LexisNexis

 Author's note (same note as displayed on the DIALOG entry): After a brief hiatus due to illness (it is already flu season in my neck of the woods) and a couple of in-depth group projects occurring at the same time, I am back and all caught up! I had these next two entries saved in my drafts folder for quite some time and I had typed everything up, but I had not yet gotten around to formatting the images so that they would display properly on the blog. You should be getting three updates here in fairly quick succession, with the statistical database being this week's actual feature and the others written on 10/21 and 10/13, respectively. I am not sure if they will show the original, typed date or the "published" date. Anyway... I hope enjoy these entries!
 
I view LexisNexis to be somewhat of a massive and peculiar beast. Sort of a Frankenstein's monster of databases, LexisNexis patches together court cases, newspaper stories, and business reports as part of its offerings. Most of the databases I have examined thus far have only focused on providing one type of source like journal articles or a listing of books/items. I plan to examine each of these features separately in this blog post. 

The first thing I noticed that I really enjoyed about LexisNexis is its simple interface. The big, red search box in the middle of the homepage provides a welcome invitation for the user to try out the database. A pet peeve of mine, as a searcher, is when I find that the search boxes are small, hidden in a corner, or are otherwise difficult to find. Usually, when I am looking for information I want to be able to search a database quickly and spend my time sorting through results, rather than trying to find out where I need to start my journey! I also like that there are three boxes below the general search box that allow a user to narrow to a particular type of information (headlines, court cases, and business reports) without having to sort through results that contain things they are not looking for.

 As you can see from the above interface screenshot, I started with a simple search without extensive limiters. I used the terms disabilit* AND "library" AND training. This yielded a large number of results, 994 to be exact.

Because I retrieved such a large number of results and I wanted specific examples of library training, I decided to take a look at the "advanced search" options to see how I might further limit my search.

I attempted to do another command string search, similar to what I did in the last entry with DIALOG. LexisNexis calls this search feature by a different name, referring to it instead as a "Segment Search." A similarity I noticed right away is that they both had proximity searching as an option. In LexisNexis, however, it stylizes this as "w/n" with "n" representing the number of words. An additional helpful feature is that it allowed for searching within the paragraph of the article using "w/p." Additionally, it has a linked thesaurus to allow users to look up relevant indexed vocabulary. I found this very helpful and easy to use.

As you can see, I limited the types of items to newspapers. I also added the limiter of "training"being within the article paragraph. Furthermore, I ensured that the articles were published within the last few years.

These limiters significantly reduced my number of results, but it also removed many relevant results. This search yielded 24 results, many of them duplicates. I wonder if perhaps I used too many duplicates in an effort to narrow in on my topic? Below is the most accurate of the news articles that I found (the third one on the list).


I attempted other searches examining other parts of the LexisNexis database as well. I moved on to searching for a relevant court case about individuals with disabilities and ADA protection under law. Using the middle gray box, I searched for a court case using the terms "library" and "disability" and found the following relevant result:

I also attempted a search using the end gray box for a relevant business. I searched for Freedom Scientific, the company that manufactures JAWS, a screen reader program for people with low vision and located the following data:

Finally, I attempted to find another headline and news story around my topic, this time using the gray quick search box (the first one on the bottom row). I used the terms "ADA requirements" AND "library" and limited my search to only stories published within the Washington Post.

 
This time, I only retrieved 6 results. This was a bit expected, because I limited my results to only items within the Washington Post.  The result below is the most accurate of the results that I found.

What did I learn this week?

Content:

Content-wise, I learned several things this week. Libraries must be very careful about how they approach patrons. Likewise, they must really consider their library policies carefully and apply them on a case-by-case basis. In an article by Gibson (2013) the reporter found that a library in Leesburg, Florida kicked a family out of the library because a patron whose daughter had Down's syndrome and autism had an emotional outburst. Other patrons complained that she was disturbing them. As a result, the librarian asked the family to leave and threatened to call the police if they would not comply as per their acceptable use policies. This may be considered violating ADA regulations, despite the policies the library had in place. This perhaps reveals that libraries may need to do more training with their staff to determine how to handle situations like the one above that would be mutually beneficial to the patron and the library.

The second thing I learned is that there are a ton of court cases that deal with upholding ADA regulations! Even though these laws have been passed, it still seems that certain service sectors are not meeting accessibility requirements. One such statute prevents discriminatory fees from being charged to people with disabilities. In a court case, Klingler vs. Missouri Dept. of Revenue (2006) the prosecution was suing the Department of Revenue because they felt that charging for placards that would allow for people with disabilities to park in reserved places was a discriminatory surcharge. This ruling sided with the original opinion of the district court which agreed with the plaintiffs that charging for windshield placards was a discriminatory practice and thus, against ADA laws. 

Searching:


As far as searching is concerned, I learned about the importance of including indexed terms when searching in newspaper databases. I also learned the handy trick of proximity searching within a paragraph. I am not sure if this is something that is just limited to LexisNexis, but I really enjoyed this feature. I will be sure to keep an eye out for it in databases to come! Finally, though not pictured in these practice searches, I learned that you could limit by headline in this particular database while doing a segment search.

Reflections:

Would I use LexisNexis again? 

I would probably use LexisNexis again, but it has very limited environments in which it would be useful. I could see using this for business students that needed in-depth reports or for patrons looking for specific news stories. I really liked that the database featured "press-able" buttons that would fill in Boolean commands automatically in your segment search. This saves a lot of time and is a really user-friendly feature for users who are not well-versed in Boolean terminology yet.

Ideas for future searches

I would like to continue trying proximity searches in future databases I encounter. Topic-wise, I would enjoy delving more into legality and how libraries are striving to meet ADA requirements. I would also like to continue to search about staff training. How are staff members being trained to assist patrons with disabilities? Is there a gap in knowledge? Can more be done to prepare staff? Can continuing education be conducted around different tools, trends, and software that can make accessing information easier?

As always, I love to hear your feedback! Feel free to write to me via the comments section!

- Crystal

References:

Gibson, Caitlin. 2013. "Asked to Leave the Library." Washingtonpost.com, May 9. LexisNexis Academic. Accessed Oct. 21, 2014.

"Klingler v. Missouri Dept. of Revenue." 2006. LexisNexis Academic. Accessed Oct. 21, 2014.

DIALOG

Author's note: After a brief hiatus due to illness (it is already flu season in my neck of the woods) and a couple of in-depth group projects occurring at the same time, I am back and all caught up! I had these next two entries saved in my drafts folder for quite some time and I had typed everything up, but I had not yet gotten around to formatting the images so that they would display properly on the blog. You should be getting three updates here in fairly quick succession, with the statistical database being this week's actual feature and the others written on 10/21 and 10/13, respectively. I am not sure if they will show the original, typed date or the "published" date. Anyway... I hope enjoy these entries!


This week I delved into DIALOG. As I learned in our initial "research a vendor" assignment on Blackboard, DIALOG was recently acquired from Reuters by ProQuest. It seems as though the database is meant to be a catch-all for several resources. This database's interface is unlike any other I have searched in thus far. When looking at the search box from the home screen, there is the interesting option of limiting your search to a particular industry. I suppose because the database is so massive, designers have thought to include this option to help limit content and make information more manageable. As a reminder, my topic revolves around how people with disabilities access information and the typical barriers they face in doing so. Not being exactly sure where this would fit as far as industries were concerned, I chose education deciding that it would be the closest match for the type of information I was seeking.

For my search, I decided to use the following search terms: (disabilit*) AND (librar*) AND (online) AND (access). My first search yielded an impressive 173 results!

While many of the results above were relevant to my topic, I wanted to see if I could narrow my results to a specific set that was closely tied to what I was trying to research. Based on looking at some of the linked terms included with the articles, I decided to modify my search further. I scrapped the terms "online" and "access" and replaced them with more database-friendly vocabulary. The terms "accessibility" and "universal design" were used instead. This narrowed my results considerably to 15 results. 

The results were considerably more targeted. Though there were many applicable articles, I chose the article below as the best of the results found. I want to focus on academic library work for my future career and I felt that the following article best fit this environment.

Unfortunately, this article was found not to have full-text available. I attempted to examine the most next applicable article, represented below. It proved to have full-text available from ERIC.

One other feature I decided to try on DIALOG was a "command string" search. A command line search allows one to build a specific string of terms with user-defined operators. ProQuest only searches within these parameters. This allows the user a greater level of fine-tuning in their search and does not require them to enter their information in several search boxes (as it does in the “advanced search” option). To my knowledge, this is the first database I have tried with this feature. As you can see, I attempted to build in several search "codes" such as "LA" for language or "YR" for the publishing dates that I wanted to limit my articles to.  

The “command line” search offered me a much greater degree of specificity than my initial search. Perhaps it allowed my search to become too specific, because I retrieved far fewer results, only 6 in total (the first two appeared to be duplicates). The fourth result seemed puzzling as to why it was included. It did not mention a single one of my search terms (other than the word library, I suppose).  The last result at least mentions ADA requirements in the designing of a library building, but I was unable to find any applicable information in the “feminist” article. I chose the fifth result for my most accurate one.

Command line searches are probably best for someone who is both well versed in the different codes required or who is looking for something very specific. Perhaps I just took the use of commands too far and it limited my search as a result. I did find my search was faster for me than trying to find and check all of the limiter boxes, however.

What did I learn this week?

Content:

Content-wise, I learned about the existence of an organization called DO-IT. I had not heard of this organization prior to finding this research. According to Blue and Pace (2011), "When it comes to applying UD in library spaces, the Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology organization has become the leading force." The purpose of DO-IT is to use technology to help individuals with disabilities achieve greater levels of independence. The website is run by the University of Washington (http://www.washington.edu/doit/) and includes pamphlets, videos, and information sheets about common barriers that people with disabilities face and suggestions for designing buildings, websites, and much more. I think that this website is an excellent resource for any library wishing to improve the accessibility of their services to their patrons.

Searching:

As far as the database and searching in general is concerned, I learned about the existence of proximity limiters. I had never used that in any of my previous searches. A proximity limiter allows one to search for two terms within a certain number of word of each other (see an example in my command line search above) using the operator NEAR/n (n being the number of words the second term should fall within). I also learned about how to build a command line search. Codes of different operators were listed on DIALOG's ProSHEETs. Each code corresponded to a different limiter. For example, PBLOC allows a user to search by the publication's location. I really enjoyed learning how to build command line searches and use ProSHEET codes. I found my searches to be much quicker than if I were using drop-down menus on the "advanced search" page.

Reflections:

Would I use DIALOG again? 

The main issue I take with DIALOG is that it is just so massive. Searches usually yield an overwhelming number of results and it takes a lot of specific limiters to narrow them below a double-digit number. Talk about information overload! To be fair, ProQuest has attempted to address this somewhat by grouping certain databases by industry. I like their use of pictures to easily convey each industry. However, what if your topic fits in multiple industries? What if it does not fit well into any of the industries chosen? I do like this interface for newer users who may not be familiar with the types of databases in existence. For me, however, I think I would much rather just search a specific database for my topic like ERIC. I could see using it to recommend to students or patrons who are newer to searching, however. I also really like the command line search feature!

Ideas for future searches

I would like to go back to the other databases I have already covered and see if they also include proximity searching. I know that commands can often differ from database-to-database, so perhaps I missed them because they do not use the same "NEAR/n" command. I would also like to test this feature in future searches of other databases to determine if it helps better target my searches. I will be on the lookout to try other command line-type searches and will compare them to one another between databases. I would like to hone my ability at using command line searches because I find it faster and easier for me to use, so long as I am able to learn the specific sets of commands commonly found in that particular database.

Again, sorry for the brief gap in updates. I am feeling much better and have gotten so huge projects behind me! You should be seeing more frequent updates now.

As always, feel free to message me, comment, or otherwise drop me a line if you find this interesting or have any tips for what I should do in future searches! I look forward to hearing from you!

- Crystal



References:

Blue, Elfreda V., and Darra Pace. 2011. "UD and UDL: Paving the Way Toward Inclusion and Independence in the School Library." Knowledge Quest 39, no. 3: 48-55. ERIC, ProQuest DIALOG (accessed October 13, 2014).