This document discusses using social network analysis to understand how electronic resources are used in an academic setting. It analyzes usage data from the Gimlet system at Loyola Marymount University, which records over 11,000 reference transactions over one year. Social network analysis identified relationships between specific resources mentioned and which ones were not. This approach provides additional context beyond traditional usage metrics like COUNTER, and suggests social network analysis can offer a more complete picture of how resources are used.

1. The
“use”
of
an
electronic
resource
from
a
social
network
analysis
perspective
Marie
R.
Kennedy
David
P.
Kennedy
Loyola
Marymount
University
RAND
Corporation

2. What
is
a
“use”?
! An
access
! A
download
! A
hit
! A
search
! A
session
! A
save

3. How
is
a
“use”
counted?
! COUNTER
“successful
full-­‐text
article
requests”
! Proxy
server
“hits”
! Service
desk
transaction
data
via
Gimlet

4. COUNTER
! How
the
statistics
are
typically
gathered
! SUSHI
protocol
assists
in
retrieval
! Retrieved
to
a
system
that
houses
or
to
single
files
stored
locally

5. “Both
Project
COUNTER
(Counting
Online
Usage
of
NeTworked
Electronic
Resources)
and
the
Standardized
Usage
Statistics
Harvesting
Initiative
(SUSHI)
of
the
National
Information
Standards
Organization
(NISO)
lack
a
definition
for
a
usage.”
(p.
8
Grogg
and
Fleming-­‐May).

6. Proxy
server
! How
the
statistics
are
typically
gathered
! Typically
a
manual
process
! Single
files
stored
locally

7. Gimlet
! From
hash
marks
on
a
piece
of
scrap
paper,
service
point
transactions
are
now
entered
into
this
commercial
system
! customizable

8. Gimlet
at
LMU
! Manually
entered:
! Initials
! Where
the
transaction
took
place
! Duration
of
the
transaction
! Format
of
the
transaction
! Questioner
! Question
Type
! Difficulty
! Question
asked
! Answer
! Tags

9. Gimlet
at
LMU
! Automatically
entered:
! Date
! Day
of
the
week
! Time

11. Guiding
question
Can
a
social
network
analysis
of
“usage”
contribute
to
a
deeper
understanding
of
the
use
of
electronic
resources
in
an
academic
setting?

12. Methods
! Describe
and
compare
3
kinds
of
measurements
of
electronic
resource
usage
! June
1,
2011-­‐May
31,
2012

13. COUNTER

14. Proxy
server

17. Social
Network
Analysis
! Data
extracted
from
Gimlet
! 11,444
total
service
point
interactions
! 4,024
tagged
as
reference
interactions
! 1,548
of
the
reference
interactions
mention
an
electronic
resource
! Universe
of
electronic
resources
at
LMU
! 194
entries
(58%)
on
the
Research
Databases
page
not
mentioned
once
during
the
year
analyzed
! 137
of
331
resources
mentioned

18. Social
Network
Analysis
! New
data
set
created
! 1,548
of
the
reference
interactions
mention
an
electronic
resource
! Listed
the
resource
mentioned
and
counted
each
time
it
was
suggested
! Analyzed
and
visualized
using
Ucinet,
Netdraw

20. Science
Direct
JSTOR
SAGE
Journals
Online
Staff
1
0
4
1
Staff
2
0
1
0
Staff
3
2
0
1
Ucinet
Netdraw
Sample
data
matrix

21. The
universe
of
electronic
resources
and
Information
Desk
staff

22. Electronic
resources
and
Information
Desk
staff,
by
color/shape

25. Benefits
of
using
SNA
! We
are
provided
new
views
of
the
use
of
electronic
resources,
especially
the
social
component.
! We
can
see
which
resources
were
not
suggested
over
the
course
of
one
year.
! We
have
evidence
that
e-­‐resources
are
suggested
and
used
in
concert;
there
are
central
resources
that
are
mentioned
together,
instead
of
a
single
e-­‐
resource
resolving
an
information
need.

26. Type
of
coun+ng
mechanism
Top
5
resources,
from
highest
to
lowest
COUNTER
JSTOR
Academic
Search
Complete
OmniFile
Full
Text
Mega
(H.W.
Wilson)
Science
Direct
SAGE
Journals
Online
proxy
server
ProQuest
EBSCO
LexisNexis
JSTOR
SAGE
Journals
Online
Gimlet
Academic
Search
Complete
JSTOR
Business
Source
Complete
ERIC
ATLA

27. Type
of
coun+ng
mechanism
Top
5
resources,
from
highest
to
lowest
COUNTER
JSTOR
Academic
Search
Complete
OmniFile
Full
Text
Mega
(H.W.
Wilson)
Science
Direct
SAGE
Journals
Online
proxy
server
ProQuest
EBSCO
LexisNexis
JSTOR
SAGE
Journals
Online
Gimlet
Academic
Search
Complete
JSTOR
Business
Source
Complete
ERIC
ATLA

28. Future
research
! Further
analysis
on
existing
data
set
! Kinds
of
e-­‐resources
suggested
to
kinds
of
patrons
! Kinds
of
reference
desk
staff
suggest
which
kinds
of
e-­‐resources
! Expand
data
set
to
include
more
years
of
data
! Develop
e-­‐resource
marketing
plan
and
look
at
resulting
3
kinds
of
usage
data

29. Summary
We
find
that
the
perspective
gained
from
social
network
analysis
provides
a
context-­‐aware
component
that
provides
a
fuller
picture
of
the
“use”
of
electronic
resources.

30. Contact
us
Marie
R.
Kennedy
marie.kennedy@lmu.edu
David
P.
Kennedy
davidk@rand.org
This
presentation
is
supported
by
a
Research
Incentive
Grant
from
the
William
H.
Hannon
Library
at
LMU

31. Bibliography
! Bates,
Marcia.
1989.
The
Design
of
Browsing
and
Berrypicking
Techniques
for
the
Online
Search
Interface.
Online
Review,
13(5):
407-­‐424.
! Borgatti,
S.P.
2002.
Netdraw
Network
Visualization.
Harvard:
Analytic
Technologies.
! Borgatti,
S.P.,
Everett,
M.G.
and
Freeman,
L.C.
2002.
Ucinet
for
Windows:
Software
for
Social
Network
Analysis.
Harvard:
Analytic
Technologies.
! Dervin,
Brenda.
1977.
Useful
Theory
for
Librarianship:
Communication,
Not
Information.
Drexel
Library
Quarterly,
13(3):
16-­‐32.
! Fleming-­‐May,
R.
A.,
&
Grogg,
J.
E.
(2010a).
Assessing
Use
and
Usage:
The
Imperative
(the
concept
of
electronic
resource
usage
and
libraries).
Library
Technology
Reports,
46(6):
5–10.
! Haythornthwaite,
Caroline.
1996.
Social
Network
Analysis:
An
Approach
and
Technique
for
the
Study
of
Information
Exchange.
LISR,
18:
323-­‐342.
! Kulthau,
Carol.
1993.
A
Principle
of
Uncertainty
for
Information
Seeking.
Journal
of
Documentation,
49(4):
339-­‐355.
! Luther,
J.
(2001).
White
Paper
on
Electronic
Journal
Usage
Statistics.
The
Serials
Librarian,
41(2),
119–148.
! National
Information
Standards
Organization,
The
Standardized
Usage
Statistics
Harvesting
Initiative
(SUSHI)
Protocol,
ANSI/NISO
Z39.93-­‐2013
(Baltimore,
MD:
NISO,
2013).
! Peters,
Thomas
A.
2002.
What’s
the
Use?
The
Value
of
E-­‐resources
Usage
Statistics.
New
Library
World,
103(1172/1173):
39-­‐47.
! Talja,
Sanna.
2002.
Information
Sharing
in
Academic
Communities:
Types
and
Levels
of
Collaboration
in
Information
Seeking
and
Use.
New
Review
of
Information
Behaviour
Research,
3:
143-­‐160.
! Tucker,
Cory.
2009.
Benchmarking
Usage
Statistics
in
Collection
Management
Decisions
for
Serials.
Journal
of
Electronic
Resources
Librarianship,
21:
48-­‐61.
doi:
10.1080/19411260902858581
! Zheng,
Yanlin,
and
Yoneo
Yano.
2006.
A
framework
of
context-­‐awareness
support
for
peer
recommendation
in
the
e-­‐learning
context.
British
Journal
of
Educational
Technology,
38(2):
197-­‐210.
doi:
10.1111/j.1467-­‐8535.2006.00584.x