Factiva and Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies

Author:

Driedger S. Michelle,Weimer Jade

Abstract

Purpose – Scholars rely on electronic databases to conduct searches and locate relevant citations. The purpose of this paper is to compare the retrieval results on the same topic (multiple sclerosis and liberation therapy) of two commonly used databases for searching print news media: ProQuest’s Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies and Dow Jones’ Factiva. Design/methodology/approach – A case study comparing two electronic searchable databases using the same keywords, date range, and newspaper-specific search parameters across three Canadian university institutions. Findings – Considerable differences were found between institutional searches using Factiva. Factiva allows all individual users the capacity to establish systems-wide “administrator” privileges, thereby controlling the output for subsequent users if these preferences are not changed. The capacity for individual users to tailor searches within Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies was more in line with standard protocols for institutions paying for single user accounts with access to multiple sessions within that same institution: any user-specific searching/retrieval preferences are individually contained within a search and do not influence the searches of a different user. Research limitations/implications – What began as a comparative analysis of two commonly used databases for searching print news media turned into an examination of larger systemic problems. The findings call into question several factors: the integrity of a researcher-generated data set; the quality of results published in peer-reviewed journals based on researcher-generated data sets derived from established e-resource databases; the reliability of the same e-resource database across multiple institutions; and the quality of e-resource databases for scholarly research when developed to serve primarily non-academic clients. Originality/value – No comparison of this kind for these particular e-resource databases has been documented in the literature. In fact, the scholarly publications that address questions of functionality and reliability of either Factiva or Proquest have not brought this issue into the discussion. Therefore, this study furthers academic discourse on the nature and reliability of database use at any academic institution and illustrates that researchers, in a variety of academic fields, cannot depend on the reliability of their search results without thoroughly consulting the various settings of their database.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications,Information Systems

Reference35 articles.

1. Asher, A.D. , Duke, L.M. and Wilson, S. (2013), “Paths of discovery: comparing the search effectiveness of EBSCO Discovery Service, Summon, Google Scholar, and conventional library resources”, College & Research Libraries , Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 464-488.

2. Bates, M. (2006), “Factiva search 2.0”, Online , Vol. 30 No. 3, p. 64.

3. Brynko, B. (2012), “Factiva: it’s all about the content”, Information Today , Vol. 29 No. 5, pp. 1-36.

4. Carr, N. (2008), “Is Google making us stupid?”, The Atlantic, July 1, available at: www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/306868/ (accessed March 30, 2015).

5. Chillingworth, M. (2006), “Factiva ups the ante in news aggregation”, Information World Review , Vol. 25 No. 221, p. 25.

Cited by 9 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3