[논문]Development of Evaluation Perspective and Criteria for the DataON Platform

Kim, Suntae

doi:10.1633/jistap.2020.8.2.6

Development of Evaluation Perspective and Criteria for the DataON Platform 원문보기

Journal of information science theory and practice : JISTaP, v.8 no.2, 2020년, pp.68 - 78

Kim, Suntae (Department of Library and Information Science, Jeonbuk National University)

Abstract ▼ AI-Helper

This study is a preliminary study to develop an evaluation framework necessary for evaluating the DataON platform. The first objective is to examine expert perceptions of the level of DataON platform construction. The second objective is to evaluate the importance, stability, and usability of DataON platform features over OpenAIRE features. The third objective is to derive weights from the evaluation perspective for future DataON platform evaluation. The fourth objective is to examine the preferences of experts in each evaluation perspective and to derive unbiased evaluation criteria. This study used a survey method for potential stakeholders of the DataON platform. The survey included 12 professionals with at least 10 years of experience in the field. The 57 overall functions and services were measured at 3.1 out of 5 for importance. Stability was -0.07 point and usability was measured as -0.05 point. The 42 features and services scored 3.04 points in importance. Stability was -0.58 points and usability was -0.51 points. In particular, the stability and usability scores of the 42 functions and services provided as of 2018 were higher than the total functions were, which is attributed to the stable and user-friendly improvement after development. In terms of the weight of the evaluation point, the collection quality has the highest weight of 27%. Interface usability is then weighted 22%. Subsequently, service quality is weighted 19%, and finally system performance efficiency and user feedback solicitation are equally weighted 16%.

주제어

표/그림 (11)

그림 Fig. 1. Research data platform and its stakeholders.
표 Table 1. Recognition status of each stakeholder group about the platform construction stage
그림 Fig. 2. Comparison of the importance, stability, and usability of functions and services of OpenAIRE and DataON.
그림 Fig. 3. A hierarchical structure for the Analytic Hierarchy Process.
그림 Fig. 4. Weights for the evaluation perspectives for evaluating the platform by stakeholder groups related to the DataON platform. D, developer; A, administrator; R, researcher; F, funder.
표 Table 2. Normalized pair-wise comparison and consistency index matrix related to evaluation perspectives
그림 Fig. 5. Weights for platform assessment perspectives by interest group.
표 Table 3. Evaluation point weight of each group, expressed in tones
표 Table 4. Preferred evaluation points by interest group of DataON platform
표 Table 5. Suggested additional evaluation perspectives for each stakeholder group of DataON
표 Table 6. Suggesting evaluation criteria corresponding to Xie’s evaluation viewpoints for each stakeholder group of DataON platform

참고문헌 (19)

Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Giesinger Hall, C., Ananthanarayanan, V., ... Wolfson, N. (2017). NMC Horizon report: 2017 library edition. Retrieved November 3, 2019 from https://www.issuelab.org/resources/27498/27498.pdf.
Buttenfield, B. (1999). Usability evaluation of digital libraries. Science & Technology Libraries, 17(3-4), 39-59.

상세보기
Barsky, E., Brown, H., Ellis, U., Ishida, M., Janke, R., Menzies, E., ... Vis-Dunbar, M. (2017). UBC Research data management survey: Health sciences: Report. Retrieved from University of British Columbia website: https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubclibraryandarchives/494/items/1.0348070.
Candela, L., Castelli, D., Pagano, P., Thanos, C., Ioannidis, Y., Koutrika, G., ... Schuldt, H. (2007). Setting the foundations of digital libraries: The DELOS manifesto. D-Lib Mag, 13(3/4).
Diepenbroek, M., Glockner, F. O., Grobe, P., Guntsch, A., Huber, R., Konig-Ries, B., ... Triebel, D. (2014, September 22-26). Towards an integrated biodiversity and ecological research data management and archiving platform: The German federation for the curation of biological data (GFBio). In E. Plodereder, L. Grunske, E. Schneider, & D. Ull (Eds.), Informatik 2014 (pp. 1711-1721). Gesellschaft fur Informatik e.V.
Foster, E. D., & Deardorff, A. (2017). Open Science Framework (OSF). Journal of the Medical Library Association, 105(2), 203-206.

상세보기
Fuhr, N., Tsakonas, G., Aalberg, T., Agosti, M., Hansen, P., Kapidakis, S., ... Solvberg, I. (2007). Evaluation of digital libraries. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 8(1), 21-38.

상세보기
Lagzian, F., Abrizah, A., & Wee, M. C. (2013). An identification of a model for digital library critical success factors. The Electronic Library, 31(1), 5-23.

상세보기
Mayernik, M. S. (2015). Research data and metadata curation as institutional issues. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(4), 973-993.
Ministry of Science and ICT. (2019). Announcement of 2020 ministry of transitional and monetary affairs budget and government R&D budget. Retrieved November 9, 2019 from http://www.korea.kr/common/download.do?fileId187894400&tblKeyGMN.
Saracevic, T. (2004, October 4-5). Evaluation of digital libraries: An overview. In M. Agosti, & N. Fuhr (Eds.), DELOS WP7 Workshop on the Evaluation of Digital Libraries (pp. 13-30). Springer.
Singh, N. K., Monu, H., & Dhingra, N. (2018, February 21-23). Research data management policy and institutional framework. 2018 5th International Symposium on Emerging Trends and Technologies in Libraries and Information Services (ETTLIS) (pp. 111-115). IEEE.
Tenopir, C., Talja, S., Horstmann, W., Late, E., Hughes, D., Pollock, D., ... Allard, S. (2017). Research data services in European academic research libraries. LIBER Quarterly, 27(1), 23-44.

상세보기
Tsakonas, G., Kapidakis, S., & Papatheodorou, C. (2004, October 4-5). Evaluation of user interaction in digital libraries. DELOS WP7 Workshop on the Evaluation of Digital Libraries (pp. 45-60). Elsevier.
Tsakonas, G., & Papatheodorou, C. (2011). An ontological representation of the digital library evaluation domain. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(8), 1577-1593.

상세보기
Xie, H. I. (2006). Evaluation of digital libraries: Criteria and problems from users' perspectives. Library & Information Science Research, 28(3), 433-452.

상세보기
Xie, H. I. (2008). Users' evaluation of digital libraries (DLs): Their uses, their criteria, and their assessment. Information Processing & Management, 44(3), 1346-1373.

상세보기
Xie, I., & Matusiak, K. K. (2016). Evaluation of digital libraries. In I. Xie, & K. K. Matusiak (Eds.), Discover digital libraries (pp. 281-318). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Zhang, Y. (2010). Developing a holistic model for digital library evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 88-110.

상세보기

내보내기 구분	파일저장 인쇄 메일전송
구성항목	기본정보 상세정보 관리번호, 논문명, 저널/프로시딩명, 저자 , 발행년, 권, 호, 시작페이지, 끝페이지, 발행기관 관리번호, 논문명, 대등논문명, 저자 , 저널/프로시딩명, 발행기관, 발행년, 발행언어, 권, 호, 시작페이지, 끝페이지, ISBN, ISSN, 주제분야, 키워드, 초록(한글), 초록(영문), 저자(소속기관)
저장형식	Text(ASCII format) Excel format RefWorks Direct Export RIS format (for Reference Manager, ProCite, EndNote), Scholar's Aids, Mendeley
메일정보	받는사람 (필수) @ 보내는사람 (선택) @ 제목 내용 KISTI 검색결과 이메일 서비스
안내	총 건의 자료가 검색되었습니다. 다운받으실 자료의 인덱스를 입력하세요. (1-10,000) 검색결과의 순서대로 최대 10,000건 까지 다운로드가 가능합니다. 데이타가 많을 경우 속도가 느려질 수 있습니다.(최대 2~3분 소요) 다운로드 파일은 UTF-8 형태로 저장됩니다. 파일의 내용이 제대로 보이지 않을실 때는 웹브라우저 상단의 보기 -> 인코딩 -> 자동선택 여부를 확인하십시오. ~ Text(ASCII format) Excel format

연합인증