Examining Energy Information Literacy with an Adaptation of the Everyday Health Information Literacy Screening Tool
Communications in Computer and Information Science, ISSN: 1865-0929, Vol: 810, Page: 470-480
2018
- 1Citations
- 14Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Conference Paper Description
This study explores energy information literacy by applying an adapted version of an everyday health information literacy (EHIL) screening tool. For this study, the original EHIL tool was modified by adjusting its ten statements to an energy context. Data were collected with an online survey from students present for the academic year in 2016–2017 (n = 11,381) at the University of Oulu. Statistical analyses include an exploratory factor analysis and comparison of mean factor scores. Survey items on respondents’ background were also included in the analyses. The response rate was 12.2% (n = 1,390). The screening tool’s factorial structure was found to be multifaceted and to resemble that of the original EHIL tool with three factors: motivation (‘motivation’), confidence in finding energy information (‘confidence’), and perceived ability to evaluate it (‘evaluation’). Mean factor scores varied by gender and field of study. The study is among the first to examine energy information literacy.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85041707439&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74334-9_49; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-74334-9_49; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-319-74334-9_49; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74334-9_49; https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-74334-9_49
Springer Nature
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know