| Abstract: | 學術資訊是學術工作者在研究過程不可或缺的參考資源，隨著網路搜尋引擎將學術資訊納為搜尋對象，已帶動另一種學術資訊取閱的新風潮，其中又以Google Scholar最為著稱。此種改變對學術工作者在學術資訊的取閱方式，以及圖書館與相關資訊產業的營運，勢必產生某些程度的衝擊，因而引發本研究的動機，希冀瞭解網路搜尋引擎取閱學術資訊之現況、服務、功能、深度與廣度及對圖書資訊界及學術工作者之衝擊。
本文採用比較法為研究方法，以Google Scholar、OCLC WorldCat、ACM Digital Library、IEEEXplore為研究對象，選取圖書、非書與電子期刊等三種資料類型，計120個樣本，對題名項、著者項及系統功能與服務等面向進行分析，以歸納此四種檢索系統在取閱學術資訊之差異。
研究結果發現以Google Scholar對於檢索的提供最好，其次在介面和檢索結果呈現方面以OCLC WorldCat最好，且四個檢索系統皆提供良好的系統輔助說明，此外，在虛字控制和標點符號等詞彙控制，則以Google Scholar最為優越。
根據研究結果，對於此四系統提出建議，希望Google Scholar能對檢索結果的呈現及瀏覽檢索有更完善的支援，並且整合Google的所有服務，以讓更多的合作夥伴加入。對於ACM Digital Library及IEEEXplore則能增加檢索詞長度。在ACM Digital Library、IEEEXplore、OCLC WorldCat等三者則為加強虛字控制和標點符號的檢索功能，且對於錯誤訊息的提示更為明確。
對於圖書資訊界與使用者在面對Google Scholar的來臨，需有體認時代與環境變動的觀念，培養自身操作與檢索的技術，且有增強溝通及應用資訊的能力，以及提昇學識與技術水準。
Scholarly information is an essential information source for researchers in pursuit of knowledge discovery and innovation. Internet search engines, such as Google Scholar, have become another new approach to accessing scholarly information gradually when scholarly resources are incorporated into their coverage. The change of information access has impacted all roles and corresponsive behaviors in scholarly communication, including researchers as author and enduser, libraries as information delivery, and related business models.
This paper aims to adopt comparison as research methodology to explore the difference of search engines on Internet from current information systems in accessing to scholarly resources. The research subjects are composed of search engine, bibliographic and fulltext databases in the following: Google Scholar, OCLC WorldCat, ACM Digital Library and IEEEXplore. Moreover, four sets of 30 individual samples are chosen to test four selected subjects respectively from books, non-books and electronic journals, in order to examine the functionality issues ranging from retrieval, browse, display, to delivery.
As a consequence, four findings are offered by this study. Firstly, the Google Scholar is more powerful on retrieval, especially in control of stop words and punctuations, as well as less constraint on length of query strings. Secondly, the OCLC WorldCat provides better performance of browsing, display and delivery. Thirdly, all of four offer well-designed online help information. However, non-stop and free authentication control access to scholarly resources of the Google Scholar is superior to others. |
