Library management and User Trends for SAGE Editors

1,006 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,006
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
17
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Budget changes--MD
  • Budget changes--MD
  • Library management and User Trends for SAGE Editors

    1. 1. Trends in journal management and user behavior – A librarian’s perspective<br />Jason S Price, PhD<br />E-Journal Package Analyst<br />Statewide California Electronic Library Consortium<br />and<br />Science & Electronic Resources Librarian, <br />Claremont University Consortium<br />For: SAGE Management and Organizational Studies Editors <br />Academy of Management Annual Conference, August 9, 2008<br />
    2. 2. Overview<br />Trends in library journal management<br />Increasing availability through bundles<br />Going electronic-only<br />Evaluating journal usage<br />Trends in user behavior<br />Googlopoly: Where users are coming from<br />Beyond keyword searching: Related, Citing, & Cited Articles<br />Current Awareness / RSS / Faculty of 1000<br />Reading more, linking more, citing more (?)<br />After each section: What are the implications for you as journal editors/authors? <br />2<br />
    3. 3. Major means of online access<br />Individual subscriptions <br />Print+Online<br />Online Only<br />Publisher package subscriptions<br />Aggregator database subscriptions<br />Third parties aggregate journal content across publishers and sell as part of an A&I database, often with an embargo period<br />SAGE MOST titles:<br />Proquest ABI/Inform (21/55)<br />Ebsco Academic Search Premier (2/55)<br />3<br />
    4. 4. 4<br />
    5. 5. Major means of online access<br />Individual subscriptions <br />Print+Online<br />Online Only<br />Publisher package subscriptions<br />Aggregator database subscriptions<br />Third parties aggregate journal content across publishers and sell as part of an A&I database, often with an embargo period<br />SAGE MOST titles:<br />Proquest ABI/Inform (21/55)<br />Ebsco Academic Search Premier (2/55)<br />5<br />
    6. 6. Libraries are: Increasing availability<br />Claremont’s SAGE past (as of 2006): <br />91 Current Subscriptions, $XX,000/yr<br />8 online only, 38 print + online, 45 print only<br />8 MOST subscriptions <br />Simulation & Gaming (Online only)<br />Human Relations (Print + Online)*<br />Work and Occupations (Print + Online)<br />Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, The (Print Only)*<br />Journal of Management (Print Only)*<br />Organization Studies (Print Only)*<br />Organizational Research Methods (Print Only)*<br />Small Group Research (Print Only)<br />1 year Embargoed access to 15 more MOST titles<br />ILL-only access to the other half<br />6<br />
    7. 7. Libraries are: Increasing availability<br />Claremont’s SAGE present (as of 2007): <br />91 ‘subscriptions’ + Premier $XX,000/yr<br />Current and post-cancellation access to all 461 titles,1997-present (including all 55 MOST titles) <br />Purchased backfile, so all older content too<br />500% increase in access, for 13% increase in price<br />So why isn’t every library doing this?<br />7<br />
    8. 8. Libraries are: Increasing availability<br />Most libraries are… <br />e.g. 90% of SAGE title subscribers in SCELC<br />Despite their drawbacks:<br />Subscription spend is ‘locked-in’ (no individual title cancellations)<br />Price guaranteed to go up 5% per year<br />Maintaining print costs an extra 25% per year<br />New acquisitions & journal start-ups are difficult to accommodate<br />What does this say about the importance of the number of subscribing institutions? //<br />8<br />
    9. 9. Libraries are: going electronic-only<br />Journals’ online suitability means they’re the first to go--Backfiles, front files, even print only<br />Sent to repositories or recycled<br />Motivators: <br />Declining (& in some disciplines negligible) print use<br />space in demand for other services<br />space & staff time costs for processing<br />pay per view & e-document delivery more efficient<br />9<br />
    10. 10. Libraries are: going electronic-only<br />Example: Mathematics journals @ Claremont<br />//<br />10<br />
    11. 11. Libraries are: evaluating journal usage<br />For package value<br />For shared collections<br />For package cancellation decisions (?)<br /><ul><li>As faculty citations
    12. 12. As downloads
    13. 13. As a replacement for impact factor</li></ul>11<br />
    14. 14. Evaluating usage: Local availability of articles cited by HMC biology faculty <br />12<br />
    15. 15. Evaluating usage:availability of articles cited by bio faculty members<br />13<br />
    16. 16. Libraries are: evaluating journal usage<br />14<br />
    17. 17. Libraries are: evaluating journal usage<br />15<br />
    18. 18. S3. Package value revisited<br />CPU<br />vs.<br />CPP<br />pdf requests only tell a different story! <br />
    19. 19. 17<br />Libraries are: evaluating usage<br />
    20. 20. 18<br />
    21. 21. Libraries are: evaluating usage factor<br />Feasibility study of usage factor <br />Standardized alternative to impact factor<br />= ratio of downloads to articles published<br />Advantages<br />Addresses undergraduate & practitioner use*<br />Useful in fields that are less heavily citation-focused<br />No delay to availability, broader coverage?<br />Concerns<br />Potential for manipulation<br />Multiple versions (or versions in multiple locations)<br />http://www.uksg.org/usagefactors<br />19<br />
    22. 22. Librarians are: evaluating usage factor<br />Web survey - 155 librarians (UKSG study)<br />20<br />
    23. 23. Howare library management trends relevant to you as journal editors/authors? <br />21<br />
    24. 24. 7 March 2007<br />22<br />After Collaborative Collection Management<br />
    25. 25. Users are: Finding abstracts w/ Google<br />23<br />
    26. 26. Page rank matters?<br />(i) being cited by influential papers contributes more to the page rank than being cited by unimportant papers<br />(ii) being cited by a paper that itself has few references gives a larger contribution to the page rank than being cited by a paper with hundreds of references<br />24<br />
    27. 27. Users are: moving beyond keyword<br />Boolean searching is dying <br />Related article functionality is booming<br />PubMed vs Web of Science vs Google Scholar<br />Working from gems<br />Subject-based vs Citation-based<br />Cited by<br />very common, <br />limited utility for non-expert <br />Cited Works<br />More popular than cited by<br />Tech. still behind in providing effective access<br />25<br />
    28. 28. Users are: evaluating articles<br />26<br />
    29. 29. Users are: using tools for awareness<br />27<br />
    30. 30. Users are: Reading more, linking more, citing more<br />Anecdotal only (on my part)<br />More efficient: less time or more coverage?<br />More accessible content, more relevant content<br />Undergraduate use is booming<br />28<br />
    31. 31. Howare user behavior trends relevant to you as journal editors/authors? <br />29<br />
    32. 32. Take home points<br />Access is growing rapidly<br />Number of subscriptions is unrelated to access<br />Usage matters (a lot)<br />The majority of users are accessing content via Google– <br />How should this affect author/editor behavior?<br />mailto:jprice@scelc.org<br />30<br />

    ×