{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015696533682145193, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.348547717842323, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Student Perspective on e-Resource Discovery: Has the Google Factor Changed Publisher Platform Searching Forever?

The literature shows that students are more likely to begin their search via Google, as it is perceived to be easier and more accessible than other databases or publisher platforms. The invisible web, specifically publisher platforms, is sometimes too difficult for students to access; there are also suggestions that Google Scholar in particular may outperform other paid-for databases. The ease of access and the somewhat misguided notion that Google Scholar has more reliable information than that provided by libraries makes search engines all the more attractive. This culture of searching using a single search box is reflected in the increase in the number of libraries opting for single resource discovery systems such as Summon or Primo, which use a single search covering all the library holdings. The findings suggest that whilst Google Scholar can perform well in some circumstances, it performed only moderately well when compared with LISTA and Summon – the single resource discovery system tested. It was the least successful resource in terms of precision when compared with LISTA, Summon, Emerald and Sage. However, the simplicity of search engines begs the question: will databases and publisher platforms become obsolete? The study concludes that subject specific databases are more effective than search engines, but the complexity of accessing the invisible web is hindering their popularity.