the quest for information james mouw the university of chicago library eril, march 20, 2008...
TRANSCRIPT
The Quest for Information
James MouwThe University of Chicago Library
ERIL, March 20, [email protected]
So many questions
• What do I get• What do I hold• What does it cost• What do I actually pay• What do I use• What’s the quality• Where do my people publish• What do my people cite
What do I get?• Purchased paper
– Purchase orders– Catalog records
• Free paper– Maybe p.o.’s– Probably catalog records
• Online Purchased (individual subs)– Purchase orders– Catalog records– SFX entries
• Online Packages– As above
• Online Aggregations– Purchase orders (at product level only)– Catalog records (sometimes)– SFX entries (usually)
• What are the links?– PO# usually, OCLC# sometimes, VRN sometimes, ISSN/ISBN (P&E) usually, SFX# usually
What do I hold?
• Print– Catalog record with holdings– Presence in Worldcat
• Online– Catalog without holdings– SFX with Holdings (usually)
• What are the links?– OCLC# sometimes, ISSN/ISBN (P&E)
usually, SFX# usually for online
What does it cost?
• Ulrich’s – individual lookup or via the Serials Analysis Tool
• Publisher – spreadsheets, usually
• Vendor data – via their catalog or custom reports
• What are the links?– ISSN/ISBN normally, VRN if using their feed
What do I actually pay?
• Invoice information from Purchase Orders – payment period usually free text
• Vendor feeds
• What are the links?– PO# usually, VRN if using, ISSN/ISBN (P&E)
usually
What do I use?
• Print collection– Circulation stats
• Online collection– Scholarly Stats when available– Publisher reports – COUNTER and non-COUNTER– Vendor aggregations of information– Sushi feeds
• What are the links– Generally just the ISSN/ISBN (P&E)
What is the Quality?
• Mainly ISI impact factor
• H-index
• What are the links?– ISSN/ISBN
Where do my people publish?
• Web of Knowledge
• Scopus
• Other tools
• What are the links?– Mainly ISSN
What do they cite?
• Journal Use Reports
• What are the links?– ISSN
Goal: Performance measures
• Cost per use
• Coordination between– Holdings and publication– Holdings and citations– Publications and citations
• Looking for gaps in collection or for underperforming titles
The problem
• Many bits and pieces coming from many directions
• No reliable links that cross all sources of information
• Time!
• Fall out from each match point with resulting need to hand check the residue
The solution
• Or, a solution to part of the problem
• Over to the rest of the panel
The Usage Data Big Picture: A look at the collection analysis tools and usage standards currently available, and the important questions still surrounding usage data
Christine Stamison, MLISSenior Customer Relations Manager
Electronic Resources & Libraries 2008 Conference
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 15
We will cover
Current journal usage analysis tools
Electronic Resource Management Systems
E-Gateways
ScholarlyStats
Industry standards that make usage analysis possible
COUNTER (Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic
Resources)
SUSHI (Standard Usage Statistical Harvesting Initiative)
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 16
Journal Usage Analysis Tools
Electronic Resource Management Systems (ERMS): Can store usage data, but…
Must collect usage data statistics from many vendors
Multiple reports from the vendors may be in a variety of formats that must be consolidated
Then the library must produce own set of reports to compare the statistics
Time-consuming and labor-intensive
E-Gateways: COUNTER standard enables gateways to collect usage data
Provide usage reports from multiple vendors
Library must produce statistics comparison reports
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 17
Usage Analysis Tools
ScholarlyStats: Single platform
Consolidates and provides access to a library’s usage statistics from multiple content providers in COUNTER compliant formats
Also provides “dashboard” comparison analysis reports
Dashboard Reports
Consolidated Reports LIBRARY
ScholarlyStats
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 18
ScholarlyStats Consolidated Reports Currently 52 Platforms
500+ Databases70,000+ Journals
Including:ACS Publications
Blackwell SynergyCSA
Elsevier ScienceBioOne
Highwire PressIngentaConnect
EBSCOhostMeta Press
Nature Publishing GroupProquest
SAGEScitation
SwetsWiseThomson Gale
Currently 52 Platforms500+ Databases70,000+ Journals
Including:ACS Publications
Blackwell SynergyCSA
Elsevier ScienceBioOne
Highwire PressIngentaConnect
EBSCOhostMeta Press
Nature Publishing GroupProquest
SAGEScitation
SwetsWiseThomson Gale
Consolidated Journal Report 1 Full-text article requests by Journal Title,
Platform and Month
Consolidated Database Report 1 Searches and Sessions by Month and Database
Consolidated Database Report 2 Turnaways by Month and Service
Consolidated Database Report 3 Searches and Sessions by Month and Service
COUNTER eBook reports in development
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 19
Comparison Analysis:
Total Number of titles by
Platform
Full text articles by platform
Top Use for each Platform
Average Use by Platform
Proportional usage by title
Top 50 journals across
Platforms
Low Usage Journals
Zero Use Journals
Sample Report: Total journal use by Platform
Sample Report: Average journal use by Platform
ScholarlyStats Dashboard Reports
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 20
Evaluating Usage Statistics: Historic view and how industry standards make it all possible
Usage of online resources
growing exponentially, but
usage not measured in a
consistent way
Content providers not
supplying data to libraries in
a format they want
Libraries unable to compare
usage stats from various
content providers
Usage of online resources
growing exponentially, but
usage not measured in a
consistent way
Content providers not
supplying data to libraries in
a format they want
Libraries unable to compare
usage stats from various
content providers
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 21
Applying the COUNTER standard
librarian
?
Specific requirements that
content providers and vendors
must meet for usage reports to
be designated “COUNTER
compliant”
Now provide data to libraries
in the format they want
But…stats not available in a
consistent data “container” and
administrative cost of individual
downloads on provider-by-
provider basis is high
Specific requirements that
content providers and vendors
must meet for usage reports to
be designated “COUNTER
compliant”
Now provide data to libraries
in the format they want
But…stats not available in a
consistent data “container” and
administrative cost of individual
downloads on provider-by-
provider basis is high
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 22
COUNTER + SUSHI
librarian
!
ERM system has ability to
store usage data
SUSHI standard for ERM
container now enables
automatic request and
delivery of usage statistics
from content providers
Libraries must still
consolidate, analyze, and
create reports from providers’
data in ERM system
ERM system has ability to
store usage data
SUSHI standard for ERM
container now enables
automatic request and
delivery of usage statistics
from content providers
Libraries must still
consolidate, analyze, and
create reports from providers’
data in ERM system
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 23
COUNTER + SUSHI + ScholarlyStats
Vendor can consolidate
statistics and generate
reports for libraries through
automated web processes
Greatly reduces time and
effort
Enables efficient, accurate
data evaluation for informed
decision making
Vendor can consolidate
statistics and generate
reports for libraries through
automated web processes
Greatly reduces time and
effort
Enables efficient, accurate
data evaluation for informed
decision making
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 24
ScholarlyStats LOVES the SUSHI Protocol
NISO Z39.93 – APPROVED BY ANSI – American National Standards Institute
As of October 2007 – 15 SUSHI Implementations through:
Innovative Interfaces (US)
Thomson Scientific ISI (US and Australia)
— JUR (Journal Usage Report) Customer
Don’t have to go to ScholarlyStats portal and download reports
Automatically loaded into Innovative’s ERM or JUR
Tested with Ex Libris Verde ERM system – not in production yet
© Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 25
Thank you!
Christine M. Stamison, MLIS
Senior Customer Relations Manager
P: 800-645-6595, ext. 2312
F: 856-632-7312
M: 847-707-1428