Скачать презентацию The Cost and Use of Electronic and Print Скачать презентацию The Cost and Use of Electronic and Print

4bf643185b8d751d1a9668c362120268.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 38

The Cost and Use of Electronic and Print Journal Collections Conference on Libraries in The Cost and Use of Electronic and Print Journal Collections Conference on Libraries in the Digital Age (LIDA) May 28 - June 1, 2007 Dubrovnic, Croatia Donald W. King, Distinguished Research Professor University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Information and Library Science

Topics of Talk • Trends in the use of library collections – Focus on Topics of Talk • Trends in the use of library collections – Focus on academic libraries – Emphasis on science faculty and staffs – Information-seeking patterns as context • Cost of print and electronic collections – Bottom-up approach – Considering all resources applied – 25 -year life cycle • An indicator of the return-on-investment – Contingent valuation approach 2

Overview • Sources of information used by scientists, engineers and medical professionals • Reasons Overview • Sources of information used by scientists, engineers and medical professionals • Reasons that professionals choose the sources that they do • Importance of professionals’ time and effort in making choices • Scholarly journals continue to be the principle source of needed information • Trends in reading patterns over 30 years 3

Tenopir & King Survey Data • Surveys of 30, 000+ scientists, engineers, social scientists, Tenopir & King Survey Data • Surveys of 30, 000+ scientists, engineers, social scientists, medical and other professionals in many settings • Two NSF-sponsored national surveys (King Research 1977, 1984) • 26 surveys in organizations served by 84 special libraries (King Research with Griffiths 1981 -1995) • 12 surveys of faculty and students (U. of Tennessee and C. Tenopir 1993 -2006) • 6 surveys society member & journal subscribers (King Research 1977 -1983, U. of Tennessee and C. Tenopir 2003 -2006) • Current IMLS study with transaction log analysis (U. of Tennessee & University College London, CIBER 200507) • 6, 000 national household telephone surveys (University 4 of North Carolina, University of Pittsburgh)

Question: What sources did you use for the last substantive piece of information you Question: What sources did you use for the last substantive piece of information you used for work? (n=469) 5

Questions from National Household Telephone Survey • Over 200 interviews involve scientists or researchers Questions from National Household Telephone Survey • Over 200 interviews involve scientists or researchers – Do you ever read professional trade or scholarly journals? – From how many…do you read? – Was the last article you read from a print or electronic version? – Where did you obtain the last journal article you read? – For what professional field is this last journal read? 6

Many Ways to Identify Articles • Browsing through print or electronic journals (mostly for Many Ways to Identify Articles • Browsing through print or electronic journals (mostly for current awareness) • Searching in search engines in bibliographic and e-journal databases (mostly for research and writing) • Follow-up of citations in journals and other publications • Recommendations from colleagues, etc. • Other (e. g. , alerts, preprint services, etc. ) 7

Trend in How Articles Are Identified Science Browsing 1977 2006 40% 37% Searching Online Trend in How Articles Are Identified Science Browsing 1977 2006 40% 37% Searching Online A&I Citations 2% 24% 11% 25% --15% Colleagues, etc. 18% 16% 6% 7% Other 8

Many Sources of Articles • • Personal subscriptions Library collections Authors, colleagues, etc. Other Many Sources of Articles • • Personal subscriptions Library collections Authors, colleagues, etc. Other 9

Where Do Readers Obtain Articles? Trends Personal Subscriptions Library Collections Down Up From Another Where Do Readers Obtain Articles? Trends Personal Subscriptions Library Collections Down Up From Another Person Same Author Websites Small Preprint and other databases Small Age of articles is important 10

Sources of Articles Science 1977 2006 Personal Subscriptions 68% 31% Library Collections 14% 52% Sources of Articles Science 1977 2006 Personal Subscriptions 68% 31% Library Collections 14% 52% Other 18% 17% 11

Trends in Scientists’ Reading Patterns • They appear to be reading more • They Trends in Scientists’ Reading Patterns • They appear to be reading more • They rely on libraries more • Reasons for increased library use 12

Average Articles Read per University Scientist 13 Average Articles Read per University Scientist 13

Source of Additional Readings Library collection Other 14 Source of Additional Readings Library collection Other 14

Reasons for Shift to Reading from the Library Collection • Decrease in personal subscriptions Reasons for Shift to Reading from the Library Collection • Decrease in personal subscriptions • More reading of articles identified by online bibliographic searches • Electronic collections have broadened access to articles 15

Average Number of Personal Subscriptions Per Scientist 16 Average Number of Personal Subscriptions Per Scientist 16

Average Number of Articles Identified by Automated Searches per University Scientist 17 Average Number of Articles Identified by Automated Searches per University Scientist 17

Electronic Collection Contribution • Personal subscriptions - 90% print • Library collections – 80% Electronic Collection Contribution • Personal subscriptions - 90% print • Library collections – 80% electronic – Broadens journal availability – Saves readers about 20 hours per year • Breadth of reading has increased – Read from about 13 journals in 1977 – Over twice that amount now • Age of article is a factor 18

Readings of Older Materials May Be Increasing (University Faculty) 19 Readings of Older Materials May Be Increasing (University Faculty) 19

Library Costs Library Costs

What Do Print and Electronic Collections Actually Cost? What Do Print and Electronic Collections Actually Cost?

King Bottom-up Library Cost Studies • 40 public libraries (King Research with Griffiths, 1985 King Bottom-up Library Cost Studies • 40 public libraries (King Research with Griffiths, 1985 -1992) • 26 special libraries (King Research with Griffiths, 1984 -1993) • 11 academic libraries (University of Pittsburgh with Aerni, Drexel University with Montgomery, 9 other universities — JSTOR with Schonfeld, 2000 -2004) 22

Costs Include All Resources Used w Collection Purchases w Staff w Facilities w Equipment Costs Include All Resources Used w Collection Purchases w Staff w Facilities w Equipment & Systems w Photocopies, Binding, etc. 23

Life-Cycle Cost per Title w Electronic collection — $180 per title w Print collection Life-Cycle Cost per Title w Electronic collection — $180 per title w Print collection — $580 per title w. Current collection — $190 per title w. Backfile collection — $390 per title 24

Annual Cost Per Reading • Compare the Unit Cost of Services – Electronic - Annual Cost Per Reading • Compare the Unit Cost of Services – Electronic - $3. 00 per reading – Current Periodicals - $13. 60 per reading – Bound Backfiles - $15. 60 per reading – ILL - $8. 40 per item – ILB - $12. 60 per item Life Cycle Cost Per Reading – Electronic - $7. 30 per title – Print - $23. 50 per title 25

Library Contribution to Usefulness & Value • • • Purpose of use Importance in Library Contribution to Usefulness & Value • • • Purpose of use Importance in achieving principal purposes Ways article affected the principal purpose How much do readers “pay” for the article? Achievers read more from library collections • Readers are more productive than nonreaders • Helps achieve parent organization goals 26

Return-on-Investment Defined • Investment – Library expenditures and organization G&A – User time in Return-on-Investment Defined • Investment – Library expenditures and organization G&A – User time in wages and overhead – Cost of other relevant resources • Return – Contingent valuation of the additional cost to users if there were not library services – Changes in user productivity, information needs satisfied, and other relevant indicators 27

Definition of Contingent Valuation • Contingent Valuation is an economic method used to assess Definition of Contingent Valuation • Contingent Valuation is an economic method used to assess the benefits of non-priced goods and services (e. g. , libraries or specific library services) by examining the implication of not having the product or service. 28

Library Journal Collection Return-on-Investment • Library expenditures (amount allocated to faculty and staff use) Library Journal Collection Return-on-Investment • Library expenditures (amount allocated to faculty and staff use) – $1. 87 million • Faculty and staff cost to use the library collection – $1. 56 million • Total organization investment – $3. 43 million 29

Library Journal Collection Return-on-Investment • User cost to use alternative sources of article information Library Journal Collection Return-on-Investment • User cost to use alternative sources of article information – $11. 38 million in user time – $2. 1 million in user purchases • Total cost of alternatives – $13. 48 million • Return in net benefit ($13. 48 million $3. 43 million) – $10. 05 million 30

Library Journal Collection Return-on-Investment • Ratio of return-on-investment ($10. 05 million divided by $3. Library Journal Collection Return-on-Investment • Ratio of return-on-investment ($10. 05 million divided by $3. 43 million) – 2. 9 to 1 PLUS – Indicators of gained needed information, productivity, etc. 31

Total Time Saved • Total time saved – 250, 000 hours – 114 FTEs* Total Time Saved • Total time saved – 250, 000 hours – 114 FTEs* • Electronic remote access savings in time – 50, 000 hours – 23 FTEs* * based on an average of 2, 200 hours worked 32

Implications of the Studies • Technologies will continue to advance journal publishing capacities and Implications of the Studies • Technologies will continue to advance journal publishing capacities and power to inform • Electronic journals have been extremely beneficial, but print will be relevant for some time to come • Both readers and libraries have benefited economically from electronic journals • Libraries will continue to be an essential participant in the journal system for the foreseeable future • Newly proposed system models need to advance cautiously and with demonstrable successes 33

Contributions by: • • • José-Marie Griffiths Carol Tenopir Sarah Aerni Carol Montgomery Roger Contributions by: • • • José-Marie Griffiths Carol Tenopir Sarah Aerni Carol Montgomery Roger Schonfeld 34

References Communication Patterns of Engineers. Carol Tenopir and Donald W, King. New York: John References Communication Patterns of Engineers. Carol Tenopir and Donald W, King. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. - IEEE Press (2004) Towards Electronic Journal: Realities for Scientists, Librarians, and Publishers. Carol Tenopir and Donald W. King. Washington, DC: Special Libraries , 2000. Scientific Journals in the United States: Their Production, Use, and Economics. Donald W. King, Dennis D. Mc. Donald and Nancy K. Roderer. Stroudsburg, PA: Hutchinson Ross Publishing Company, (Division of Academic Press) 1981. “Some Thoughts on Academic Library Collections” Guest Editorial. Donald W. King. Journal of Academic Librarianship. July 2004. “Should Commercial Publishers Be Included in the Model for Open Access Through Author Payment”? Donald W. King. D-Lib Magazine, Volume 10, No. 6. June 2004. “An Evidence-based Assessment of the ‘Author Pays’ Model. ” Donald W. King and Carol Tenopir. Nature Forum. June 2004. “Measuring Total Readings of Journal Articles. ” Donald W. King and C. Tenopir, M. Clarke, D-Lib Magazine, October, 2006. “The Non-Subscription Side of Periodicals: Changes in Library Operations and Costs Between Print and Electronic Formats. ” Roger C. Schonfeld, Donald W. King, Ann Okerson, Eileen Gifford Fenton, Council on Library and Information Resources, Washington, D. C. , June 2004. “Comparative Costs of the University of Pittsburgh Electronic and Print Library Collections. ” Donald W. King, Sarah Aerni, Fern Brody, Matt Herbison, and Amy Knapp. The Sara Fine Institute for Interpersonal Behavior and Technology, 2004. http: //purl. oclc. org/sfpitt/pub 2004045 ab 35

References (continued) “The Use and Outcomes of University Library Print and Electronic Collections. ” References (continued) “The Use and Outcomes of University Library Print and Electronic Collections. ” Donald W. King, Sarah Aerni, Fern Brody, Matt Herbison, and Amy Knapp. The Sara Fine Institute for Interpersonal Behavior and Technology, 2004. http: //purl. oclc. org/sfpitt/pub 2004045 ab “Medical Faculty’s Use of Print and Electronic Journals: Changes Over Time and in Comparison with Scientists. ” Carol Tenopir, Donald W. King, Amy Bush. Journal of the Medical Library Association 92 (April 2004) 2. “Library Periodicals Expenses: Comparison of Non-Subscription Costs of Print and Electronic Formats on a Life-Cycle Basis. ” Roger C. Schonfeld, Donald W. King, Ann Okerson and Eileen Gifford Fenton. D-Lib Magazine. Vol. 10, No. 1, January 2004. “Patterns of Use by Faculty at Three Diverse Universities”. Donald W. King, Carol Tenopir, Carol Hansen Montgomery and Sarah E. Aerni. D-Lib Magazine. Vol. 9, No. 10, October 2003. “Patterns of Journal Use By Scientists through Three Evolutionary Phases”. Carol Tenopir, Peter Boyce and others. D-Lib Magazine. Vol. 9, No. 5, May 2003. “After Migration to an Electronic Journal Collection: Impact on Faculty and Doctoral Students. ” Donald W. King and Carol Hansen Montgomery. D-Lib Magazine. Vol. 8, No. 12, December 2002. “Comparing Library and User Related Costs of Print and Electronic Journal Collections. ” Carol Hansen Montgomery and Donald W. King. D-Lib Magazine, Volume 8, No. 10, October 2002. “The Cost of Journal Publishing: A Literature Review and Commentary. ” Donald W. King. Learned Publishing. Vol. 20, No. 1, April 2007. 36

References (continued) Aerni, Sarah E. and Donald W. King. “Contingent Valuation of Libraries: Including References (continued) Aerni, Sarah E. and Donald W. King. “Contingent Valuation of Libraries: Including Examples from Academic, Public and Special Libraries. ” September 2006. In: Proceedings of the ARL Library Assessment Conference (in press). Further information at: http: //www. arl. org/statsevents/laconf/06 schedule. shtml. Griffiths, Jose-Marie, Donald W. King and Sarah E. Aerni. “Taxpayer Return-on-Investment (ROI) in Pennsylvania Public Libraries. ” September 2006. (Pre-print). “Taxpayer Return-on-Investment of Florida Public Libraries. ” José-Marie Griffiths, Donald W. King, Thomas Lynch, and Juli Harrington. September 2004. 37

Donald W. King • Distinguished Research Professor, School of Information and Library Science, University Donald W. King • Distinguished Research Professor, School of Information and Library Science, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill • Email: [email protected] edu • Web: http: //www 2. sis. pitt. edu/%7 Edwking/ • Bio: http: //www 2. sis. pitt. edu/people/bios/king. html 38