levine-clark, michael, “humanities e-book usage on a global scale,” charleston conference,...

Humanities eBook Usage on a Global Scale

Charleston ConferenceNovember 7, 2014

Michael Levine-ClarkAssociate Dean for Scholarly Communication & Collections

ServicesUniversity of Denver

https://www.flickr.com/photos/aigle_dore/6365101775. "Books," Moyan Brenn

How do students and scholars in the arts and humanities use ebooks?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/aigle_dore/6365101775. "Books," Moyan Brenn

How are arts and humanities ebooks used?

Ithaka S+R US Faculty Survey 2012, April 8, 2013, p. 34.

Arts/Humanities Social Sciences Science0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Do not want to use ebooks, but some-times there is no other choice.

I use ebooks but I prefer print

Ebooks are ac-ceptable

I prefer ebooks

Deborah Lenares, "Ebooks: Their Use and Acceptance by Undergraduates and Faculty," ER&L 2013. http://proposalspace.com/publishdocs/220/download.

Busi

ness

Eng

Com

putin

g M

ath

Hum

aniti

es

Life

Sci

ence

s

Phys

ical

Sci

ence

s

Soci

al S

cien

ces

Stud

io &

Per

form

art

s

Tota

l

Busi

ness

Eng

Com

putin

g M

ath

Hum

aniti

es

Life

Sci

ence

s

Phys

ical

Sci

ence

s

Soci

al S

cien

ces

Stud

io &

Per

form

art

s

Tota

l

Library print book Library's ebook

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Student Preference/Acceptance by DisciplineStudents were asked: You are in the library doing research for a

paper. You find a book of interest and want to read at least a chap-ter.

preferred acceptable not acceptable

Chart by Deborah LenaresDebbi Dinkins, Anne Cerstvik Nolan, Kathleen Sacco, and Robert Walsh, “Why the Resistance? Trends and Results from a Collaborative Survey on E-Book Usage Across Eight Academic Institutions,” Charleston Conference, November 6, 2014.

ccby Deborah Lenares 2014

Previous Presentations

• Two different data sets– Four years worth of usage– 2013 usage

• ebrary 2013 – didn’t include all of the unused books

• Testing the methodology

http://www.slideshare.net/MichaelLevineClark/presentations

Data Overview

All ebooks from EBL • Usage for 2013• Worldwide• Three library types– Academic– Public– Special

• A focus on arts & humanities

Usage Definitions• Session– Any time that a user interacts with an e-book

• Page View– A count of the number of pages examined

• Download– A download of the entire book

• Usage Time– Minutes spent looking at the book

What can we learn by examining usage on such a large scale?

• Are we collecting the right things?• Are there general patterns by subject?• Can we identify disciplinary preferences?• What are the best ways to measure use?• Can those patterns and preferences help

shape our collections and guide our services?

Academic Library eBooks

• 379,111 titles– Available on average in

72 libraries

• 345,891 titles with LCCN– Available on average in

73 libraries

Academic Public Special0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

Number of Titles Available, by LC Class

H Q P

NO LCCN R T B D L K G J E S N M F U Z C V A

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

Arts & Humanities

Social Sciences Other

STEM

Title Availability: Arts & Humanities

Art (N

)

History

(C, D, E

, F)

Langu

ages (

P-PM)

Literat

ure (PN-PZ)

Music

(M)

Philoso

phy (B-BJ)

Religion (B

L-BX)

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

Academic Library eBook Usage – 345,891 titles with LCCN

On average in 2013, at each library, each title:– Was held by 73.3 libraries– Had 0.38 sessions– Had 10.77 page views– Had 0.11 downloads– Was viewed for 5.6 minutes

Academic Library eBook Usage – 108,082 Arts & Humanities Titles

On average in 2013, at each library, each title:– Was held by 68.0 libraries (vs 73.3 for all) – Had 0.30 sessions (0.38)– Had 8.85 page views (10.77)– Had 0.09 downloads (0.11)– Was viewed for 4.87 minutes (5.57)

Average Number of Libraries with Title Available by Discipline

Arts & Humanities Social Sciences STEM0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

68 81 69

Title Availability: By LC Class

H L J G E M Q D Z T B N F C R K P A V S U0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Average number of academic libraries with title available

73.368.0

Average availability across all subjects Average availability across A&H

Title Availability: Arts & Humanities

Philoso

phy (B-BJ)

Music

(M)

History

(C-F)

Art (N

)

Langu

ages (

P-PM)

Literat

ure (PN-PZ)

Religion (B

L-BX)

55.00

60.00

65.00

70.00

75.00

80.00

ARE THESE THE RIGHT BOOKS?

Sessions Compared to Availability

Social Sciences STEM Arts & Humanities0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

AvailabilitySessions

Sessions are multiplied X100 to fit scale.

Sessions Compared to Availability: Arts & Humanities

(1) Lan

guag

es (P-PM

)

(2) Art

(N)

(3) Philo

sophy (

B-BJ)

(4) Music

(M)

(5) Hist

ory (C-F)

(6)Literat

ure (PN-PZ)

(7) Relig

ion (BL-B

X)0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

Availability

Sessions (x100)

Sessions are multiplied X100 to fit scale.

BROAD DISCIPLINARY DIFFERENCES

The Disciplines

HumanitiesB (Philosophy, Religion) excluding BF (Psychology)C, D, E, F (History)M (Music)N (Fine Arts)P (Language & Literature)

Social Sciences BF (Psychology)H (Social Sciences)J (Political Science)K (Law)L (Education)U, V (Military, Naval Sciences)

STEMQ (Science)R (Medicine)S (Agriculture)T (Technology)

Percentage of Titles Used

Arts &

Humanities

Socia

l Scie

nces

STEM Art

History

Langu

ages

Literat

ureM

usic

Philoso

phy

Religion

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

% of Titles with a Session % of Titles with a View % of Titles Downloaded

Average Usage: Sessions

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Average Usage: Page Views

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Average Usage: Downloads

0

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

0.14

0.16

Average Usage: Time

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Views Per Session

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

Downloads Per Session

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

0.11

0.12

0.13

0.14

Time Per Session

Arts &

Humanities

Socia

l Scie

nces

STEM Art

History

Langu

ages

Literat

ureM

usic

Philoso

phy

Religion

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

Disciplinary Summary

• Social sciences outperform humanities and STEM in two categories– Percentage of books used– Average amount of use

• STEM outperforms the others in actions per session• Readers in the humanities spend more time in the

book per session

. . . but within the humanities . . .

Arts & Humanities Summary• Art (N), Languages (P-PM), and Philosophy (B-

BJ) are used at a higher percentage and average rate than other A&H subjects, and generally than Social Sciences.

• On a percentage basis, History (C-F) and Music(M) are used at about the same rate as books overall, but the average usage is much lower.

• Religion (BL-BX) and Literature (PN-PZ) show poor use by all measures

Arts & Humanities Actions Per Session

• Views per sessionArt, History, Music Languages, Literature, Philosophy, Religion

• Downloads per sessionArt, Languages, (Religion)History, Literature, Music, (Philosophy)

• Time per sessionHistory, Languages, Music, (Religion)Art, Philosophy, (Literature)

MEASURING PREDICTED USE

Performance Relative to Predicted Use

L N J T H M R D E Z B G S V A C Q P K U F0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

% of Titles Available % of Titles with a Session

H: 20.60% of titles available, 21.46% of titles with a session

percentage difference

Performance Relative to Predicted Use

Art

Philoso

phyM

usic

Langu

ages

History

Religion

Literat

ure0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%

8.00%

9.00%

% of Titles Available% of Titles with a Session

Performance Relative to Predicted Use

L A R H G N J C Z M B D P T K S Q E F U V0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

% of Titles Available % of Sessions

H: 20.60% of titles available26.49% of sessions

Performance Relative to Predicted Use

Philosophy Art Languages Music History LiteratureReligion0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%

8.00%

9.00%

% of Titles Available% of Sessions

CAN WE LEARN ANYTHING BY LOOKING AT THE MOST HIGHLY USED TITLES?

Availability Overall Compared to Presence in Top 10,000

Social Sciences STEM Arts & Humanities0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

50.00%

Percentage of Titles Available% of Titles with a Session in Top 10,000

Availability Overall Compared to Presence in Top 100,000

Social Sciences STEM Arts & Humanities0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

50.00%

Percentage of Titles Available% of Titles with a Session in Top 100,000

Availability Overall Compared to Presence in Top 10,000 (A&H)

Langu

ages

Art

History

Music

Literat

ure

Philoso

phy

Religion

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%

8.00%

9.00%

Percentage of Titles Available% of Titles with a Session in the top 10,000

Availability Overall Compared to Presence in Top 100,000 (A&H)

ArtM

usic

Langu

ages

History

Literat

ure

Religion

Philoso

phy0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%

8.00%

9.00%

Percentage of Titles Available% of Titles with a Session in the top 100,000

INTENSIVE / EXTENSIVE USE

Breadth vs Depth

PERCENTAGE OF TITLES USED

AVER

AGE

AMO

UN

T O

F U

SE

EBL Sessions – Avg and % Narrow (low %) but Deep (more usage of each title)

Broad (high %) andDeep (more usage of each title)

Narrow (low %) andShallow (low usage of each title)

Broad (high % and Shallow (low usage of each title)

EBL Sessions – Avg and % (A&H)Narrow (low %) but Deep (more usage of each title)

Broad (high %) andDeep (more usage of each title)

Narrow (low %) andShallow (low usage of each title)

Broad (high % and Shallow (low usage of each title)

EBL Page Views – Avg and % Narrow (low %) but Deep (more usage of each title)

Broad (high %) andDeep (more usage of each title)

Narrow (low %) andShallow (low usage of each title)

Broad (high % and Shallow (low usage of each title)

EBL Page Views – Avg and % (A&H)Narrow (low %) but Deep (more usage of each title)

Broad (high %) andDeep (more usage of each title)

Narrow (low %) andShallow (low usage of each title)

Broad (high % and Shallow (low usage of each title)

EBL Downloaded – Avg and % Narrow (low %) but Deep (more usage of each title)

Broad (high %) andDeep (more usage of each title)

Narrow (low %) andShallow (low usage of each title)

Broad (high % and Shallow (low usage of each title)

EBL Downloaded – Avg and % Narrow (low %) but Deep (more usage of each title)

Broad (high %) andDeep (more usage of each title)

Narrow (low %) andShallow (low usage of each title)

Broad (high % and Shallow (low usage of each title)

CAN WE DETERMINE LEVEL OF IMMERSION IN A BOOK?

Page Views Per Session

F N V M T E R Q G A D C H S P J K B Z U L0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

20.59

Page Views Per Session: A&H

Art Music History Literature Languages Philosophy Religion17.00

18.00

19.00

20.00

21.00

22.00

23.00

24.00

20.59

Minutes Per Session (Time in the Book)

F E D J M C V G A K U R H P Q B T N S L Z0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

10.03

Minutes Per Session: A&H

History Music Languages Religion Literature Philosophy Art0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

10.03

Summary: Level of Immersion

• Users spend the most time in music (M) and history books (C, D, E, F)

• Users examine a lot of pages in art books (N) but spend a relatively small amount of time(a lot like technology (T))

CONCLUSIONS

There are many ways to measure use

• Difference from predicted use• Depth vs breadth– Books used a lot vs a lot of books used

• Type of use (session, view, download)• Amount of use per session

Page Views Per Session: A&H

Art Music History Literature Languages Philosophy Religion17.00

18.00

19.00

20.00

21.00

22.00

23.00

24.00

20.59

Minutes Per Session: A&H

History Music Languages Religion Literature Philosophy Art0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

10.03

How do we use these observations to build better collections and

better serve our users?

Thank You

Michael Levine-ClarkAssociate Dean for Scholarly Communication and

Collections ServicesUniversity of Denver Librariesmichael.levine-clark@du.edu

http://www.slideshare.net/MichaelLevineClark