Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

Discovery study detailed results 20140728

3.885 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Levine-Clark, Michael, John McDonald, and Jason Price. Discovery or Displacement? A Large-Scale Longitudinal Study of the Effect of Discovery Systems on Online Journal Usage. July 23, 2014.

Veröffentlicht in: Bildung
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

Discovery study detailed results 20140728

  1. 1. Discovery or Displacement? A Large-Scale Longitudinal Study of the Effect of Discovery Systems on Online Journal Usage July 23, 2014 Michael Levine-Clark, University of Denver John McDonald, University of Southern California Jason Price, SCELC Consortium
  2. 2. Why Do We Use Discovery Services? • Too many sources of information – Specialized – Confusing – What’s the right specialized database for my subject? • Why do you search in one place for an article, another place for a different article, another for a book?
  3. 3. Terminology Discovery Tool = Discovery Layer = Discovery Service = Discovery System
  4. 4. Web-scale discovery services • Single source for finding information – Books – Articles – Local content • Metadata and/or full text • Content is pre-indexed and/or pre-harvested • Single fast search ILS Publisher Metadata MLA Bibliograph y Institutional Repository HathiTrust Discovery Service
  5. 5. Does implementation of a discovery service impact usage of publisher-hosted journal content?
  6. 6. What did we measure? • Whether there is an effect • NOT why that effect exists (that’s a future study!)
  7. 7. Publisher-hosted journals are only part of the picture eBooks, pBooks, newspaper articles, aggregator journal content, etc. publisher journal content The six publishers in this study
  8. 8. Journals Traffic Sources 52.3 12.4 32.5 2.8 1 Open web search Library referrals Social media Academic N/A (SAGE, Conrad ALPSP 2013)
  9. 9. An assumption • At any given institution, given a relatively stable user base, the total search effort will remain roughly the same.
  10. 10. Discovery services  Will take up an increasing amount of a finite time for searching  Will draw users from other (more or less efficient) search tools  Will alter the overall productivity of searches (users will find more or less)  Will alter the overall efficiency of users (users will access more or less full-text)
  11. 11. • 33 Libraries Dataset – 28 US, 2 CA, 1 each from UK, AUS, NZ – WorldCat book holdings > Average: 1,114,193 ; Range: ~300k to ~2.6mil – 4 discovery groups, of 6 libraries each – 1 control group, 9 libraries • Implementation dates (Discovery Libraries): > 2010 (3), 2011 (19), 2012 (2) • 6 Publishers • 9,206 Journals • 163,545 Usable Observations
  12. 12. Methodology Compared COUNTER JR1 total full text article views for the 12 months before vs 12 months after implementation date Start June 2010 Implementation May 2011 May 2012 End Year 1 Year 2 Included implementation month in Year 1 to ensure that both periods included an entire academic year
  13. 13. Examine Data for Outliers
  14. 14. Analyzing Usage Change: % vs Total Use 12 months before Use 12 months after % Change Total Change Journal A 500 600 20% 100 Journal B 5 15 200% 10 Which is the better measure? Is it the same for publisher- & journal-level data?
  15. 15. Observations by Publisher
  16. 16. Journals by Library & Service EDS Primo Summon WorldCat Control
  17. 17. Average Journal Usage by Library
  18. 18. Testable Effects • Discovery Tool – Implemented by multiple libraries – Used to find content from all publishers • Publisher – Accessible in all discovery tools – Accessible across multiple libraries • Library – Uses content from multiple publishers – Uses only one discovery tool (so only within DT)
  19. 19. Full Model Including Discovery Service, Publisher, and Library Including Discovery Service, Publisher, and Library
  20. 20. Nested ANOVA Model Results
  21. 21. How does usage change differ across discovery services? Letters indicate statistically significant differences (Tukey multiple comparisons, p < .05) A C D B B
  22. 22. How does usage change differ across publishers? Letters indicate statistically significant differences (Tukey multiple comparisons, p < .01) C Publisher (sorted by Mean Change) D B B B A
  23. 23. How does usage change differ across publishers?
  24. 24. Does usage change vary across libraries? Institution (sorted by Mean Change)
  25. 25. Usage Change Per Institution: All Journals Control EDS Primo Summon WCL
  26. 26. 6.32 Usage Change By Institution: Pub 1 Control EDS Primo Summon WCL
  27. 27. Usage Change By Institution: Pub 2 Control EDS Primo Summon WCL
  28. 28. Usage Change By Institution: Pub 3 Control EDS Primo Summon WCL
  29. 29. Usage Change By Institution: Pub 4 Control EDS Primo Summon WCL
  30. 30. Usage Change Per Institution: Pub 5 Control EDS Primo Summon WCL
  31. 31. Usage Change by Institution: Pub 6 Control EDS Primo Summon WCL
  32. 32. Publisher 1 by Discovery System
  33. 33. Publisher 2 by Discovery System
  34. 34. Publisher 3 by Discovery System
  35. 35. Publisher 4 by Discovery System
  36. 36. Publisher 5 by Discovery System
  37. 37. Publisher 6 by Discovery System
  38. 38. Next Steps • Design & test for effects of: – Aggregator full text availability – Journal age (archive vs current) – Journal Subject – Overall usage trends – Configuration options in Discovery services • Expand pool of libraries • Perhaps explore WHY
  39. 39. Sharing Data • With participating libraries – Customized reports for each library • With participating publishers – Customized reports for each publisher – Presentations as requested • With discovery vendors – Presentations as requested • In publications and presentations – Maintaining anonymity of data
  40. 40. Presentations • Ithaka Sustainable Scholarship Conference (October 2013) • Charleston Conference (Nov 2013) http://sched.co/17A3Kun • ER&L/Library Journal Webinar (December 2013) • Shangai Jiao Tong Univ / Beijing Univ Forum (Jan 2014) • SCELC Colloquium (March 2014) http://goo.gl/WmJoIw • ER&L (Mar 2014) http://bit.ly/discovery-impact-erl2014 • UKSG (April 2014) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_2ycMk_9fA • Presentations to three publishers (Spring-Summer 2014) – More to come

×