Keep on knockin' but you can't come in: access denials and e-journal selection


Published on

In 2012, librarians at UNC-Chapel Hill examined journal activity reports for titles with one of their Big Deal publishers to determine if there was an evident demand for journals we weren't entitled to access. Based upon this data, we exercised our "swap allowance" to gain access to the most highly sought after titles. This session will present before and after snapshots of usage after a full year of subscription access.

Megan Kilb
E-Resources Librarian, UNC-Chapel Hill

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Summer/Fall 2012 – looked at the “journal activities” report from Wiley to see how many times someone locked out of full-text content (limited to frontfile activity)Information now available in JR5Matched it up with 2012 and 2013 list pricing
  • Like most assessment projects, we crunched the data in Excel – I’ve included a screenshot of the column headings at the bottom to give an idea of the data points we considered.Generated “hypothetical” cpu (pro-rated since report only covered 2/3 of the year)Benchmarks for consideration:$25 or less CPU AND 50+ access denials; no medical titles17 titles: 8 added to next year’s pkg; 9 we added/swapped in to our pkg
  • Hypothetical vs actual usageMajor outliers were in Engineering – we have no engineering program. Those two titles came in on a package – didn’t pay list price.ChemInform – big spike in August – 629 attempts vs 50-60 in other months
  • “Actual” is in quotes because about half of the titles considered came in on the 2013 version of our package. CPU is based on 2013 list price, not a discounted package price.Full Disclosure: I removed major outliers – 2 engineering titlesIEEJ – actual ($990) vs hypothetical ($10)Packaging Tech – actual ($875) vs hypothetical ($24)J of Advanced Transportation – will likely get the ax going into next year
  • 9 titles outperformed hypothetical usage, both in terms of raw usage and CPU, but in the aggregate, stats/results were more conservative.9 titles – FT downloads in 2013 greater than attempted downloads in 2012.Aggregate actual/hypothetical usage: 85%  15% gap betweenaccess denials in 2012 and actual downloads in 2013 (about 533 downloads)9 titles - lower actual CPU than hypothetical CPUAggregate hypothetical vs actual CPU: $7.61 vs $9.64In the future, we’ll likely: Set higher benchmarks, especially if we’re dealing with real money instead of Big Deal allowancesConsider ILL requests – did someone want the content badly enough to request it via ILL?Explore title availability elsewhere – aggregators, JSTOR, etc.
  • Keep on knockin' but you can't come in: access denials and e-journal selection

    1. 1. Keep On Knockin’ But You Can’t Come In Access Denials and E-Journal Selection Megan Kilb, UNC-Chapel Hill
    2. 2. Image: Yung Grasshopper
    3. 3. Image: Amit Agarwal
    4. 4. Hypothetical vs. Actual Usage
    5. 5. Hypothetical vs “Actual” Cost Per Use
    6. 6. Recap and Future Steps Image: Granger Meador