discoverability of online reference
DESCRIPTION
Are Users Finding Our Online Reference Resources? - RUSA Seminar presentation by Lettie ConradTRANSCRIPT
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Are Users Finding Our Online Reference Resources?
RUSA Seminar
November 20, 2013
Lettie Y. ConradExecutive Manager, Online Products
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
SAGE overview
● Independent, global scholarly publisher● Books, journals, reference, databases
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Source: Somerville, M. M., Schader, B. J., and Sack, J. R. Improving Discoverability of Scholarly Content in the Twenty-First Century: Collaboration Opportunities for Librarians, Publishers, and Vendors. A White Paper commissioned by SAGE. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2012. http://www.sagepub.com/repository/binaries/librarian/DiscoverabilityWhitePaper/
SAGE Discoverability White Paper
● Best practices for access and discovery of content in libraries
● Big problems that publishers, vendors, and libraries need to solve
● Real solutions that librarians and
publishers can implement
● Further observations for improving discoverability and visibility
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
User knowledge >> channel knowledge
● Market research• Usability testing & observation• Librarian advisory boards• End-user focus groups, surveys, etc.• Info-seeking behavior research studies
● Data analysis• COUNTER reports• Google Analytics• Moz (previously SEOMoz)• Data Salon
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Discovery channels – what are they?
1. Open web search
2. Library search
3. Academic databases
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Discovery channels – 3 questions
1. Who uses it? (reader / customer persona)
2. Why does it matter to SAGE?
3. How do we monitor?
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
1. Open Web Search – who uses it?
● Everyone! (despite what they may say)
● Simple and user friendly
● Quantity vs. quality traffic
● Use case: quick search, new topic
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Open web search – why does it matter?
● Everyone uses it (remember?)
● SEO = ROI
● Common ‘starter’ channel
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Open web search – how do we monitor?
● Google Analytics
● Moz
● Market research
CQ Researcher Traffic Sources
Open web searchLibrary referralsSocial mediaAcademicDirect / unknown
SAGE Knowledge Traffic Sources
Open web searchLibrary referralsSocial mediaAcademicDirect / unknown
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
2. Library search – who uses it?
● Advanced students, faculty
● Advanced search / browse
● Use case: narrow queries, “known searches”
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Library search – why does it matter?
● Capture advanced readers
● Win-win strategy
• Discovery services
• ERM feeds
• LibGuides, widgets and more!
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Library search – how do we monitor?
● Google Analytics
● COUNTER – cost / use
● Usability testing
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
3. Academic search – who uses it?
● Advanced students, faculty, practitioners
● “Power” users
● Use case: deep research, building expertise
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Academic search – why does it matter?
● A&I
• reach experts, power users
• branding, profile, scholarly ecosystem
● Mainstream academic search
• hybrid, emerging technology
• reach wider audience, including advanced readers
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Academic search – how do we monitor?
● Market research
● Google Analytics % Total Usage (Sep-Dec 2012)
SAGE Journals 2.6%
SAGE Knowledge 0.6%
SAGE Research Methods
0.4%
CQ Researcher 1.5%
Los Angeles | London | New DelhiSingapore | Washington DC
Thank [email protected]
● Cardwell, C. et. al (2012). “Beyond simple, easy and fast.” College & Research Libraries News, 73(6), 344-347. http://crln.acrl.org/content/73/6/344.full
● Haines, L. et al. 2010. Information-seeking behavior of basic science researchers: Implications for library services. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 98(1), 73-81. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2801986/
● Holman, L. (2011). Millennial students’ mental models of search: Implications for academic librarians and database developers. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(1), 19-27. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099133310002545