The massive expansion of electronic resources has been identified as one of the major drivers behind the ‘explosion’ in the popularity of family history, which bring ease, convenience and accessibility to some parts of the research process. Amongst this expanse of easily-accessible raw materials, online local studies materials (recording both historical and contemporary aspects of a community) can add real context and value to researchers’ findings and experience; turning a genealogy into a family history. However, the vast majority of these do not appear visible to online family history researchers. Through three central foci (users, e-family history resources, and Local Studies Collections), this research investigates these resources and collections from the perspective of users, to establish how to make the added value of the local studies collections more visible and encourage increased engagement for those who cannot visit collections in person. Specific evaluative criteria for e-family history resources are presented, contributing to practitioners’ awareness and understanding of their nature; in turn helping maintain their service quality to researchers. Using a hybrid (primarily ethnographic) research approach, the study also examines the online research behaviour of family historians, identifying a taxonomy of actions (seeking of genealogical facts, local or social history; communicating with other researchers or resources; locating resources or instructive information; managing own information), strategies (search modifications and incorporation of background knowledge) and outcomes (outcome; direction (projected and actual)). From these categories, a model of Family Historians’ online information seeking has been developed. Researchers have both informational and affective needs, and are highly emotionally attached to the research process. Users universally used Ancestry, FamilySearch, ScotlandsPeople, and Genes Reunited far more than other sites, seeking out quality informational content and unique records, which must be successful for researchers. Google was a major method of access to these. Very few participants were preaware of ‘e-local studies’ websites, and were surprised by the variations in quality, inconsistencies in terminology and navigation, and invisibility of quality content. Despite a lack of ease of use, the content present on e-local studies sites and their usefulness and value had been demonstrated to researchers. This suggests significant demand for local information of this kind online where it is available and made known.

Diese Dissertation aus der Sparte der Reflexiven Bibliometrie erforscht die Rückwirkungen der Verwendung von quantitativen Indikatoren in der Wissenschaftsevaluation auf die Wissensproduktion und Forschungsqualität in der Astronomie. Eine qualitative Analyse der strukturellen Bedingungen der akamdeischen Astronomie anhand des Rational Choice Frameworks führen zur Beobachtung eines "Evaluation Gap" zwischen dem, was Indikatoren messen und dem, was Forscher unter Forschungsqualität verstehen. Die Analyse offenbart weiters einen Balanceakt, in dem Astronomen zwischen Publikationsdruck und Forschungsintegrität Kompromisse finden. Weiterführende quantitative Untersuchungen unter Einbezug von Organisational Culture Theories und Self-Determination Theory zeigen, dass kontrollierte Formen von Motivation zu einem erhöhten Publikationsdruck und wissenschaftlichem Fehlverhalten führen, während autonome Formen von Motivation das Gegenteil bewirken. Schließlich skizziert die Arbeit Wege zur Transformation der Forschungskultur hin zu mehr Vielfalt und Partizipation, einschließlich der Einführung offener Wissensmanagement-Infrastrukturen und kontinuierlicher, reflexiver Evaluationsprozesse. / This dissertation from the field of Reflexive Bibliometrics, investigates the constitutive effects of utilizing quantitative metrics in research evaluation on knowledge production and research quality in astronomy. Embedded in the Rational Choice Framework to analyze the structural conditions within academic astronomy, a qualitative analysis reveals an "Evaluation Gap" between what metrics measure and researchers' perceptions of research quality. Furthermore, the analysis unveils a balancing act where astronomers navigate compromises between publication pressures and research integrity. Subsequent quantitative analyses, incorporating Organizational Culture Theories and Self-Determination Theory, demonstrate that controlled forms of motivation exacerbate publication pressure and scientific misconduct, while autonomous motivations yield contrasting effects. Lastly, the study outlines pathways towards transforming research culture towards greater diversity and participation, including the adoption of open knowledge management infrastructures and continuous, reflexive evaluation processes.