Course instructor perceptions of computer‐generated bibliographic citations

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate course instructor perceptions into personal and classroom use of computer‐generated bibliographic citations. The paper aims to provide guidance as librarians promote and teach automated citation services to the academic communities. Design/methodology/approach Course instructors at one university completed a quantitative survey about computer‐generated bibliographic citations. Questions focused on instructor use of automated citation services, if they generally reduce grades for bibliographic errors, if they would reduce grades for specific computer‐generated citation (CGC) errors, and would they advise students to use automated citation services at various course levels. Findings The results show a majority of course instructors do not use CGCs for their own research or promote the citation services in the classroom. A majority of respondents generally reduce student grades for bibliographic errors and would continue to do so for CGC errors. The data show specific types of automatically generated citation errors are more detrimental to student grades than others. Furthermore, results indicate course level impacts instructor promotion of CGCs. Practical implications The results provide librarians with helpful data, from the course instructor perspective, as they promote and teach computer‐generated bibliographic citations. Originality/value Literature on computer‐generated bibliographic citations tends to focus on technical and comparative aspects of citation services, or users' product opinions. This paper explores course instructor use, course promotion, and bibliographic grading of automatically generated citations to enhance advocacy and instruction of these services.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.