The Quest for Information

James MouwThe University of Chicago Library

ERIL, March 20, 2008mouw@uchicago.edu

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

E: cstamison@us.swets.com