میترا سمیعی

The present research has been done with a view to identifying gamification components in association with users' experience in the services of digital libraries. Typically, the research method has been a developmental and systematic review, and essentially an analytic one. The data collection was carried out based on three major components: gamification, user experience, and digital library services. 164 resources related to the three components have been found. After filtering the resources in three phases, 12 resources in the first phase and 41 resources in the second phase were omitted and the remainder exactly 37 resources which were more closely related to the gamification components in the interaction with the user`s experience of digital library services, were identified, ranked and analyzed. The Findings show that gamification elements for digital library services include: certificate, achievement, membership law, ranking, digital products, signs, status and position, money, lottery, the Boss game, reward, present, feedback, navigation pages, Avatar, score, badges, narratives, prizes and badges collections and finally the results arising from the investigation of these components and analysis of the conceptual connection among them, show that the use of gamification elements for any digital library services develop the components “dynamism” and “gamification stimulants” such as competitiveness, attractiveness, excitement, hopefulness, challenge, victory and, etc in the users and that ultimately leads to the utilization of digital library services and user`s satisfaction.

Purpose: The present research has been done with a view to evaluation and ranking of production and management of digital resources in the supply chain of digital libraries. Methodology: The present research is essentially an applied one and the method employed, has been descriptive survey based on Shanon Entropy and Fuzzy TOPSIS methods. Findings: According to our findings, the risks of “Collection development strategy of digital resources” with highest rate of Proximity Coefficient(PC)=%731 stand in the first place and then the other ones in order include: risks of “Management strategy of digital resources at libraries” with PC=%7186, “The high cost of technological changes of information carriers and storage formats” with PC=711 and “Competence of library software in detecting repetitious copies” with PC=%651. Conclusion: 26 risks for production and management of digital resources in the supply chain of digital libraries have been identified and amidst production and management risks of digital resources in the supply chain of digital libraries the risk of” Collection development strategy of digital resources” stands in the first place.

Purpose: The present paper aims at identifying and extracting the dimensions, components, and criteria of digital library evaluation based on experts` opinions and the 5S conceptual framework of Goncalves.Methodology: This was an applied, documentary, and survey research making the best use of the fuzzy Delphi method (to extract criteria and develop the conceptual model), forming a trinity in methodology. To refine the components, and criteria, 20 Iranian and foreign experts were polled about digital libraries in 3 stages. The results of each stage were refined based on Minkowski formula. This was an applied research since it presented the evaluation criteria of Iranian digital libraries, and its results can be practically used, enabling digital libraries to evaluate and examine their status quo, and accordingly plan and enhance their activities. It was a descriptive study based on the research design and data collection method. To gather the data, three methods were used: documentary study, fuzzy Delphi (to extract criteria and develop the conceptual model), and survey, creating a trinity in methodology. Findings: During the three stages of the experts` poll, in Stream component 4 criteria, Structure component 4, Space component 4, Scenario component 5 and in societies component 3 ones were refined and also the results of each stage were refined using the formulas of Cheng and Lin model and ultimately the experts agreed with each other on 20 criteria. Conclusion: A digital library evaluation model was designed with 5 dimensions (components), 20 criteria, and 50 sub-criteria. It was offered to all organizations and universities as an evaluation model for digital library performance examination, so that they properly perceive the efficiency and effectiveness of digital libraries and their services.

Purpose: This research aimed to identify and evaluate the risks of content production in the governmental digital libraries of Tehran.Method: In terms of essence, this research is synthetic (library studies, qualitative and quantitative), and regarding purpose, it is an applied one.  In the first part, using the studies of the research literature, a set of indicators related to the risks of content production in the governmental libraries of Tehran was obtained. The second part of this research involved a fuzzy Delphi approach that was conducted at two stages among 20 experts. In this stage, a researcher-made questionnaire based on the indicators obtained from the first stage was used. The third part of the research was a survey-analysis conducted with a quantitative method using a questionnaire made out based on the results of qualitative stage with three criteria: the probability of occurrence, effect intensity, and the inability of organization to respond and was distributed among 100 managers and experts of governmental digital libraries in Tehran.Findings: In this research, the risks of content production were identified and fell into nine major categories (human force, environmental factors, infrastructure, protection and maintenance,  creators`  technical rights, integration, content evaluation of sources and authors and information security).Conclusion: The results of this evaluation show that digital libraries are not exactly at their best level when it comes to their responses to the risk of human resources, authors' rights, and integration risks.