Full report

Original page 1

NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project Report Number 7 NASA Technical Memorandum 104063 Summary Report to Phase 2 Respondents Including Frequency Distributions Thomas E. Pinelli NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia John M. Kennedy Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana Terry F. White Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana March 1991 NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration Department of Defense INDIANA UNIVERSITY

Original page 2

THE NASA/DOD AEROSPACE KNOWLEDGE DIFFUSION RESEARCH PROJECT Report to Phase Two Respondents Introduction This project, started in 1989, is designed to explore the diffusion of scientific and technical information (STI) throughout the aerospace industry. The increased international competition and cooperation. in the industry promises to significantly affect the STI demands of U.S. engineers and scientists. Therefore, it is important to understand the aerospace knowledge diffusion process itself and its implications at the individual, organizational, national and international levels. The Project is planned in four Phases. Phase 1 is designed to study the information-seeking habits of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists. Phase 2, the subject of this report, is concerned primarily with the transfer of scientific and technical information in industry and government and the role of librarians and technical information specialists. Phase 3 looks at the use and transfer of STI in the academic aerospace community. Phase 4 will examine knowledge production, use and transfer among non-U.S. individuals and aerospace organizations. Part I Data Collection Methods The list of U.S. and Canadian government and industrial libraries was compiled from several sources. One source was the Directory of Special Libraries and Information Centers. Additional libraries were compiled from the members of the Aerospace Division of the Special Libraries Association. All libraries held aerospace, aeronautical or related collections. In addition to the industry libraries, government libraries, including both regional depositories and armed services libraries, were included on the list. Academic libraries with aerospace collections were included if the institution did not offer an aerospace program. (Academic libraries in institutions offering aerospace programs were included in Phase 3 of this project.) The self-administered questionnaire was mailed to all the libraries rather than a sample. The questionnaire was directed to the person listed as the head of the library. Often it was given to the person in charge of the aerospace collection. Generally, in any corporate group and location, only the main library (based on collection size) was surveyed. The survey was conducted between May and. August 1990. The Center for Survey Research staff called every fifth non-respondent. These calls, reminded respondents to return the questionnaire. They also eliminated libraries which were not eligible for the study. For instance, some libraries had been closed for lack of funds. In all, 156 libraries responded to the survey with an adjusted response rate of 68 percent. Description of the Participants The librarians were asked to provide some information about themselves and their libraries. This section describes the librarian. Almost 70 percent of the librarians were female. Most had extensive experience as information specialists. Overall, 78 percent had more than five years experience. However, 43 percent had been in his or her current job five years or less. Altogether, 72 percent held the current job less than ten years. Seventy-one percent of the librarians had earned the MLS. Sixty percent were members of SLA and 25 percent were members of ALA. Seventeen percent did not belong to any national professional information society. The librarians were not likely to be members of technical societies. Only about four percent were members of ACM, AIAA and ASTM, respectively. About eight percent held IEEE membership. The librarians were also asked to provide information about their library. Thirty-six percent reported that there was more than one library at their facility. Staff sizes of the libraries varied. Forty-one percent employed only one librarian or technical information specialist. Thirty-eight percent reported their library employed between two and five librarians. Fifty-nine percent reported their library employed only one

Original page 3

administrative or management person and 37 percent employed only one library technician. Ninety-two percent employed at least one clerk. Total Size of Staff of All Libraries at Facility Staff Type None Management 5.3 Librarian/TIS 0.0 Library Technician 5.1 Clerk 6.6 Other 7.7 One 2-5 6 or More 58.5 22.4 14.1 40.7 38.2 19.2 36.7 28.5 28.2 38.5 33.0 19.8 42.3 23.0 22.8 Most (72 percent) of the information centers functioned as cost centers with the library costs charged to the organizational overhead. Seven percent of the libraries were cost-justified centers in which the library operates on its own budget. The remaining libraries functioned as self-sufficient or profit centers. The Library as a Cost Center Functions True Profit Center Protected Profit Center Cost Center Self-Sufficient Cost Center Cost Justified Center Reports Received (percents) 1.4 4.1 74.7 8.2 11.6 Part H Most of the respondents (82 percent) reported that their library received NASA technical reports in paper. Only 68 percent received microfiche reports. DoD technical reports were received in paper by 76 percent and in fiche by 59 percent. Sixty-five percent received AGARD technical reports in paper and 47 percent received them in fiche. NASA Technical Reports Most libraries hold the only NASA technical report collection in the organization. Only 12 percent reported that an engineering or research department or office maintained a separate collection of NASA technical reports. Thirty-four percent receive NASA reports directly from NASA and 34 percent receive them from NTIS. Thirteen percent reported receiving them from the GPO. The librarians were asked to consider why their library might discontinue automatically receiving NASA technical reports. Sixty-eight percent said subscription cost could be a factor. Another potential factor was lack of physical storage space (66 percent). Only fourteen percent said NASA technical reports duplicated other information sources and less than ten percent felt NASA reports were not timely. The librarians were asked to consider the factors that influenced the use of NASA technical reports by both the technical management personnel and the engineering and research personnel in their facility. They noted that accessibility was an influential factor in the use of the reports. Sixty-one percent said it affected use for the technical management personnel and 73 percent noted accessibility was an important factor for the engineers and researchers. Most of the other factors affected both groups of users about the same. Technical quality was seen to be the most important factor for both groups. 2

Original page 4

Factors Influencing Use of NASA Technical Reports (percents) Factor Technical/Management Engineering/Research Personnel Accessibility 61.2 Ease of Use 49.0 Expense 36.9 Familiarity 61.4 Technical Quality 65.0 Relevance 64.1 Comprehensiveness 53.5 Physical Proximity 50.0 Skill in Use 35.6 Timeliness 57.4 Personnel 72.5 58.9 34.2 65.0 73.7 66.6 60.2 53.5 50.4 56.4 The librarians also rated the reports themselves. Fifty-eight percent of the librarians rated NASA technical reports as accessible and 81 percent rated them high in technical quality. The reports were rated high by 74 percent of the librarians in relevance. The three factors rated highest by the librarians were the same as the librarians perceived influenced management personnel; technical quality, relevance and familiarity. The librarians perceived accessibility to be among the top two factors influencing the use of NASA technical reports by engineers, but they rated accessibility among the lowest three factors themselves. These results indicate the use of NASA technical reports may be reduced by inaccessibility. Rating of NASA Technical Reports by the Intermediaries (percents) Technical Quality Relevance Familiarity Expense Ease of Use Comprehensiveness Timeliness Accessibility Physical Proximity Skill in Use 80.5 74.0 67.0 62.7 61.3 61.1 57.7 57.6 53.1 50.1 Bibliographic access to NASA technical reports is extensive in most libraries. Over 90 percent provide access via author, title, subject, and report number. Eighty percent also provide corporate source access and 70 percent provide access by contract/grant number. Seventy-nine percent provide access by key words. The librarians were also asked to the reasons why they were unable to obtain a NASA technical report for a patron. (See tables at end of report for complete list.) The reason most often cited was the "library did not own the report" with 85 percent of those responding indicating it had happened at least once in the preceeding six months. Sixty percent noted they had trouble obtaining a NASA report because it was classified or restricted. NASA Information Products and Services The librarians were asked to review several statements about NASA products and indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the statements. The librarians (74 ..percent) found SCAN to have current announcements and 71 percent said SCAN was easy to use. Eighty-four percent said RECON coverage was adequate, but only 37 percent said RECON was easy to use. Sixty-seven percent found the RECON database 3

Original page 5

to be current and 52 percent said RECON searches were sufficient compared to searches of other databases. The librarians were also asked to evaluate STAR and IAA. STAR and IAA Evaluation The coverage is adequate (percents) STAR IAA 76.7 84.4 The category scheme is adequate 71.0 80.6 The announcements are adequate 62.4 70.3 The abstracts are adequate 77.4 .77.3 The librarians were also asked which NASA products they would be likely to use in an electronic format. Sixty-one percent would use NASA technical reports online and 47 percent would use NASA reports on CD- ROM. Bibliographic Tools and Electronic Services The librarians were asked to rate the importance of various indexes and bibliographic information sources. NASA STAR was rated very important by 50 percent and 74 percent found DTIC DROLS very important. Other sources ranked as very important by more than 50 percent of the librarians were: Aerospace Index, (58 percent); COMPENDEX, (66 percent); INSPEC, (55 percent); and NTIS OnLine, (65 percent.) Electronic search services are primarily done by the intermediaries. Sixty-three percent reported that all searches use intermediaries. The method of payment for these services varies according to the organization. Forty-three percent of the libraries absorbed all costs and 19 percent split the costs with the user. The user paid all costs in 21 percent of the libraries. Services Provided A variety of services are provided at most libraries. Some examples are: document order and delivery (94 percent); handouts and library guides (81 percent); locating sources (97 percent); identifying documents (97 percent); and acquiring information (97 percent.) Other widely provided services include: alerting services (63 percent); electronic ordering (62 percent) electronic reference services (78 percent); in-house STI and routing services (61 percent); database development (73 percent); and on-line catalog searching (53 percent). It is important to note that 67 percent of the librarians thought that engineering and research staffs were not aware of the available services and did not use the library as a result. Sixty-five percent of the respondents listed the personal collections of users as a competitor to the library in providing services to the engineering and research staff. Fifty-five percent reported competition from the "old boy" network. The third major competitor, marked by over half of the respondents (51 percent), wall department or project "libraries". Three-quarters noted that there were "gatekeepers" in their organization. Rating NASA as an Information Provider The intermediaries were asked to rate NASA in three categories: 1) knowledge of the technical information needs of the user 2) community, effort devoted to understanding user needs and 3) involving intermediaries in the information transfer process. NASA was rated high by 57 percent for its knowledge of the technical information needs of the user community. Fifty-one percent rated NASA high on the effort NASA devotes to understanding the technical information needs of the user community. However, only 38 percent gave NASA high grades for the effort NASA devotes to involving intermediaries in transferring the results of NASA research to the user community. 1Gatekeepers were defined as "engineers or researchers who serve as information intermediaries for their colleagues. 4

Original page 6

Part III Summary and Comparisons This portion of Phase 2 of the NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project was concerned primarily with the ratings of librarians and other information intermediaries have of STI used by aerospace engineers and scientists. Some broad patterns of similarities and differences have emerged. First, librarians and engineers use different resources to obtain information. The personal collections that the engineers and scientists go to first (see our Phase 1 report) are seen as competition by the librarians. The information specialists use the electronic and database collections more often than do the engineers and scientists. Second, the librarians want to be more actively involved in the research activities of their clients. They believe the information resources they have available are under-utilized by the researchers in the facilities where they work. They believe that researchers are not aware of all the STI resources and facilities available to them via the information centers. The engineers and scientists who responded to the Phase 1 study indicated that they explore informal information sources first, then look to formal resources themselves and finally turn to librarians and technical information specialists only when their other efforts have not proven fruitful. This indicates that the information-gathering process used by the researchers inhibits their use of the libraries and the professionals who work there. Finally, while the information specialists think NASA has a fairly good understanding of the needs of their clients, they feel NASA may not be doing enough to assist the librarians to be involved in the research process. Eighty-six percent want NASA to host a conference to help in this regard. 5

Original page 7

Page intentionally left blank

Original page 8

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THIS PROJECT Phase 1 of this project is concerned primarily with the use and rating of STI by aerospace engineers and scientists. AIAA members were asked to review several information sources and rate them and to describe the patterns they use to gather the information they need. Analysis of these data is underway. Phase 3 of this project focuses on the academic sector of the aerospace community. Questionnaires were sent to undergraduate engineering students and to faculty in aerospace-related departments. Additionally, questionnaires were sent to academic librarians in schools with aerospace programs. Each group was asked to evaluate aerospace STI and to explain how STI is used. Analysis of these data is underway. Phase 4 began in summer, 1990 with a pilot study in Europe and Japan. A study of aerospace engineers and scientists in Britain is scheduled to begin in February, 1991. Additional surveys in NATO countries and Japan are planned. If you would like additional information about this study or copies of reports that examine these data in more detail, please contact: John Kennedy Tom Pinelli Indiana University Mail Stop 180A Center for Survey Research NASA 1022 East Third Street Langley Research Center Bloomington, Indiana 47405 Hampton, VA 23665-5225 Telephone: (812) 855-2573 (804) 864-2491 FAX: (812) 855-2818 (804) 864-6131 INTERNET: kennedyj@ucs.indiana.edu BITNET: kennedA@iubacs We welcome your comments and suggestions. 7

Original page 9

NASA/DoD AEROSPACE KNOWLEDGE DIFFUSION RESEARCH PROJECT PUBLICATIONS Reports Pinelli, Thomas E.; Myron Glassman; Walter E. Oliu; and Rebecca O. Barclay. Technical Communications in Aeronautics: Results of an Exploratory Study. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA TM-101534, Report 1, Part 1. February 1989. 106 p. (Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA; 89N26772.) Pinelli, Thomas E.; Myron Glassman; Walter E. Oliu; and Rebecca O. Barclay. Technical Communications in Aeronautics: Results of an Exploratory Study. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA TM-101534, Report 1, Part 2. February 1989. 84 p. (Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA; 89N26773.) Pinelli, Thomas E.; Myron Glassman; Rebecca O. Barclay; and Walter E. Oliu. Technical Communications in Aeronautics: Results of an Exploratory Study -- An Analysis of Managers' and Nonmanagers' Responses. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA TM-101625, Report 2. August 1989. 58 p. (Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA; 90N11647.) Pinelli, Thomas E.; Myron Glassman; Rebecca O. Barclay; and Walter E. Oliu. Technical Communications in Aeronautics: Results of an Exploratory Study -- An Analysis of Profit Managers' and Nonprofit Managers' Responses. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA TM- 101626, Report 3. October 1989. 71 p. (Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA; 90N15848.) Pinelli, Thomas E.; John M. Kennedy; and Terry F. White. Summary Report to Phase 1 Respondents. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA TM-102772, Report 4. January 1991. 8 p. (Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA.) Pinelli, Thomas E.; John M. Kennedy; and Terry F. White. Summary Report to Phase 1 Respondents Including Frequency Distributions. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA TM-102773, Report 5. January 1991. 53 p. (Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA.) Pinelli, Thomas E. The Relationship Between the Use of U.S. Government Technical Reports by U.S. Aerospace Engineers and Scientists and Selected Institutional and Sociometric Variables. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA TM-102774, Report 6. January 1991. 350 p. (Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA.) Pinelli, Thomas E.; John M. Kennedy; and Terry F. White. Summary Report to Phase 2 Respondents Including Frequency Distributions. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NASA TM-104063, Report 7. March 1991. 40 p. (Available from NTIS, Springfield, VA.) 8

Original page 10

Parsers Pinelli, Thomas E.; Myron Glassman; Rebecca O. Barclay; and Walter E. Oliu. The Value of Scientific and Technical Information (STI), Its Relationship to Research and Development (R&D), and Its Use by U.S. Aerospace Engineers and Scientists. Paper 1. Paper presented at the European Forum "External Information: A Decision Tool' 19 January 1990, Strasbourg, France. Blados, Walter R.; Thomas E. Pinelli; John M. Kennedy; and Rebecca O. Barclay. External Information Sources and Aerospace R&D: The Use and Importance of Technical Reports by U.S. Aerospace Engineers and Scientists. Paper 2. Paper prepared for the 68th AGARD National Delegates Board Meeting, 29 March 1990, Toulouse, France. Kennedy, John M. and Thomas E. Pinelli. The Impact of a Sponsor Letter on Mail Survey Response Rates. Paper 3. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Lancaster, PA, May 19, 1990. Pinelli, Thomas E. and John M. Kennedy. Aerospace Librarians and Technical Information Specialists as Information Intermediaries: A Report of Phase 2 Activities of the NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. Paper 4. Paper presented at the Special Libraries Association, Aerospace Division - 81st Annual Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, June 13, 1990. Pinelli, Thomas E.; Rebecca O. Barclay; John M. Kennedy; and Myron Glassman. Technical Communications in Aerospace: An Analysis of the Practices Reported by U.S. and European Aerospace Engineers and Scientists. Paper 5. Paper presented at the International Professional Communication Conference (IPCC), Post House Hotel, Guilford, England, September 14, 1990. Pinelli, Thomas E. and John M. Kennedy. Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion in the Academic Community: A Report of Phase 3 Activities of the NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. Paper 6. Paper presented at the 1990 Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education - Engineering Libraries Division, Toronto, Canada, June 27, 1990. Pinelli, Thomas E. and John M. Kennedy. The NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project: The DoD Perspective." Paper 7. Paper presented at the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) 1990 Annual Users Training Conference, Alexandria, VA, November 1, 1990. Pinelli, Thomas E.; John M. Kennedy; and Rebecca O. Barclay. "The Role of the Information Intermediary in the Diffusion of Aerospace Knowledge." Science and Technology Libraries 11:2 (Winter) 1990: 59-76. Paper 8. 9

Original page 11

Page intentionally left blank

Original page 12

Survey of Librarians and Technical Information Specialists 156 Respondents 11

Original page 13

Page intentionally left blank

Original page 14

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS OF RESPONDENTS' ANSWERS The following tables reflect the actual number of respondents answering each question in a specific way rather than the percentages of respondents choosing an answer. For most questions, all respondents were eligible to respond. However, for some questions, only respondents answering a previous question in a specific way were eligible. In some cases, a large number of respondents did not answer a question, although eligible to do so. Most of these questions had yes-no answers and it is safe to assume that "no answer" means no or did not use the information sources. Using actual frequency of response should provide readers with a clearer picture of the meaning of the data. Question order (and in some cases, question text) has been slightly modified for ease of presentation and reader use. Any reader with particular interest in the data may contact the authors for additional information and assistance. 13

Original page 15

LIBRARY SURVEY Approximately how many times in the past six months has a NASA technical report been requested by one of your patrons but could not be obtained from your library for each of the following reasons? Your library did not own the report Your library owned the report but it was missing or could not be found The report was in a STAR category not received by your library The report was distributed in fiche only and your library receives paper copy in that STAR category The report was distributed in paper only and your library receives fiche copy in that STAR category The report was listed in STAR but was not automatically distributed by NASA The report was in a STAR category you automatically receive but you never received it The report was referenced as a NASA publication but was not in the NASA system The report was a classified, restricted, or limited distribution document The report was available only from the NASA center of origin The report was available only from the author or technical monitor Insufficient bibliographic information; did not know where or how to obtain the report More 0 1-10 11-25 26- than 100 100 12 34 15 15 6 33 29 1 3 2 37 15 4 1 0 48 3 0 0 0 49 4 0 0 0 34 16 4 2 0 42 5 1 0 0 29 25 4 1 0 26 35 3 0 1 42 12 1 0 1 42 8 1 0 1 37 25 0 0 1 Approximately how many times in the past six months did the library staff use the followingrp int sources? Do More not 0 1-10 11-25 26- than have 100 100 Applied Science and Technology Index 58 12 21 10 15 12 Engineering Index 67 5 20 9 15 14 71 13 19 3 8 10 Current Contents 55 10 22 8 19 18 Government Reports Announcement and Index International Aerospace Abstracts 62 9 22 10 9 18 64 31 18 5 2 2 NASA SP-7037 74 25 4 8 6 6 NASA SCAN 37 8 24 15 24 22 NASA STAR Science Citation Index 90 15 5 2 6 7 Approximately how many times in the past six months did the library staff use the following electronic sources? 28 10 24 19 23 28 Aerospace Database COMPENDEX 28 9 23 17 29 27 DTIC DROLS 55 11 15 10 14 23 24 12 30 17 27 22 INSPEC NASA RECON 49 20 17 10 10 16 NTIS Online 25 6 21 18 32 33 Wilson Line Index 76 25 11 4 5 5 SCISEARCH 37 19 40 10 13 11 14

Original page 16

LIBRARY SURVEY Approximately how many potential library/TIC Approximately what percentage of the potential users are there at your facility? users actually use your library/TIC? 1-100 15 1-10% 101-500 28 11-25% 501-10,000 62 26-50% More than 10,000 9 51-75% 76-100% 6 21 39 23 13 Including in-house (company) reports, Approximately what percentage of your total approximately how large is your library's/TIC'S technical report collection is NASA/NACA technical technical report collection? reports? 0-1000 21 0-5% 21 1001-10,000 30 6-10% 10 10,001-50,000 22 11-20% 14 50,001-100,000 14 21-30% 14 100,001-200,000 11 31-40% 8 200,001-750,000 15 41-50% 12 More than 750,000 12 51-80% 8 more than 80 percent 9 Approximately how many times in the past six months has your Iibrary utilised the following sources to obtain NASA technical reports not in your collection? 0 1-25 NTIS 15 47 NASA STIF 38 28 DTIC 32 32 NASA field center library 43 25 NASA author 46 21 Another library 31 39 DDS or broker 56 5 OCLC 48 18 AIAA technical library 42 19 More 26-50 51-100 than 100 11 9 14 2 2 5 3 5 9 0 0 3 0 0 3 3 0 5 0 0 4 0 0 4 2 6 7 15

Original page 17

LIBRARY SURVEY Are there any other library/Technical Information Centers at your facility? Yes No How many other libraries/TICS exist at your facility? None One Two-Five Six-Ten Over Ten 54 96 6 16 22 5 3 Do the engineering or research department(s), division(s) or office(s) maintain a NASA Technical Report collection separate from that which is kept in your library? Yes No 15 112 Which of the following best describes how your library routinely receives NASA Technical Reports? Directly from NASA From NTIS From GPO Does not routinely receive NASA Technical Reports 51 52 20 18 Which of the following best describes the use of NACA and NASA Technical Reports in your library? Heavily Used 1 2 NACA 5 7 NASA 15 35 Not Used No at All Collection 3 4 5 33 51 5 36 53 29 1 14 16

Original page 18

LIBRARY SURVEY Please indicate the total size of the library staff at all libraries/technical information centers at your facility: 0 One Administrative/Management 5 55 Librarians/Technical Information Specialist 0 50 Library Technician 5 36 Clerks 6 35 Other 2 11 Which of the following describes how your library/TIC functions? True Profit Center Protected Profit Center Cost Center Self-Sufficient Cost Center Cost-Justified Center More 2-5 6-10 11-25 than 25 21 5 7 1 47 8 7 9 28 15 6 7 30 5 5 8 6 2 3 1 2 6 109 12 17 Does your library subscribe to, automatically receive, purchase or otherwise obtain the following? Yes No NASA Technical Reports in paper 125 27 NASA Technical Reports in fiche 94 44 DoD Technical Reports in paper 109 35 DoD Technical Reports in fiche 80 56 FAA Technical Reports in paper 71 67 FAA Technical Reports in fiche 37 87 AGARD Technical Reports in paper 90 49 AGARD Technical Reports in fiche 60 69 US Aerospace Company Technical Reports 88 53 US University Technical Reports 83 52 AIAA papers in hard copy 93 50 AIAA papers in fiche 40 86 Does your library subscribe to, automatically receive, purchase or otherwise obtain the following foreign (non-US) t echnical reports? Yes No British ARC & RAE Reports 46 99 ESA Reports 45 98 French ONERA Reports 16 122 German DFVLR, DLR & MBB Reports 28 113 Japanese NAL Reports 8 128 Swedish NAL Reports 8 122 17

Original page 19

LIBRARY SURVEY Which of the following are used to provide access to your NASA Technical Report collection? Card Catalog Printed Directories (Online Public Access Catalog) OPAC (Computer Output Microfiche Catalog) COMCAT NASA RECON Other Yes No 68 33 106 12 52 37 12 61 57 31 37 106 How is bibliographic access provided to the NASA Technical Reports in your library? Author Title Report Number Subject Corporate Source Contract/Grant Number Key Words 113 13 114 9 116 10 112 11 91 22 76 32 84 23 Which of the following describes how physical access to your NASA/NACA Technical Report Collection is provided? NASA-Open NASA-Closed NASA-Individually Cataloged 84 25 43 45 70 30 NASA-Arranged by Report Numbers, by Report Series 96 14 NACA-Open NACA-Closed NACA-Individually Cataloged 61 32 41 33 41 37 NACA-Arranged by Report Numbers, by Report Series 79 14 Which of the following best characterises why your library would consider discontinuing automatically receiving NASA Technical Reports? Automatic distribution (subscription) is too costly Yes No 68 27 NASA TRs duplicate other sources of needed information 10 62 Information contained in NASA TRs is not timely Not all the reports received were useful 7 67 46 37 Problems with the distribution and receipt of NASA TRs 15 66 NASA contract/grant completed; no longer needed NASA TRs 11 60 Physical (storage) space Do not automatically receive NASA TRs 61 32 49 38 18

Original page 20

LIBRARY SURVEY To what extent do you think the following factors influence the use of NASA TRs in your library: Greatly Not By Technical/Management Personnel Influenced Influenced Accessibility Ease of Use Expense Familiarity or Experience Technical Quality or Reliability Comprehensiveness Relevance Physical Proximity Skill in Use Timeliness By the Engineering or Research Personnel Accessibility Ease of Use Expense 33 43 26 7 8 Familiarity or Experience 39 42 16 4 9 Technical Quality or Reliability 1 2 3 4 5 32 39 18 8 19 19 33 28 7 19 13 28 20 19 31 37 33 25 6 13 37 30 22 6 8 31 23 33 8 6 33 35 26 8 4 24 29 23 13 17 13 24 34 16 17 26 32 28 7 8 50 37 14 5 14 27 39 24 7 15 19 20 27 18 30 Comprehensiveness 29 36 30 4 9 Relevance 36 38 25 7 5 Physical Proximity Skill in Use Timeliness 29 32 18 17 18 15 41 27 10 18 29 29 28 8 9 19

Original page 21

LIBRARY SURVEY Which of the following best represents your library's approach to paying for online search services? Not offered User pays nothing; library absorbs costs User pays reduced cost; library absorbs some costs User pays all costs User pays all direct costs plus a fee Other 10 64 29 31 4 12 Which of the following best characterizes your library's approach to providing online (electronic) search services? Not offered Users do all searches Users do most searches Users do half themselves/half through an intermediary Users do most searches through an intermediary Users do all searches through an intermediary Other 11 1 5 6 22 93 10 How do you view your library's use of the following electronic/information technologies? We already use it We don't use it, but We don't use it, doubt Audio tapes and cassettes Motion picture films Video tapes Desktop/electronic publishing Computer cassette/cartridge tapes Electronic mail Electronic bulletin boards may in the future if we will 91 19 38 34 14 95 95 31 19 43 69 27 46 48 40 95 46 4 56 68 19 FAX or TELEX 135 11 3 Electronic databases 135 10 2 Video conferencing Teleconferencing 21 64 65 42 49 51 Micrographics and microforms 132 4 8 Laser discs/video discs/CD ROM Electronic networks 76 56 10 78 64 10 20

Original page 22

LIBRARY SURVEY How important to your library are the following print sources? Very Important 1 2 Applied Science/Technology Index 27 19 Engineering Index 31 16 Current Contents 18 11 Government Report Announcement and Index 36 17 International Aerospace Abstracts 28 16 NASA-SP-7037 8 6 NASA SCAN 14 3 NASA STAR 51 27 Science Citation Index 16 5 How important to your library are the following electronic sources? Aerospace Database 65 11 COMPENDEX 75 16 DTIC DROLS 56 2 INSPEC 64 18 NASA RECON 36 12 NTIS Online 79 18 SCISEARCH 28 23 Wilson Line Index 4 7 Not Do Not at all Have 3 4 5 6 11 17 9 61 12 7 11 66 11 9 12 79 21 6 8 60 9 14 6 70 19 16 20 68 13 11 9 88 13 8 3 43 6 8 6 97 17 10 9 32 10 7 5 32 5 4 9 65 16 12 6 26 12 8 5 64 14 6 4 26 24 22 12 33 13 7 15 90 21

Original page 23

LIBRARY SURVEY Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of the following statements concerning the following bibliographic products: Strongly Strongly About STAR. Agree Disagree 1 3 3 4 5 The coverage is adequate 42 37 18 5 1 The category scheme is adequate 37 34 23 5 1 The announcements are current 34 29 22 12 4 The abstracts are adequate 44 19 1 About LAA 35 3 The coverage is adequate 29 7 25 3 0 The category scheme is adequate 25 25 11 1 0 The announcements are current 24 21 15 4 0 The abstracts are adequate 30 21 14 1 0 About SCAN 14 12 6 2 1 The announcements are current SCAN is easy to use 13 5 0 12 5 SCAN is timely 14 12 5 3 1 The print quality is adequate 11 7 0 About RECON 29 19 7 2 0 The coverage is adequate 12 5 RECON is easy to use 11 11 14 16 7 The RECON database is current 14 13 5 23 0 Searches on RECON meet user's research 12 23 14 7 0 requirements Searches on RECON are sufficient compared to 11 6 3 searches of other databases 17 17 How likely would you be to use the following if they were provided in electronic format? Very Not at all Likely Likely 1 2 3 4 5 IAA on CD-ROM 25 12 13 18 39 STAR on CD-ROM 34 20 20 16 28 Full text of NASA reports on CD-ROM 34 23 19 16 29 Computer program listings on CD-ROM 15 10 20 21 40 19 16 18 24 30 Numerical/factual data on CD-ROM 25 17 21 20 23 Numerical/factual data online Images (photographs) on CD-ROM 20 17 18 24 33 RECON front-end 10 9 10 8 27 Online system (full text and graphics) for NASA 47 25 19 10 17 technical reports 22

Original page 24

LIBRARY SURVEY How does your library generally learn about user needs? Yes Requests Received 147 In-house Publications 60 Survey Questionnaires 45 One-on-one Interviews 129 Library Staff Meetings with 55 Research/Program Managers Which of the following services does your library provide? Alerting Services Electronic Ordering Document Order and Delivery Electronic Reference Services Handouts and Library Guides In-House SDI and Routing Services End-User Online Database Search Training NASA SCAN Stored Search on RECON for SDI Time Saving Assistance in: Locating Sources Identifying Documents Acquiring Information Expert Help in: Learning/Using Information Database Development Uploading/Downloading Remote Online Access to Library Catalog CD-ROM Work Station(s) in Library Cooperative Cost Sharing Services: Group Contract for Online Services Coordinated Access to Networks No 1 74 90 15 77 Yes No 93 54 88 55 140 9 113 32 118 27 87 55 28 114 36 104 13 118 142 5 143 4 142 4 99 37 42 102 42 97 69 72 60 79 44 92 44 94 Acquisition of Most-used Databases for Searching Online Through Corporate Computer Facilities: Aerospace Database NTIS Online Federal Research in Progress (FEDRIP) Energy Database DTIC DROLS NASA RECON 42 88 50 82 15 108 25 99 28 102 24 100 Acquisition or Development of User Friendly Front-end Systems for Searching Most Used Online Databases: Library Online Catalog Searching Gateway Searching of Multiple Databases 75 66 25 110 --I 23

Original page 25

LIBRARY SURVEY Which of the following do you see as "competition" for your library in providing services to the engineering or research staff? The "old-boy" network Personal collections Other units within the organization: Research assistants attached to projects Department or project "libraries" not a part of your library Direct user access to outside information sources: Information brokers Publishers Online vendors NASA/STIF NTIS Direct use of national computer communications networks: ARPANET Internet/NSFNET Direct use of facility network (local area network): Online access to your library catalog Online access to other facility libraries Transmission of text: Office facsimile transmission Electronic mail Manuscript preparation and delivery (electronic publishing) Database creation by users: Information collection, storage, and use Downloading data to personal files Electronic transmission of data Yes No 75 61 89 48 27 107 70 67 34 97 28 102 25 105 13 116 15 109 5 124 6 124 18 ill 18 ill 28 98 22 105 11 114 34 90 27 99 22 101 24

Original page 26

LIBRARY SURVEY Overall, how would you rate your library's information services? Funding: Excellent Poor 1 2 S 4 5 Staff Salaries 15 41 50 21 14 Materials/Equipment 45 49 31 9 8 Searching Online 7 43 45 28 20 CD-ROM 12 21 20 14 36 Innovation 20 32 43 24 20 Staffing: Staff Size 6 24 .53 30 31 Aerospace Experience 17 23 42 25 26 Science Background 15 30 44 28 17 Services to Users: Information Supplied on Request 66 59 15 3 1 Alerting 28 52 29 10 9 Turnaround Time 34 50 44 8 2 State-of-the-Art 13 41 36 25 15 Interaction with Users: User Needs Surveyed 23 39 33 21 14 User Meetings Attended 15 28 31 25 22 Orientation/Instruction 23 36 47 10 12 Which of the following statements explain why members of the engineering and/or research at do not use your library? They are not aware of the library's existence They are not aware of the services offered Library's hours not convenient Library is physically too far away Information needs met more easily elsewhere Library does not have the information they need Library too slow in getting needed information They have to pay to use the library Management discourages use of the library They have their own personal collection of information Yes No 48 78 89 43 22 104 64 65 47 79 54 73 40 88 7 118 14 112 93 37 25

Original page 27

LIBRARY SURVEY Years of library/information experience: Years in present position: 0 to 5 years 18 0 to 5 years 65 6 to 10 years 16 6 to 10 years 44 11 to 15 years 30 11 to 15 years 14 16 to 20 years 44 16 to 20 years 16 21 to 25 years 19 21 to 25 years 9 26 to 30 years 14 more than 25 years 4 more than 30 years 11 Education: Bachelor's Degree MLS Master's Degree MBA Ph.D. Other Professional (National) Library/Information Membership: ALA 39 ASEE 4 ASIS 18 SLA 93 Other 21 None 27 Gender: Female 105 Male 47 75 110 30 4 6 10 Professional (National) Technical Membership: ACM 6 AIAA 6 ASTM 6 IEEE 13 Other 16 None 83 26

Original page 28

LIBRARY SURVEY Approximately how many times in the past six months has your library provided the following services for the engineering and/or research staff? Not 26- than Have 0 1-10 11-25 100 100 Tour of the library Library presentation as part of employee orientation Library skills instruction Library presentation for members of a research project/team Engineering information resources and materials instruction Instruction for end-user searchers Do More 17 8 64 28 11 5 47 22 50 4 6 3 28 19 38 18 17 13 48 34 40 5 1 1 40 20 39 8 12 10 52 24 23 7 12 9 In performing your professional duties as an intermediary, about how many times, in this past year, have you contacted or been contacted by NASA personnel concerning transferring the results of NASA research? Contacted Contacted Zero ne L 10 -25 Lts^Many You NASA NASA You 68 97 9 6 36 8 7 1 3 1 27

Original page 29

LIBRARY SURVEY As an intermediary, how would you rate technical reports on each of the following factors? NASA Very Accessible 1 Accessibility 25 Easy to Use 1 Ease of Use 17 Skill in Use 21 Not Expensive 1 Expense 29 Very Familiar 1 Familiarity or Experience 30 Excellent 1 Technical Quality or Reliability 33 Comprehensiveness 23 Highly Relevant 1 Relevance 31 Close 1 Physical Proximity 31 Very Timely 1 Timeliness 20 Not at all Accessible 2 3 4 5 47 36 16 1 Difficult To use 2 3 4 5 48 35 3 3 35 44 8 4 Very Expensive 2 3 4 5 45 34 8 2 Not at all Familiar 2 3 4 5 47 25 12 1 Poor 2 3 4 5 58 19 3 0 43 36 5 1 Not at all Relevant 2 3 4 5 54 23 6 1 Far 2 3 4 5 29 37 12 4 Not at all Timely 2 3 4 5 36 34 5 2 28

Original page 30

LIBRARY SURVEY Should NASA sponsor a NASA Technical information users meeting similar to those held by DTIC and NTIS? Yes No What form would you prefer the meeting to take: Annual meeting held in Washington, D.C. Annual meeting held on a regional basis Meeting held in conjunction with annual national meetings Extensive 2 3 4 None As an intermediary, how would you rate your knowledge of the technical information needs of the engineering and/or research staff at your facility? As an intermediary, how would you rate NASA's knowledge of the technical information needs of your user community? As an intermediaary, how much effort does it appear that NASA devotes to understanding the technical information needs of your user community? As an intermediary, how much effort do you think NASA devotes to involving you in transferring the results of NASA research to your user community? As an intermediary, how active are you in transferring NASA produced knowledge to the engineering and/or research staff at your facility? Very 2 3 4 Very Active Passive 12 33 34 30 17 95 15 20 46 19 15 60 44 13 1 23 34 29 10 5 17 34 28 15 7 16 25 32 23 12 As an intermediary, what steps or actions, if any, do you take to "actively" transfer NASA produced knowledge to the engineering/research staff at your facility? Screening Information Interpreting data Within the past year, are you able to cite at least one specific case or incident that demonstrates how information provided (or denied) by your library made a difference to an R&D project? In your company or corporation, do you think there are "gatekeepers," engineers/researchers who served as information intermediaries for other engineers and researchers? Circled Not Circled 52 104 18 138 Yes No 78 63 97 32 29

Original page 31

30

Original page 32

^ z w o O w w 0 0 •, z N N N N N N N N N N N N ,J O O O O ai ai X L o d aW,^ ^ 5.5 5.5.5.5 5 4 ^w 0 ^ R.&0.-^^ H g .c cr ^ p ^ « o>k o q «« A A m '2 a. o. o '^ ^ 5 Q ^ Z N N N N N N f j .^ W U d o v pq 0 N w i W ^ 3 "a W ^a o g xQQ& « p ^ E 8 K xz z R ^' d d o .0 .^ O ACC yr ^'' Q« G: 0.r A 7 T? X td N N •y Y O 'd ^ v v^rn A A ^ y ddddvi d d o QQ oo O q •n k ^'a v •5 ^ >+z^ ,E C] V. zzC^Ll W W dQaS¢^Q A^ ww wC7^-".v,0 L^ ..NM I^ W w C, ^ o ^ T i o. m ^d j^ w .^ .+ 'ry N C L^ T \'(J I ^ v f ^ I I I t ^ w O M N G ^ ^ ^ a C R o .^ C i m ,^ a v? a O N > z t9e ti o •5 E °c u^"' T« o ^ .a ^ Ui ''^ .°2 v •5 5 y °^ .5 93. (1 M Oi O O 0^0 C y U G ^ NF ,^ b A O 'tl E. ^ G ^ s W b 'S v 'a ° 3 -' w .O. vOi w^ ^ w a ,U T yy ^l A 'O d s '^ q A N w > V ^ .5y ^ .0 7 O .t^7G(' '^' p aT .d :7 C v' NO N C C U CY. N ^. ^ C t0 p U C N m O ^ .Cp, 050 ^ A ° •^ ^ ^ ^^ C y O o CO ^'S C^ 8 d F c v C a^ 3 ^ k w zo ^ :E g .a 8 c°t °^ .o .^. U.0 _ C^ 'b ^x ". a a g 5 S3G U^ k U ^y J 3 °d me w^" U^ o5^ ^w ^p o TO U T d m v 'G 5 ^ ^ eo ^ 8^ d.17 4: ^ 5 °^,^ U 0 m y ^^ w 5 O ri Ili 4 ^c Vi 16 31

Original page 33

zN U Q Q ZN N N N N N N Q T ° zl u u A u z T t R N O Y^ ^}o ^p[y, .^ m ^ V V.O. w Xj U b Q a z 16 ^ w U N a U L ^ d U a°, z F U z ^, z x z ti ^ ^ 3 O CC u O V Q O Q U. z A O U d N T V J o T Q Q d ^ z ^ ^ u q y U W ^ .q yC p ,^ Q w ^ O Vj 00 T 5 c Q 5 m d T U z -01 U •^ x 00 O O y N O ^° O w w^ 0 (V M 0 N N N H o QQC qq i o z a Q ^ i ^ ^' a 3^ ,T ? d d 'J 9u 5 ¢^' ^T O N v n a v C O h N N N N 'y ,^ ^ N R '•^ d 'J L v^ Z A C C ^ .MVO U ^ a^ T O ^• p3 ^ :^7 .^ A ^ ^ _T '^7v C 'c w ^ b ,^ ^ O ^ b ppupp o0. ^ ^ .L ^ 5y^^ .' N M d .u+ i (^/1 L7 N A U y^ qy-^• O 9u 4 0 avdi ^ y U ^ h o'er aU^ d N M v v ¢ z z Z Z Q^ 0 0 ^Q 0 o0 3 „ a v d ^ ' a0': ^ o p .O. O L rn z F U >°, u Q.. z z ^' _ U ^ C O r ^ Z N N N N N qq h Q uvi ^ L M T Z ¢ O O d ep N O V 7 ^ a 'J U v yy• ^ U QQ^^!! O p M , vy^ y N N ^ N X60 i pS e^pT 5 .. ZO O m `" 'o U U U OOUZO V vi 32

Original page 34

.y ^ S •o O N N N N N N N N z d .-+ ti .-i .-+ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ C Cv 3 i h r ^ ^ a ^' p 4pL. 3^ g O ^ ^ a¢' .^ ^ •o vii a v ^ v, 5 a ^3 c^z p ^" 5"^s pp C. U ... JOor ° op V .°i A^! d w y O O G ,^ •O N N ^. .°^. $ 5 'S aS b rJ .^ A v] o T U ° ggC z z O Nu Z LC z C 0. G^ N O O C O T A 'O ^d qp G ^ w ' 3 < ° d d G :O O ^' O 5 i d °? S °c o N O ^ .aP w ^ ^% P. O, H .^ .010 ^ b ^ u .5 ^ ^, ^'' ^ v 'd o c•o •> ^• T " o v o C .0. GO .O. 00 5 a 9 a Fvi b y A a m ^° ^ . y ^ o C T :d ^ ¢ v J5 Q ^^ ^ ^..^ 3^ 3 T^ 3 T^ 0 0 0 3 .m o ° .5 g, ° '^ o O^ ti QC 300q Tq po d 0. U ^ a a ^ a z^ ^ N M M M M w0 .D V N N N N •v U WFi s o U T w C. p o ^ ^ ^ $ U o xJ ^ ^ y ° Win° 0 'T^ 'S O' omcjO OO O v^q^y U J Y'^ N O YO •d W pN a,3 C a a^ 0 .S p 5 2 'S U 'tl v] ^ 40 TQ.^ O 'S yyW^^ G O Q MO W V W U W O. O F '4 N ^ U u h .+ ^ > .3M1 b > 3 C vdi Q i o d a z z v o> d o A T N C N Z a "$ °' ^ a ^ a ;3 ^ o au ^, ^ •5 o .5 ^ a '3 .^ '$ ° O ° O 3 A ^ ,^ N oq N 5 'B vHi d d G wv q o a a 3 ^ a. 5 v ^ 3 ^ ^ ro ^ a °, ° ^ 3 •ate 3 .^ 3 c 3 :d 3^ 3^ ^ 3 ^ m o v g m ,^ d^ u z m o a "^ ,5 33

Original page 35

O ,s s =EH'0 E, W cw •o V) 0 cn - 9 , z oll 0 0 2 O .N U -Z ;3 a, 0 8 19 U z P -9 s f 15 ZA ti z ti N C4 N C-4 N y C-4 N cq C14 (q cli C-4 N -300 a o 0-0 a•no'^ —0 0 O u `o I I ^-1 -a', -, 1 OU WW SM. 0 a , g" 1,5 go cn ss 9 A ^D 10 V. C4 C-4 34

Original page 36

s o w x ,^ x a 5 s 0 E .5 U T z d E a W ° .°c u U A i ^ .p ^T ^ a .Wd a W ^ p x W^W Ca d ^ A^ O U . ^ .c u' ^' „ ^, z Ra o w q U x O N z ol o, a, o, rn a x n z ,^ a v a v v d• r ch M M M N1 M i i N N (rI N N N a^ L 0 i 5 ^ v I b °' I ^ ^ W o u b '^ •3 U i-! U ^ N W ^ x o d_ v ^ .5 ^ '^ ou .5 °' a0 •^ ° ^ ^ o'^ U U •^ ai .^ F v o, u F o vdi 'n y d U r v r^ d a v z d d O 0. z, O d a OA d U z N QQ rr^^ 4 QQ C, 3 O a C W U C^ .5 zd N a^ Ll y. ^ q ^ ^ Ca .1C ^ R^'^ ^ /p^ ^ ^ Okn ° 4=i Vt ° It a -IT M M M M N N N N T ^ T U ~ W x W U N O N •5 •erp ^ U^., p ^ b O ° O o ^ ^ ^' ^ a y3'y u^y ^"^ yb .a W y y o ^.°. 'S d^ ,^ 0°^0'S 5 "^(". F ^j ^° rl o oqf h WO y^ ai a N G ^i d R A ^ ^ as ° wx > ^"^ !•^^a od ° w2& 4L U coy W. eo .°'. a v h o •5 LR O L ^ Q h w a ° ^x 'o v L 7 M ^y N 8 N b h ^ 0. b F" L a, ' gD o j i j i A W b ^ O r ^ T F U W 9 p .ya. r ^ g° ^ b '''^ 3 '3^ ^ T F °O d ^a a 9 b C^, ^i o .^ O 7 O W Kl ^ ^ O ^ p 0. .a U ^ ^,' d N a ..d. w F ',I F7 A ... O y •q V ^i p CL' U 3 .o 14 ^ ^ E" d 3 ^ '^ cn•^ ^p5 ^ and a & <U F o Q p d W C7 z d z m L F a N 35

Original page 37

.aU O b N u 0 m O s U Oy R y W 00 N .^ w .S .V F U ^ ^Oj- 7 yy O "J h W p d d •^ d ^J' z h W •C 00 o c n J w U q t0 F ^L' y! E R N O ^' P. -S v w b •O b ^y 'O b v ^C• O x^ a d d ^^ d d N M ^ h ^O r A O N M O d o O z;^ x a ^, ^, a, z>$ x d » O ^ •^^ y M M M M M M M M M M M M M M v^ 3 v T L -0i N N N N N N N N N N N N N N T y o qO y y: ^. ^ ^ ^ ^' p W R N ^ •'^ > d O pu v F•, ^• a o o v gip+ $ v ^', •ii o. S o 0 0 0^ boa '^ o 0 0^° '° a o v d o aY ^ ^ ^ v ^ .G °/ ¢^>oui^www>F^^w M o, ^. ^. a ^ o, a, a a z4 F z r. d .s d N V V 7 V' ^ a R 7 V' V 7 <t •7 V a G U O w M M M M M M M M M M M M M m U_ C• N v .5 N a 0 N N N N 7 N N N N N N N N N N p W d O w 'J o a T W ' OO .O a °^. y CO., V n7• 0 $ w h A w o W cn y & w w a p py U O p ON ? A ^ w w N ^ 7 C W ,y TJ l7 ^ lC ^ y V " u ^jT N N id N id v a °^` a W Q o a a s a„ ^ °' w ¢ w a .. ¢ ¢ k .^ Zd a Z z ti O - x p q C V A ^1 i, 3 0 N Z^ 'V U .•^ N. M •7 vi ^o ao N 36

Original page 38

C U U _ z 0 vJ o Q. C• a 7 7 a ^ V C C a ^ oq O U N N U Q' O M M M M M M M M M ^ ,^ b 7 d ^ U o N N N N N N N N N y ^a w 0 T d fx ^ Q A a; O A .d '^ " u O o O Q yy U ti a z o z b N O T .^ F^i' b P. o b ° b qq ,JJ 5 O O C x a Oti m 0 o vvn^ i .x^• 0 O a ,^ 2 2 v z o. o ¢ o a A z ° w o 3 ^:: zl L U a .c ° .° .5 T O itl '^ ¢^ y ^.., y V U U z .U+ o a^iv d O °^' P.L P. v M M U K O p .° 3 a a -- E E E n U '^ ^ ^^ m n W U z z R' oqj .. N M .. N M . .. N M M "3 ='3 M M \OC^1 :' 3 :'3 $ 4^ rnrnrnrn Q.K rno.rnrn 4.0 o. o. a. o, ^ K o^o.a a rn op C] aC .5 v. r TN d 00 oq G] d4' A4' .T N ?'N DA h vl h Vt vl h h h h N h O A h V) V) h h Cb b Vi Q VI Q dv V] Q H Q ' '^ row 7 7 d' 7 7 d' V 7 V V V C G 'o 3 ^ o 7 7 V V V ^ ^p M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M 5 U p, N N N N N N N N N N Cl N N N N N N L. U ^N •^ ep y r t EON r y K .....--i .. C ...,...-^ .. ..-i .--i ^--i .--i ....... .., ... E 3 bQ b¢^' F In c h 0 E Z O q 00 d N C L w G C bQ ^°d h u^ d A AL' C W r^ U ^ :; ^ U N U a ^ U N d O a 3 " ^° v A ^° m > .0 °^ r^An y E ^ y y E ^ pp^ .g T ^ N T s^tl ^ V (y^, y n^a a o°n'^ ° e°oZ ° A Q^ A O N a A O w o ¢ v ^ hl r M p• •te ro a; °y ° O a O. u Td a •o^y O o°oZ^ m°G Ury C U A ^n O O ti O q tj Wa' ° o ^. v v 37

Original page 39

s N u u F O •a Fttl G zN N ('J N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ZN N Wti r ° o ,5 v 3 p i oD i .m o '^ C C 0. ^^?0 .5 M .5 a .5 a 0 T b m w p 5 O id U ^U O• i ^i^ n uT ? ^^ p o ^ y h F T w +. • v p°O o 0 d v 00 .^o^aa i sm a,y.°^ M N a won ? v 3 yo Q 5 ^ v v > o moo 0 a :Cy 3 0 $ O w - F w .5 v F 3. u 'G La oG $ °^ ° >, 'a w oo .F u° 0 .5 k °r' o . ° a^ a o a > ab F a: ^A O; F y ^^ 3 > > ^ ^ v 5 0 a ° d ° eu o ^ d ^ ^ (n v .N v °^ d .8 $ F 6 ^ Q b .^ S °d DOcY^U ^C^UO a ^d wwOZO S Va^00 yy P O Q' F ri U Q y 0 v 0 w 9 R on m 5 'O 0 F ^O 9 .q L 0> w ^' G ^ (/ O ^ a d^ ^ o ^ c E° E 0. <+ m r F N F ^ U ^ U : d FO b 5 F w F 0 a 5 ti `^ F W.0 'did S7 co E o o a° pyy ,°n r q N ^ O C F r°. 4L q^ •^ co .^ '^ •5 a ^ y a yy 'F y o P. y U G 4 u ° ^o ^ ^^A ° ^T. c. •^ 5 mo ^ .5 ¢ d F 3a, a a£ ci 5 0 d^ FaC+ can N U O O' F Q^ O ° W v zN N N N N ZN N N N N N N N N W E 5^ • N O i . E ^Ub ?q dy h M d y v 0 > .^ i o m eo 0 s w > 0 P d C ^ P.a d G ^v pp d o • p O ° V^1 ^ N A ..55 a S ^ ^ a 0 ~¢rs^^if^w7^C,SwzAO M 38

Original page 40

F 0 d z•^ rnola C\ a, C, arnrn O oC o h V1 Vl h V1 Vl Vl V'1 V'1 00 U d 4 '7 V' 7 V d' 7 V V 7 N pp Oq M M M .5 M M M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N L C O U ^ a T 3 ' x o' f ^ N : °^' b i .$ b .n K v d CM .^. T 7 op a ^ v ^ .5 ^ U a v^ m b . ti'' w a y °o •^ O 'te a a d v o'• c •5 'S ^ oO w CJO Wci^ y^ y 7^ ep p ^.: 3^ N . ^r w O F O CC^ d N O F FN Oq d .N d 4: .J d 3 T v N N N N N N N N zN '+ i O i o 3 i 3 i o C F a o ° 3 3 n o m a m .0 G 'C ^ .Z cy o F ,G, N N N N N N N N N N ,a Q Ol Ll w '. .-i .v .-+ .-. .--i .-i '^ ~ ~ ~ • N C ^ z O odO O .$ F, OO U A ^ E d C .0 'xw y K "' o'b ^^ y T O o O N u ^ ^ 3 ^ w '^ ^ ^ v v^, ^ m d W o •ai G 0 3 0 r! 5 y y y '.r".t 'J K O G FJ' .y 3 T F .-^ d v a^ ^. x^ K a o u^ d 0 0 o w W RI !2 5C .^ 3 3 y 0 3 ^n N <tl a T C ^^ 0. 'O d w K y 0 C y y O O O s d y N N '^ b>>td 0. M N Ei R ^ d d a ia^'aa"F^FF o ¢^ ^ C O o •^ z g arnO,rnrnrn 0 a N N N N N N N N d 7 V V V d' y L F y M M M M M M u U N N N Cl N N ^ p' o x ' •^ '«ppy W Q ? w i^ .5 F K '^ ^ O.0 ^ ^ b ^ ^ ^S AN ^ id .^ w^ EL "w m ct FO O tq u u w U ^' '^ 3a o ^° o 3' 'p^ v F U Lam.. F ;'O 2 . byp b ;O w : N s O T °3 T o tj a aj ,y '^ qq o d G o .5 O O O F K .-.• yUT ^r wUy yZ tyT '3 X FL ^C+'O^Vri 4L ^^ CCL P.^ N F m a d v~Oi b+p.^h^ d y N d ^ m o aw ¢ 0 as 0 a^ a y^ p p .b .a 'T 3 T x .c N •D U W ^d U y P. Cwy'0. N ^ NO V 3 ^M"i o b 7 :r:a N °..{ C. o d 5 ^ W d+ M^^^ ^ u 0 4 d ar^o ^a^^zo ^¢a"o ^U^o ow ^a^r^w b^^ua^ v O A Q Q 3 F` A w (V 39

Original page 41

o v ^ ^' W j V o •b ^ b ^ ^ u c ^ r O ^ ^ Pp ^ ^ v E" L U ^ w F y a^ O Vt ^ ^^ W z ^ s^ b y U ^ o h v d O ^ C m W y a ^ ^ o > ''7 •5 ^ k o m ^ a d C T Y .5 ^ O V U rO a O 'n O O h z z d g 15 v N^ a V O Q^ 7 U z^ N M w0 U W Q' M ^ E M ;^ M ^ z ;, ^ t z •„ c T ^, ^ v ^ o^ o0 a .5 M ^ '° U •n ^ _ gt ^ T N w v b N .O„ ^ N o O, E^ w O^ 7^ N P u O ^ 'S N E ^ E ^; ^ ^o ^] _^eA 3 ^ z N .. = = .c 0 o K 3 an d z '° o "' .. ^ 'o ^ E ^ v ^ N a y C ^x vNi F ^ ^ vii o bo O y T '^ v o o pUq ^ U W H o^ ^, •$ U $ fir. v U N T ^ U N a ,^ mA d Xd, ^ U ^ 5^ u o z M N b ^ O N d 5 ? O ^. U 5 N' C Op ^Q tab '''3 GL 1^ j 7 a N SS C T no y T O b O N .T. w ^' ^ I T @ ^ 0 z ' 'O-' .O+ .0. C ^ ^ d d 5 X ^Uli 9 1 ^ a^ $ n a 5 v v+U r,NMOOa 3 y 16 r ^ V V g qq 16 '^iv v^ 0 a v ^ 5 G F ^ y m ^ d C U ^ i N ^ y. 3 E.. ^ y a '^ a b ^^ a '^ ^ A ^ '^ Tra d y 'o 0 7 ^ OJ C W :'y .'. W .y '^ C i b zN ^ G'^ ,OWN zN 3 b'u _ o .5 ^ ^ N T •N ^ ^ m s s ^ O p T .^a' N n' J ^ Vi W o Z o d W y C ,3 Q3Ew ..NM V i1 00 of O 7 7 40

Original page 42

d U O A}$ .0 O ^, ^O O p, 'a m m ^ F i F ' W a a CO a^i o E a •a .^ c E z ' U U W >u^ y o z Q 5 0 5 o v^ b c„ z •^ O E O b N :d G N C. .d U U G is w d d o E m o a^ F O.^ N A T o ;- S N ^ p N it C N y ^ CA 4 3 s U •a v v ^ aui K o u E U z N N v O EEEP, d^7 ^. '$ d o U w^ 3 5 0 .$ o •5 obro o^ 0 d d C G C ^ o E d Z, y C ^p C C ^ C P a v o ^ y6 E O Q ¢ Q 7 7 0O N 'S .. N M U 3'a .--^ to N M V N M V V1 9 7 W O L T 9 O q N X x ^ 3 T Y. h 0. 6 L 7 ^z e e° r N ^ 3 G T ,r E cl. O x a ^ 0 O W C W R 7 •E c W ^ p G °u F 'O y ^ a a •N E •^^• x ^ u O a^ vQ K U F y $g y b O d d •" -, a w u ^ K •a a O O S xM T0 ^, •d ^ ,^ 3 0 .U+ U T C O 2 C p b C ^ 0. 3 W .. R 0 5 ^.c o¢ w .5 U ^^ z >4 ^"' w y{ wF o6 •U y •a° N T N O U N O N 0 ^^ C P ^ Ca m w A .^ d ^ .; a O c ^n ^c n oo •^ V v 10 C F ^ rj- :: [ CJ O C ^ .^ .E ^ •FL O W ol co a 6 ¢ d a o •." N M V .. N M W F L^ 41

Original page 43

NASA Report Documentation Page National Aeron=tica and Space Acffiinietrstion 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. NASA TM-104063 4. Title and Subtitle Summary Report to Phase 2 Respondents Including Frequency Distributions* 7. Author(s) Thomas E. Pinelli, John M. Kennedy, and Terry F. White 9. Performing Organization Name and Address NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA 23665-5225 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 5. Report Date March 1991 6. Performing Organization Code 8. Performing Organization Report No. 10. Work unit No. 505-90 11. Contract or Grant No. 13. Type of Report and Period Covered National Aeronautics and Space Administration Technical Memorandum Washington, DC 20546 15. Supplementary Notes 14. Sponsoring Agency Code *Report number 7 under the NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. Thomas E. Pinelli, Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia. John M. Kennedy and Terry F. White, Center for Survey Research, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana. 16. Abstract Phase 2 of the four phase NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project was undertaken to investigate the transfer of scientific and technical information (STI) from government to the aerospace industry and the role of librarians and technical information specialists in the transfer process. Data were collected through a self-administered mailback questionnaire. Libraries identified as holding substantial aerospace or aeronautical technical report collections were selected to receive the questionnaires. Within each library, the person responsible for the technical report was requested to answer the questionnaire. Questionnaires were returned from approximately 68 percent of the libraries. The respondents indicated that scientists and engineers are not aware of the services available from libraries/technical information centers and that scientists and engineers also under-utilized their services. The respondents also indicated they should be more involved in the process. 17. Key Words (Suggested by Author(s)) Knowledge diffusion Knowledge transfer NASA technical reports User study STI 18. Distribution Statement Unclassified—Unlimited Subject Category 82 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) Unclassified Unclassified NASA FORM 1626 OCT 86 21. No. of Pages 22. Price 42 A03 For sale by the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161-2171