Survey of reader preferences concerning the format of NASA langley-authored technical reports
The U.S. government technical report is a primary means by which the results of federally funded research and development (R&D) are transferred to the U.S. aerospace industry. However, little is known about this information product in terms of its actual use, importance, and value in the transfe...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Publishing research quarterly 1997-06, Vol.13 (2), p.48-68 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The U.S. government technical report is a primary means by which the results of federally funded research and development (R&D) are transferred to the U.S. aerospace industry. However, little is known about this information product in terms of its actual use, importance, and value in the transfer of federally funded R&D. Little is also known about the intermediary-based system that is used to transfer the results of federally funded R&D to the U.S. aerospace industry. To help establish a body of knowledge, the U.S. government technical report is being investigated as part of the NASA/DoD Aerospace Knowledge Diffusion Research Project. In this article, we summarize the literature on the U.S. government technical report and present the results of a survey of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists that solicited their opinions concerning the format of NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC)-authored technical reports. To learn more about the preferences of U.S. aerospace engineers and scientists concerning the format of NASA LaRC-authored technical reports, we surveyed 133 report producers (i.e., authors) and 137 report users in March-April 1996. Questions covered such topics as: (a) the order in which report components are read; (b) components used to determine if a report would be read; (c) those components that could be deleted; (d) the placement of such components as the symbols list; (e) the desirability of a table of contents; (f) the format of reference citations; (g) column layout and right margin treatment; and (h) writing style in terms of person and voice. Mail (self-reported) surveys were used to collect the data. The response rates for report producers (i.e., authors) was 68% and for users, was 62%.[PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1053-8801 1936-4792 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s12109-997-0018-8 |