Achenbach, K., Błaszczyńska, M., De Paoli, S., Di Donato, F., Dumouchel, S., Forbes, P., Kraker, P., & Vignoli, M. (2022). Defining discovery: Is Google Scholar a discovery platform? An essay on the need for a new approach to scholarly discovery. Open Research Europe, 2(28). https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.14318.2

Antonijević, S. (2015). Amongst digital humanists: An ethnographic study of digital knowledge production. Palgrave Macmillan.

Avison, D., & Fitzgerald, G. (2003). Information systems development: Methodologies, techniques and tools (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Baez, M., Birukou, A., Casati, F., & Marchese, M. (2010). Addressing information overload in the scientific community. IEEE Internet Computing, 14(6), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2010.107

Baker, K. S., & Karasti, H. (2018, August). Data care and its politics: Designing for local collective data management as a neglected thing. PDC 18: Proceedings of the 15th Participatory Design Conference: Full Papers, 1, Article 10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3210586.3210587

Balaji Babu, P., & Krishnamurthy, M. (2013). Library automation to resource discovery: A review of emerging challenges. The Electronic Library, 31(4), 433–451. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-11-2011-0159

Blanke, T., & Hedges, M. (2013). Scholarly primitives: Building institutional infrastructure for humanities e-Science. Future Generation Computer Systems, 29(2), 654–661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2011.06.006

Borst, T., & Limani, F. (2020). Patterns for searching data on the web across different research communities. LIBER Quarterly: The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries, 30(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10317

Bosman, J., & Kramer, B. (2015, November 11). 101 Innovations in Scholarly Communication: How researchers are getting to grip with the myriad of new tools. Impact of Social Sciences Blog, http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/70920/

Bouillard, M., Roi, A., Brunel, M., Capelli, L., De Santis, L., Dumouchel, S., Geogriadis, H., Gingold, A., Goosen, T., König, A., Maryl, M., Pacheco, A., Polydoratou, P., Rohden, J., Stojanovski, J., & Umerle, T. (2020). Triple Deliverable: D2.2 Data Harvesting Best Practices Document for Data Providers [Project deliverable]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4438651

Boukhelifa, N., Bryant, M., Bulatović, N., Čukić, I., Fekete, J. D., Knežević, M., Lehmann, D., & Thiel, C. (2018). The CENDARI infrastructure. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage (JOCCH), 11(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3092906

Bourke, T. (2022). Bibliographic control of research datasets: Reflections from the EUI library. JLIS: Italian Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science, 13(1), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.4403/jlis.it-12723

Cahoy, E. S. (2018). Leave the browser behind: Placing discovery within the user’s workflow. LIBER Quarterly: The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries, 28(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10221

Choe, K., Jung, S., Park, S., Hong, H., & Seo, J. (2021). Papers101: Supporting the discovery process in the literature review workflow for novice researchers. 2021 IEEE 14th Pacific Visualization Symposium (PacificVis), 176–180. https://doi.org/10.1109/PacificVis52677.2021.00037

Coiffait, L. (2019, March 20). Criticisms of the citation system, and Google Scholar in particular. Social Science Space. https://www.socialsciencespace.com/2019/03/criticisms-of-the-citation-system-and-google-scholar-in-particular/

Coombs, S. K., & Peters, I. (2017). The Leiden Manifesto under review: What libraries can learn from it. Digital Library Perspectives, 33(4), 324–338. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-01-2017-0004

Cooper A., Reimann, R., & Cronin, D. (2007). About face 3: The essentials of interaction design. John Wiley & Sons.

Costis, D., Chatzidiakou, N., Benardou, A., Clivaz, C., Cunningham, J., Dabek, M., Garrido, P., Gonzalez-Blanco, E., Hadalin, J., Hughes, L., Immenhauser, B., Joly, A., Kelpšienė, I., Kozak, M., Kuzman, K., Lukin, M., Marinski, I., Maryl, M., Owain, R., … Zebec, T. (2017). European survey on scholarly practices and digital needs in the arts and humanities – Highlights Report. DARIAH-EU Scholarly practices survey. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.260101

Crymble, A. (2016). Digital library search preferences amongst historians and genealogists: British History Online user survey. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 10(4). http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/10/4/000270/000270.html

De Paoli, S. (2020). Triple Deliverable: D3.1 Iteration on the User Needs [Project deliverable]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4636592

De Paoli, S., Blotière, E., Forbes, P., & Arasteh-Roodsary, S. (2022). Measuring and promoting the success of an Open Science discovery platform through “compass indicators”: The GoTriple case. Publications, 10(4), 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040049

Dogunke, S. (2020). Co-design in libraries. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 26(2–4), 243–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2020.1810081

Ehn, P. (1990). Work-oriented design of computer artifacts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Favaro, S., & Hoadley, C. (2014). The changing role of digital tools and academic libraries in scholarly workflows: A review. Nordic Journal of Information Literacy in Higher Education, 6(1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.15845/noril.v6i1.174

Giannoutakis, K. M., & Tzovaras, D. (2017). The European strategy in research infrastructures and Open Science Cloud. In L. Kalinichenko, S. O. Kuznetsov, & Y. Manolopoulos (Eds.), Data Analytics and Management in Data Intensive Domains: XVIII International Conference, DAMDID/RCDL 2016 (pp. 207–221). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57135-5

Gray, D., Brown, S., & Macanufo, J. (2010). Gamestorming: A playbook for innovators, rulebreakers, and changemakers. O’Reilly Media.

Grubert, E., & Siders, A. (2016). Benefits and applications of interdisciplinary digital tools for environmental meta-reviews and analyses. Environmental Research Letters, 11(9), Article 093001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/9/093001

Haddaway, N. R., Collins, A. M., Coughlin, D., & Kirk, S. (2015). The role of Google Scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching. PLoS One, 10(9), Article e0138237. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138237

Heers, M., Ferrez, E., & Morgan DePaula, E. (2017). Data sharing and re-use: Researcher practices, attitudes and needs - FORS survey of social science researchers in Switzerland. FORS. >https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/226980824.pdf

Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., De Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520(7548), 429–431. https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a

Ince, S., Hoadley, C., & Kirschner, P. (2022a). Collaborative technology practices in social science early career scholarly research workflows. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006221140124

Ince, S., Hoadley, C., & Kirschner, P. A. (2022b). A qualitative study of social sciences faculty research workflows. Journal of Documentation, 78(6), 1321–1337. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-08-2021-0168

Jensenius, F. R., Htun, M., Samuels, D. J., Singer, D. A., Lawrence, A., & Chwe, M. (2018). The benefits and pitfalls of Google Scholar. Political Science & Politics, 51(4), 820–824. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909651800094X

Koper, B., & Umerle, T. (2019, July 9–12). Polish literary bibliography-new research data portal for complex cultural dataset [Poster presentation]. Digital Humanities Conference 2019 Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Krämer, T., Papenmeier, A., Carevic, Z., Kern, D., & Mathiak, B. (2021). Data-seeking behaviour in the social sciences. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 22, 175–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-021-00303-0

Landhuis, E. (2016). Scientific literature: Information overload. Nature, 535(7612), 457–458. https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7612-457a

Leathem, C., & Adrian, D. (2015). Survey and analysis of basic social science and humanities research at the science academies and related research organisations of Europe. Union of the German Academies of Sciences and Humanities. https://edoc.bbaw.de/files/2331/2015_ProjectReport_SASSH_englisch_A1b.pdf

Li, S., Jiao, F., Zhang, Y., & Xu, X. (2019). Problems and changes in digital libraries in the age of big data from the perspective of user services. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 45(1), 22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.11.012

Lindberg, T., Meinel, C., & Wagner, R. (2011). Design thinking: A fruitful concept for IT development? In C. Meinel, L. Leifer, & H. Plattner (Eds.), Design thinking. Understanding Innovation (pp. 3–18). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13757-0_1

Llewellyn, A. (2019). Innovations in learning and teaching in academic libraries: A literature review. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 25(2–4), 129–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614533.2019.1678494

López-Cózar, E. D., Orduña-Malea, E., Martín-Martín, A., & Ayllón, J. M. (2017). Google Scholar: the big data bibliographic tool. In F. J. Cantú-Ortiz (Ed.), Research analytics: Boosting University productivity and competitiveness through scientometrics (pp. 59–80). CRC Press.

López-Cózar, E. D., Orduña-Malea, E., & Martín-Martín, A. (2019). Google Scholar as a data source for research assessment. In W. Glänzel, H. F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (Eds.), Springer handbook of science and technology indicators (pp. 95–127). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3

Martin, P., Remy, L., Theodoridou, M., Jeffery, K., & Zhao, Z. (2019). Mapping heterogeneous research infrastructure metadata into a unified catalogue for use in a generic virtual research environment. Future Generation Computer Systems, 101, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2019.05.076

Martín-Martín, A., Orduña-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2016). The role of ego in academic profile services: Comparing Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Mendeley, and ResearcherID.). SSRN. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2745892

Mattelmäki, T., & Visser, F. S. (2011). Lost in co-X-interpretations of co-design and co-creation [Conference paper]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5821297

Meyer, E. T., & Schroeder, R. (2023). Knowledge machines: Digital transformations of the sciences and humanities. MIT Press.

Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106, 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5

Mounier, P., Ferwerda, E., Dumouchel, S., Gatti, R., Gingold, A., Radovic, D., Smaniotto A., Stojanovski J., de Vries S., & Waaijers, L. (2018). OPERAS platforms and services white paper [Other]. Zenodo. https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.1324058

Oddone, N. E., & de França, C. M. D. (2019). Plataformas de livros acadêmicos em acesso aberto e sua representação no Twitter: Métricas de divulgação, descoberta e avaliação. Transinformação, 31. https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889201931e190011

Ovadia, S. (2014). ResearchGate and Academia.edu: Academic social networks. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 33(3), 165–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639269.2014.934093

Papenmeier, A., Krämer, T., Friedrich, T., Hienert, D., & Kern, D. (2021). Genuine information needs of social scientists looking for data. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 58(1), 292–302. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.457

, C., Codina, L., & Lopezosa, C. (2021). Language bias in the Google Scholar ranking algorithm. Future Internet, 13(2), 31. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi13020031

Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed.). MIT Press.

Spinello, A. O., Giglitto, D., & Lockley, E. (2021). Management of open access research infrastructures in large EU projects: The “CultureLabs” case. CNR-IRCrES Working Paper, 9, 1–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.23760/2421-7158.2021.009

Steen, M. (2013). Co-design as a process of joint inquiry and imagination. Design Issues, 29(2), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00207

Sun, G., Friedrich, T., Gregory, K., & Mathiak, B. (2022). Are we building the data discovery infrastructure researchers want? Comparing perspectives of support specialists and researchers. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.14655

Tattersall, A. (2019). Technology has all the answers, but we must start thinking about asking the right questions. Library Hi Tech News, 36(10), 12–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHTN-09-2019-0058

Taylor, R., Walker, J., Hettrick, S., Broadbent, P., & de Roure, D. (2022). Shaping data and software policy in the arts and humanities research community. AHRC Independent Report. https://www.ukri.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/AHRC-011122-SSIReport-ShapingDataAndSoftwarePolicyInTheArtsAndHumanities.pdf

Tenopir, C., King, D. W., Christian, L., & Volentine, R. (2015). Scholarly article seeking, reading, and use: A continuing evolution from print to electronic in the sciences and social sciences. Learned Publishing, 28(2), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1087/20150203

Thoden, K., Stiller, J., Bulatovic, N., Meiners, H. L., & Boukhelifa, N. (2017). User-centered design practices in digital humanities–experiences from dariah and cendari. ABI Technik, 37(1), 2–11. https://doi.org/10.1515/abitech-2017-0002

Unsworth, J. (2000, May 13). Scholarly primitives: What methods do humanities researchers have in common, and how might our tools reflect this [Conference presentation]. Symposium on Humanities Computing: Formal Methods, Experimental Practice, King’s College, London, United Kingdom. https://people.brandeis.edu/~unsworth/Kings.5-00/primitives.html

van der Weel, A., & Praal, F. (2020). Publishing in the Digital Humanities: The treacle of the academic tradition. In J. Edmond (Ed.), Digital technology and the practices of Humanities research (pp. 21–48). Open Book Publishers. https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0192.02

Van Zundert, J. (2012). If you build it, will we come? Large scale digital infrastructures as a dead end for digital humanities. Historical Social Research, 37(3), 165–186. https://doi.org/10.12759/hsr.37.2012.3.165-186

Venlet, J., Farrell, K. S., Kim, T., O’Dell, A. J., & Dooley, J. (2018). Descriptive metadata for web archiving: Literature review of user needs. OCLC Research. https://apo.org.au/sites/default/files/resource-files/2018-02/apo-nid132136.pdf

Wallis, J. C., Mayernik, M. S., Borgman, C. L., & Pepe, A. (2010, June). Digital libraries for scientific data discovery and reuse: From vision to practical reality. JCDL Proceedings 10 (pp. 333–340). https://doi.org/10.1145/1816123.1816173

Zide, J., Elman, B., & Shahani-Denning, C. (2014). LinkedIn and recruitment: How profiles differ across occupations. Employee Relations, 36(5), 583–604. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-07-2013-0086