New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries
- Authors
- Karen Williams
- Journal
- University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (University of Minnesota)
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w22677490 →Countries where authors are citing New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries
This map shows the geographic impact of New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries more than expected).
Fields of papers citing New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries
This network shows the impact of New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries.
About New Roles for New Times: Transforming Liaison Roles in Research Libraries
This paper, published in 2013, received 158 indexed citations . Written by Karen Williams covering the research area of Library and Information Sciences and Information Systems. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Information Systems (92 citations), Library and Information Sciences (70 citations) and Communication (22 citations). Published in University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (University of Minnesota).
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w22677490.