What advantages to social tagging do you see for libraries?
I played with CiteULike and it was really interesting. One of my ongoing interests is looking at the idea of overload. The problem is not getting to content it is sifting through it and getting good stuff. A quick tag search found some other individuals and groups that are looking at information overload. I was able to follow their citations and find some interesting review articles and such. I also found that I could ask to be a connection to various people, making a research network.
One of the items that I thought was interesting was that blogs were listed in CiteULike. I’m sure this was covered in the lecture but to see a Springer product with items that weren’t peer-reviewed was rare. I think CiteULike is a healthy nudge for scholarly communication. I don’t know how Springer will use the information from CiteULike but I’m sure that they will use it to create peer-reviewed blogs and web content.
Lastly, it was still a bummer to see how difficult it was to get to a PDF. One could either follow the access through a database (assuming that you were logged in) or one could upload their own PDF from a local copy. Why can’t the export function grab the PDF too?
Students will tag at least 5 (Web 2.0-related) bookmarks with the class
tag LIBR246-11. Link to your profile in whatever SB tool you chose in a
blog post (Homework tag: SB).
http://delicious.com/mtmabbett
Students will subscribe to the tag LIBR246-11 through their newsreader.
See my iGoogle page
Weekly commenting.
http://www.infosherpas.com/libr246-11/node/1057
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
What do you think about social tagging possibly making some research more popular (because it was tagged and read more frequently). While I am comfortable with this for my recreational bookmarks, I'm not sure if I want to rely on what's popular when I am doing scholarly research. I know CiteULike is used by academics, therefore the tagging might be a little more consistent and popular articles may truly reflect the pinnacle of research, but I can't help thinking about all the students who might also be using the site and just using what is popular on the assumption that it is quality research (I'm not saying it's not). I'm sure the system as a whole works just as effectively as database searching, possibly faster and more efficient, but I do wonder about what bubbles up to the surface and what might end up unacknowledged. Also, I think about the same citations appearing over and over in future work . . .
Just curious.
I really found your post about CiteULike interesting. I have to say, I'm intrigued by the ability to search, review and generate citations. And, I like that it's possible to make connections to other people and thus, create a research network. I'm not familiar with Springer but I think peer-review vs. non peer-review has been pounded into us as students in both undergraduate and graduate courses. It will be intersting to see how CiteULike handles this subject in the future.
Springer is an academic publisher. They do a lot of science, technology and medical publishing for higher ed. I know of them because of their linguistics publishing and because of the ebook content we subscribe to where I work.