studies’ is the most cited journal and thehalf life of LIS literature is found to be 9 years forjournals and 14 Years for books respectively. Gupta& Khare (2013) analysed the citations of 28 LISdoctoral theses and depicted that IASLIC Bulletin isthe most preferred journal among cited sources. It isfound that journals and books are widely used formatby the researcher. Haridasan and Khan (2013) in theircitation analysis study revealed that majority of citedjournals are online journals. There is a shift fromcitation to e-citation due to increase in the usage ofinternet and World Wide Web.

3. Objectives:• to find out quantitative distribution of articles by

volume,

• to examine reference wise distribution of articles,

• to reveal forms of cited documents,

• to assess the authorship pattern,

• to compile a rank list of core cited journals,

• to test the validity of Bradford’s law of scatteringand

• to identify the half-life period of cited journals inagriculture discipline.

4. Scope & Methodology:In the present study, articles published in The Journal ofIndianLibrary Association (JILA) during 2009-2013 havebeen taken up. Total 81 articles citing 1085 referencesof the volume numbers 45 to 49 have been covered inthe study. The required data are collected from thearchives of the journal website (www.ilaindia.net). Thedata obtained from the sources are recorded separatelyand then used MS-Word and MS-Excel to organize,tabulate and analyze the necessary data for the study.

5. Data Presentation and Analysis:The author have tried to organize the data andanalyze them according to issue, referencedistribution, forms of cited documents, list of corecited journals, and year wise publication of citedjournals. The analysed data are then presented intabulated form and explained with the help ofgraphs and diagrams.

5.1. Issue wise distribution of Articles:Table-1 presents the issue wise distribution of articlesduring 2009-2013. It shows that the source journalpublishes 81 articles citing total 1085 references. Theaverage citation per article is 13.39. The maximumarticles are published in 49 volume i.e. 25 (30.86%)and the lowest number of contributions are 10(12.34%) in the volume 46. The yearly distributions ofarticles show that there is a increasing trend in paperpublications.

Dhiman Mondal


Table 1: Issue wise distribution of articles.Year Volume Issue Total % Total

1 2 3 4 References

2009 45 5 7 12 14.81 90

2010 46 5 5 10 12.34 158

2011 47 5 5 4 14 17.28 120

2012 48 5 6 5 4 20 24.7 397

2013 49 6 7 7 5 25 30.86 320

Total = 81 100 1085

5.2. Reference wise distribution of Articles:Table-2 and figure-1 depict the reference wise distributionof articles. Maximum 36 articles cite 6-10 references with44.44 % followed by 0-5 references with 20.1 % and11-15 references with 12 %.

Table 2: Reference wise distribution of Articles.

No. of Articles Percentage( % ) CumulativeReferences Percentage

0-5 17 20.1 20.1

6-10 36 44.44 64.5411-15 12 14.81 79.35

16-20 6 7.40 86.7521-25 2 2.47 89.22

26-30 1 1.23 90.45

31-35 2 2.47 92.92>> 35 5 6.17 100

81

17

36

5

12

2126

0

10

20

30

40

0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 31-35 >>35

References

Art

icle

s

No. of Ref.

Figure 1: Reference wise distribution of articles.

5.3. Forms of Cited documents:Table 3 and figure 2 shows the distribution ofbibliographical forms of cited documents. The tablereveals that majority of the contributors preferred journalsas the source of information. Journals contribute highestcitations with 534 (49.21 %) followed by web resourceswith 215 (19.81%) and books with 160 (14.74 %).Citations from theses/ dissertations are marginal. Here,others include magazine, newsletter, report etc.

Table 3: Forms of Cited Documents.

Forms Number % Cum. %

Books 160 14.74 14.74Journals 534 49.21 63.95

Web Resources 215 19.81 83.76

Reference Sources 34 3.13 86.89Thesis/ Dissertations 9 0.83 87.72

Seminar/ Conf. Proceedings 55 5.07 92.79

Others 78 7.19 100Total = 1085

160

534

215

34 9 55 78

0100200300400500600

Books Journals Web Ref. Theses Proceedings Others

Forms of Cited Documents

Num

bers

Forms of Cited Doc.

Figure 2: Forms of Cited Sources.

5.4. Authorship Pattern of Cited Journals:Table 4 and figure 3 depicts the authorship pattern ofcited journal articles. It shows that maximum articles (258)are contributed by single authors with 48.31%. This isfollowed by two authors with 168 articles (31.46 %)and three authors with 74 articles (13.85%). There aresmall percentages of articles published by more than fiveauthors with 5 articles (0.93 %).

Table 4: Authorship pattern of cited journals.

Authorship Articles Percentage Cumulative Percentage

1 258 48.31 48.31

2 168 31.46 79.77

3 74 13.85 93.624 19 3.56 97.18

5 10 1.87 99.05

More than 5 5 0.93 100Total = 534

Five Authors, 10

More than Five

Authors, 5

Four Authors, 19

Three Authors, 74

Two Authors, 168

One Author, 258

Figure 3: Authorship Pattern of Cited Journals.

Citations of Journal of Indian Library Association: An Analytical Study


5.5. Degree of collaboration in the journal:To determine the degree of collaboration in quantitativeterms, the following formula by K. Subramanyam wasused.

The formula is NM

C=NM+NS

Where C = Degree of collaboration

NM = Number of multi authored papers

NS = Number of single authored papers.

JILA:In the present study of JILA journal, the value of C is

276C=

276+258

Hence the value of C is C = 0.516.

The degree of collaboration shows that solocontributing research is prominent in this journal withan average degree of collaboration of 0.516.

5.6. Core Cited Journals:Table 5 shows the ranking list of cited journals. The tableprovides a list of 199 journals with 34 citations. TheScientometrics is highly preferred journal with 35citations, followed by Journal of the American Societyfor Information Science and Technology with 17 citationsand SRELs Journal of Information Management with 16citations.

Table 5: Ranked list of cited Journals.Sl. No. Rank Name of the Journals No. of Cum. Ref. % Cumulative

References %1. 1 Scientometrics 35 35 6.55 6.55

2. 2 Journal of the American Society for Information 17 52 3.18 9.73Science and Technology

3. 3 SRELs Journal of Information Management 16 68 3 12.734. 4 Journal of Indian Library Association 14 82 2.62 15.35

5. 5 Journal of applied psychology 12 94 2.24 17.596. 5 Library Herald 12 106 2.24 19.83

7. 6 The Electronic Library 11 117 2.06 21.89

8. 7 Journal of Documentation 10 127 1.87 23.769. 7 DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 10 137 1.87 25.63

10. 7 Journal of Academic Librarianship 10 147 1.87 27.5

11. 7 Library Philosophy & Practice 10 157 1.87 29.3712. 8 Journal of organizational Change Management 9 166 1.68 31.05

13. 8 Journal of Vocational Behaviour 9 175 1.68 32.73

14. 8 Annals of Library & Information Studies 9 184 1.68 34.4115. 8 Herald of Library Science 9 193 1.68 36.09

16. 8 Journal of Library and Information Science 9 202 1.68 37.77

17. 9 Human Relations 8 210 1.5 39.2718. 9 Library Review 8 218 1.5 40.77

19. 9 Library HiTech 8 226 1.5 42.27

20. 10 4 Journals having 7 citations 28 254 5.24 47.5121. 11 4 Journals having 6 citations 24 278 4.5 52.01

22. 12 4 Journals having 5 citations 20 298 3.74 55.75

23. 13 8 Journals having 4 citations 32 330 6 61.7524. 14 8 Journals having 3 citations 24 354 4.5 66.25

25. 15 30 Journals having 2 citations 60 414 11.23 77.48

26. 16 120 Journals having 1 citations 120 534 22.47 100Total = 197 Journals 534 100

Dhiman Mondal


5.7. Application of Bradford’s Law to citation data:In 1934, S.C. Bradford formulated a law to describe thedistribution of articles on a particular subject in differentjournals. According to Bradford law (Deshmukh, 1998),if scientific journals are arranged in order of decreasingproductivity of articles on a given subject, they may bedivided into a nucleus of periodicals more particularlydevoted to the subject and several groups or zonescontaining the same number of articles as the nucleus,when the number of periodicals in the nucleus andsucceeding zones will be as 1:1n:1n2 .

In the present study, first 16 journals cover 202citations; next 31 journals cover 152 citations and thenext 150 journals cover 180 citations. In other words,the 1st zone of nucleus contains 16 journals followedby second zone containing 31 journals and the thirdzone having 150 journals. The zones will form anapproximate series in the form:

16: 31: 150

16: 16 × 2: 16 × 2× 2 Here n= 2 is a multiplier.

Hence, 16: 16n: 16n2.

Where 1st 16 represent number of journals in thenucleus.

Here, the Bradford’s law is not justified.

Table 6: Scattering of journals andcitations over Bradford’s law.

Zones Number of % of No. of % ofJournals Journals Citations citations

1 16 8.12 202 37.77

2 31 15.73 152 28.48

3 150 76.14 180 33.75

Total = 197 100 534 100

5.8. Age Distribution of Cited Journals andpublication half life:Table 6 demonstrates the year wise distribution ofcitations. There has been an increasing trend of citationsof journals up to eight years. After onwards there hasbeen a declining trend. The eight year of publication itselfhas recorded the highest number of citations (39, 7.30%).

Half-life means the time during which one half ofall the currently active literature was published. Out of

534 total journal citations 10 years old journals covercumulative percentage of 50.36. Therefore, in total theestimated half life of Library & Information Sciencejournals are 10 years.

Table 7: Year wise distribution of Citations.

Year Age old Total Num. Cum. Total Total % Cum. %

2013 0 0 0 0 0

2012 1 13 13 2.43 2.43

2011 2 24 37 4.5 6.93

2010 3 24 61 4.5 11.43

2009 4 28 89 5.24 16.67

2008 5 20 109 3.74 20.41

2007 6 22 131 4.12 24.53

2006 7 35 166 6.55 31.08

2005 8 39 205 7.30 38.38

2004 9 31 236 5.80 44.18

2003 10 33 269 6.18 50.36

2002 11 38 307 7.11 57.47

2001 12 17 324 3.18 60.65

2000 13 29 353 5.43 66.08

1999 14 36 389 6.74 72.82

1998 15 13 402 2.43 75.25

1997 16 17 419 3.18 78.43

1996 17 15 434 2.80 81.23

1995 18 13 447 2.43 83.66

1994 19 13 460 2.43 86.09

1993 20 5 465 0.93 87.02

1992 21 6 471 1.12 88.14

1991 22 3 474 0.56 88.7

1990 23 3 477 0.56 89.26

1989-1944 24-69 57 534 10.67 100

534 100

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24-69

Age old

Cum

. Cita

tions

Cum. Citations

Figure 4: Half-life of cited journals.

Citations of Journal of Indian Library Association: An Analytical Study


6. Conclusion:The present citation study reveals that total 81 articlesare published in the source journal during the study periodand the maximum 36 articles cite 6-10 references.Journals are the most favorable form of documents inresearch and the ranked list of cited journals depicts thatthe two foreign journals titled, Scientometrics and Journalof the American Society for Information Science andTechnology top the list. Besides, the estimated half-lifeof library & information science journals are 10 years.The list of core journals and half-life of journals will beuseful to academic library intending to build their journalcollection in LIS discipline and also will be helpful to theresearcher to consult with.

The journal has a long history of 49 years ofpublication and has gained its own identity in theprofessional world. But the journal is usually behindschedule and many times two issues are combined intoone. It should publish regularly and on time.

References:1. Chikate, R. V. & Patil, S. K. (2008). Citation

Analysis of Theses in Library and InformationScience Submitted to University of Pune: A PilotStudy. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/222.

2. Deshmukh, P. P. (1998). Citation Analysis ofPh.D thesis submitted to Punjabrao Krishividyapith during 1990-94 (Ph. D thesis, Dept. oflibrary and information science, Amravati University,Amravati). Retrieved from http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in:8080/jspui/ handle/10603/11178.

3. Deshmukh, Prashant P. (2011). Citations in Annalsof Library and Information Studies during 1997 to2010: a study. Annals of Library and InformationStudies, 58(4), p. 355-361.

4. Gupta, J. & Khare, V.P. (2013). Citation analysisof Ph.D Theses of LIS in Dr. Harisingh GourUniversity,Sagar. International Journal ofInformation Dissemination and Technology,3(2), 118-124.

5. Haridasan, Sudharma & Khan, Aisha. (2013).Citation analysis of the journal ‘Library HiTech’.Journal of Indian Library Association, 49(4), p.26-33.

6. Kumar, S. & Kumar, S. (2008). Citation Analysisof Journal of Oilseeds Research 1993-2004.Annals of Library and Information Studies,55(1), 35-44.

7. Ramesh, L.S.R.C. V. & Nagaraju, A. V.S.S.(2000). Citation Analysis of the Indian Journal ofInformation, Library and Society. Indian Journalor Information, Library and Society, 13(3-4),171-179.

8. Riahinia, Nosrat. (2009). A 2003-2007 CitationAnalysis of Library Herald. Library Herald, 47(1), p. 73-89.

Dhiman Mondal