The quantitative analysis of difference between Chinese and German libraries subject services

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to study the difference of subject service between Chinese and German libraries. Subject service is the key direction of user-oriented service in libraries at home and abroad, especially in university libraries. It is an innovative measure to provide service for teaching, learning and research in libraries under the information environment. Subject service has strong practicality, and with the increasing demand of users and the continuous change of external information environment, the service content and mode are gradually improved.Design/methodology/approachBy investigating the selected websites of University Libraries between China and Germany, the specific practice status of subject services between these two countries was known, and the study provided a basis for the comparative analysis of the practice status of subject services between China and Germany. By using the elastic analysis model, the library services in foreign countries and China can be quantitatively analyzed to find out the matching situation between resources and reader’s needs, and then formulate the countermeasures for the allocation of literature resources. In this way, readers can find out the hotspot topics which are more in line with their needs, as well as in the field of inquiry. It is also helpful for readers to further study and analyze the knowledge background and subject distribution in this field.FindingsThe results show that there are still some deficiencies in China’s participation in international scientific research cooperation. By mapping high-frequency keyword co-occurrence network and clustering knowledge map, it is seen that there are differences in user research, information search, subject service platform and other aspects between Chinese and German library subject services. There are also some gaps in such aspects as location, disciplines service website revealing mode, resources support, disciplines service platform and so on.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough this study compares the status of scientific research and practice of discipline services between China and Germany, due to the limited capacity, the paper only selects a number of key points for comparative analysis of discipline services at home and abroad. Due to the limited range of data collected by WOS and Chinese Social Sciences Index, there are some deviations in data processing in the software used, which makes the theoretical research and comparison results have certain limitations.Practical implicationsBy investigating and analyzing the current situation of subject service in university libraries between China and Germany, this paper points out the shortcomings of subject service in university libraries in China on the basis of comparative analysis and draws on the advanced experience of German subject service to provide guidance for improving the problems in subject service in China.Originality/valueThe innovation of this study lies in the comparative analysis of Chinese and German subject services from the perspective of subject service research and work practice and puts forward some strategies to improve the development of domestic subject services. At present, there are few domestic literatures comparing the research status of subject services between China and Germany by using visualization method. This study quantitatively compares the time distribution, knowledge evolution direction, research hotspots and topics of subject services at home and abroad by using visualization technology and summarizes the evolution direction of subject services between China and Germany.