The “use” of an electronic resource from a social network analysis perspective

The
“use”
of
an
electronic

resource
from
a
social

network
analysis

perspective

Marie
R.
Kennedy

David
P.
Kennedy

Loyola
Marymount
University

RAND
Corporation

What
is
a
“use”?

!   An
access

!   A
download

!   A
hit

!   A
search

!   A
session

!   A
save

How
is
a
“use”
counted?

!   COUNTER
“successful
full-‐text
article

requests”

!   Proxy
server
“hits”

!   Service
desk
transaction
data
via
Gimlet

COUNTER

!   How
the
statistics
are
typically
gathered

!   SUSHI
protocol
assists
in
retrieval

!   Retrieved
to
a
system
that
houses
or
to

single
ﬁles
stored
locally

“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).

Proxy
server

!   How
the
statistics
are
typically
gathered

!   Typically
a
manual
process

!   Single
ﬁles
stored
locally

Gimlet

!   From
hash
marks
on
a
piece
of
scrap

paper,
service
point
transactions
are

now
entered
into
this
commercial

system

!   customizable

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

Gimlet
at
LMU

!   Automatically
entered:

!   Date

!   Day
of
the
week

!   Time

The “use” of an electronic resource from a social network analysis perspective

Guiding
question

Can
a
social
network
analysis
of
“usage”

contribute
to
a
deeper
understanding
of

the
use
of
electronic
resources
in
an

academic
setting?

Methods

!   Describe
and
compare
3
kinds
of

measurements
of
electronic
resource

usage

!   June
1,
2011-‐May
31,
2012

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

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

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

The
universe
of
electronic
resources
and
Information
Desk
staﬀ

Electronic
resources
and
Information
Desk
staﬀ,
by
color/shape

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.

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

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

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.

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

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

The “use” of an electronic resource from a social network analysis perspective

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to The “use” of an electronic resource from a social network analysis perspective (20)

More from Marie Kennedy (10)

Recently uploaded (20)

The “use” of an electronic resource from a social network analysis perspective