References
- Banks, R. A. (2006). Decision-making factors related to bibliographic database cancellation. Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian, 25(1), 93–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J103v25n01_04
- Blecic, D. D., Wiberley, S. E., Fiscella, J. B., Bahnmaier-Blaszczak, S., & Lowery, R. (2013). Deal or no deal? Evaluating Big Deals and their journals. College & Research Libraries, 74(2), 178–194. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl-300
- Blessinger, K., & Olle, M. (2003). Comparison of three primary aggregator databases. The Serials Librarian, 45(1), 53–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J123v45n01_06
- Bucknell, T. (2012). Garbage in, gospel out: Twelve reasons why librarians should not accept cost-per-download figures at face value. Serials Librarian, 63(2), 192–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2012.680687
- California Community College Libraries. (2004). CCL-EAR committee review of ProQuest bundle. Retrieved from http://www.cclibraries.org/reviews/Documents/ear_rev_proquestbundle.pdf
- Cambridge Information Group. (n.d.). Timeline. Retrieved from http://www.cambridgeinformationgroup.com/timeline.html
- Conger, J., & Reidenbaugh, P. (2002). The GALILEO comparison of EBSCOhost and ProQuest product suites. Georgia Library Quarterly, 39(1), 11–17.
- Dawson, D. (2014). Breaking-up is hard to do: A unique methodology for unbundling a “Big Deal.” Retrieved from http://ecommons.usask.ca/handle/10388/6472
- Duong, K., Perruso, C., & Ramachandran, H. (2013). Content overlap and replacement cost analyses: Tools to evaluate Abstracting/Indexing (A&I) and full-text databases in science and engineering. Science & Technology Libraries, 32(1), 84–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2012.758461
- Duy, J., & Vaughan, L. (2003). Usage data for electronic resources: A comparison between locally collected and vendor-provided statistics. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 29(1), 16–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0099–1333(02)00400–7
- Garczynski, J. (2011). Making the cut: Do faculty want to be involved in library database cancellations? Practical Academic Librarianship: The International Journal of the SLA, 1(1), 16–27.
- Glasser, S. (2013). Judging big deals: Challenges, outcomes, and advice. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 25(4), 263–276. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2013.847672
- Jones, M. A., Marshall, D., & Purtee, S. A. (2013). “Big Deal” deconstruction. Serials Librarian, 64(1–4), 137–140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2013.760389
- Kumar, H. A., & Dora, M. (2013). Evaluating e-resource collections in a business school library: A comparative study of aggregator packages at Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad library. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 18(2), 100–118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08963568.2013.768875
- Moore, K., & Duggan, L. (2011). Transparency and publisher pricing models. Serials Librarian, 60(1–4), 98–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2011.556446
- Nabe, J., & Fowler, D. C. (2012). Leaving the “Big Deal”: Consequences and next steps. Serials Librarian, 62(1–4), 59–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2012.652524
- Pickett, C. (2011). Eliminating administrative churn: The “Big Deal” and database subscriptions. Serials Review, 37(4), 258–261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.serrev.2011.08.001
- ProQuest. (n.d.). History & milestones. Retrieved from http://www.proquest.com/about/history-milestones/
- Shapiro, S. (2012). Database cancellation: The “hows” and “whys.” Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 24(2), 154–156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1941126X.2012.684564
- Silver, S., & Gallagher-Starr, S. (2010). Analyzing value: EBSCO and Gale. OLA Quarterly, 16(2), 22–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.7710/1093–7374.1283
- Sutton, S. (2013). A model for electronic resources value assessment. Serials Librarian, 64(1–4), 245–253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2013.760417
- vanDuinkerken, W., Smith, J., Harrell, J., Reynolds, L. J., Tucker, S., & Carrigan, E. (2008). Creating a flexible fund structure to meet the needs and goals of the library and its users. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 32(3), 142–149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lcats.2009.01.001