Seeking Sustainability

1
Seeking Sustainability Singularity Evaluating
Virtual Reference From User, Non-user,
Librarian Perspectives

• Presented by
• Marie L. Radford
• and
• Lynn Silipigni Connaway
• American Society for Information Science
• and Technology Conference
• Austin, Texas
• November 3-9, 2006

2
Authors

• Marie L. Radford, Ph.D.
• Associate Professor,
• Rutgers University, SCILS
• Email mradford_at_scils.rutgers.edu
• www.scils.rutgers.edu/mradford
• Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D.
• Consulting Research Scientist
• Email connawal_at_oclc.org
• www.oclc.org/research/staff/connaway.htm
• Grant Website (Slides will be posted)
  http//www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicit
  y

3
Seeking Synchronicity Evaluating Virtual
Reference Services from User, Non-User, and
Librarian Perspectives

• 1,103,572 project funding
• Institute of Museum Library Services (IMLS)
• 684,996 grant
• Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  OCLC, Online Computer Library Center
• 405,076 in kind contributions

4
Seeking Synchronicity Evaluating Virtual
Reference Services from User, Non-User, and
Librarian Perspectives

• Project duration
• Two-year project
• October 2005-November 2007
• Four phases
• Focus group interviews
• Analysis of 1,000 QuestionPoint transcipts
• 600 online surveys
• 300 telephone interviews

5
Phase IFocus Group Interviews

• 8 Focus Group Interviews
• 2 with VRS librarians
• 4 with VRS non-users
• Screenagers
• Rural
• Suburban
• Urban
• College students
• Graduate
• 2 with VRS users
• College students
• Graduate
• Undergraduate
• Adults

6
Participant Demographics8 Focus Group Interviews

• Total participants
• 21 Librarians (25)
• 40 Non-users (48)
• 23 Users (27)
• Total librarians
• 13 Academic librarians (62)
• 3 Public librarians (14)
• 1 Government Librarian (5)
• 4 Unknown (19)

7
Participant DemographicsLibrarian Focus Group
Interviews

• Ethnicity- Librarians
• 20 Caucasian (95)
• 1 African- American (5)
• Gender- Librarians
• 14 Female (67)
• 7 Male (33)

8
Participant DemographicsUser Focus Group
Interviews

• Ethnicity- Users
• 15 Caucasian (68)
• 4 Asian (18)
• 2 African- American (9)
• 1 Hispanic/Latino (5)
• Gender- Users
• 13 Male (59)
• 9 Female (41)

9
Participant DemographicsNon-user Focus Group
Interviews

• Ethnicity- Non-users
• 18 Caucasian (45)
• 7 African- American (17.5)
• 6 Hispanic/Latino (15)
• 2 Asian (5)
• 7 Missing (17.5)
• Gender- Non-users
• 23 Female (57.5)
• 17 Male (42.5)

10
VRS Librarians Positive Themes

• Interactivity
• Opportunity to reach people and develop
  relationships
• Providing accessibility
• Access to librarians
• Access to services and databases
• Opportunity to learn
• No geographic boundaries

11
VRS Librarians Negative Themes

• Performance/Staffing
• Job performance
• Human resource allocation
• Issues about pressure and accountability
• Technological problems
• Software
• Learning curve for VRS librarians and users

12
Non-User (Screenager) Major Themes

• Librarian stereotypes
• Preference for independent information seeking
• Google
• Web surfing
• Trust own ability to evaluate web resources more
  than librarians
• Preference for face-to-face interaction
• Value interpersonal interactions in Face-to Face

13
Non-User (Screenager) Major Themes

• Privacy/Security concerns
• Librarians as psycho killers
• Fear of cyber stalkers
• Concern for accuracy of information
• Chat takes too long
• Factors influencing future VRS use
• Recommendation
• Marketing
• Ability to choose a trusted librarian

14
Non-User Graduate Students Major Themes

• Most students prefer face-to-face librarian
  interactions
• Reliable
• Developing a personal relationship with a
  librarian
• Utilize internet tools for information
• Library website, Google, other internet resources

15
Non-User Graduate Students Major Themes

• Negative perceptions about VRS
• Sounds like a chat room, not professional, fear
  of question unsuitability, technology/learning
  curve
• Fear of appearing stupid, or being negatively
  evaluated by the librarian.
• Privacy concerns/ transcripts revealed to
  professors

16
Non-User Graduate Students Major Themes

• Factors influencing future VRS use
• Recommendation by librarian/colleague
• Developing confidence in services use, speed
  access
• Promotional campaign

17
VRS Users Positive Major Themes

• Convenience
• Research/Information retrieval independence
• Collaborative share work
• Knowledgeable service provider

18
VRS Users Positive Major Themes

• Pleasant interpersonal environment
• Transcript of chat session
• Anonymity of VRS
• Immediacy of chat vs. email
• Allows multi-tasking

19
VRS Users Negative Major Themes

• Just another search engine
• Generic responses
• Distrust in information provided
• Technical improvement suggestions
• Face-to-face interaction preferred
• Fear of overwhelming the librarian
• Concerns about librarians lack of subject
  expertise

20
Future Directions

• Phases II, III, IV
• 1000 Transcript analysis (in progress)
• 600 Online surveys (in progress)
• 300 Telephone surveys
• Build on Phase II, III, IV results

21
Implications for Future Research

• Study of Millennials
• Implications for Library 2.0
• Services
• Technology
• Sources

22
End Notes

• This is one of the outcomes from the project
  Seeking Synchronicity Evaluating Virtual
  Reference Services from User, Non-User, and
  Librarian Perspectives.
• Funded by IMLS, Rutgers University and OCLC,
  Online Computer Library Center
• Special thanks to Jocelyn DeAngelis Williams,
  Patrick Confer, Julie Strange, Vickie Kozo,
  Timothy Dickey.
• Slides available at project web site
  http//www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicit
  y/

23
Questions and Discussion

• Marie L. Radford, Ph.D.
• Email mradford_at_scils.rutgers.edu
• www.scils.rutgers.edu/mradford
• Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D.
• Email connawal_at_oclc.org
• www.oclc.org/research/staff/connaway.htm