Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.



Published on

Eric Meyer and Kathryn Eccles presenting to the Digital Humanties at Oxford Summer School.

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

  • Be the first to like this


  1. 1. Impact as a process: considering the reach of resources from the start <br />Eric T. Meyer & Kathryn Eccles<br />Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford<br />Digital Humanities@Oxford Summer School<br />29th July 2011<br />@etmeyer<br />#tidsr<br />#oess<br />#dhox<br />
  2. 2. What is impact and why consider it?<br />What do we mean by impact?<br /><ul><li>Reaching intended audience
  3. 3. Reaching new audiences
  4. 4. Attracting users
  5. 5. Attracting new usage
  6. 6. Enabling new research questions
  7. 7. Enabling new approaches to education</li></li></ul><li>Where to begin?<br />Identify your audience and key stakeholders<br />Set your goals. What types of impact do you envisage your resource having?<br />What steps are you taking to ensure these types of impact?<br />Identify connections <br />What resources do you see as successful in terms of audience and impact? <br />Do you see your resource as part of a network of connected resources?<br />
  8. 8. Digitisation and Impact<br />
  9. 9. Measuring usage and impact<br />What to measure?<br />Users<br />Types of use<br />Awareness<br />Citation practices<br />Marketing strategies<br />Embedding<br />
  10. 10. JISC funded project<br />July 2008-April 2009<br />Looked at five specific JISC-funded resources<br />Designed to test the TIDSR methods and review them for the TIDSR toolkit<br />TIDSR: The first usage and impact study<br />
  11. 11. Methods<br />Quantitative methods<br />• Webometrics<br />• Web Analytics<br />• Log file analysis<br />• Scientometrics / bibliometrics<br />Content Analysis<br />Qualitative methods<br /> Interviews<br /><ul><li> Focus groups
  12. 12. User feedback
  13. 13. Referrer analysis
  14. 14. Content Analysis</li></li></ul><li>Project 1 – Online Historical Population Reports (OHPR/Histpop)<br />
  15. 15. Survey: Low Awareness<br />
  16. 16. Survey: High Importance to Users<br />
  17. 17. Log Files: Non UK Activity<br />
  18. 18. Log File Analysis<br />Top Search Phrases: Histpop<br />
  19. 19. Histpop: User Communities<br />Perception: Specific niche community<br />Well known by target audience<br />Transforming access and usage patterns<br />User surveys:<br />Embedded in educational resources<br />Enhanced access to primary sources<br />‘Histpop made it possible to do a completely different project’<br />Continuing education, online resources, non-traditional learners<br />
  20. 20. Project 2 – British Library 19th Century Newspapers<br />
  21. 21. Project 2 – British Library 19th Century Newspapers<br />
  22. 22. Citation Habits<br />Have you ever published a piece based on your work in this collection? <br />If so, how did you cite the collection? <br />
  23. 23. Webometric results<br /><ul><li>Highest numbers for original British Library resource (analogue)
  24. 24. 19th Century British Library Newspapers registers strong links for a project page
  25. 25. Note: Importance of comparator sites when using webometrics</li></li></ul><li>Blog Evidence<br />
  26. 26. Project 3 – British Library Archival Sound Recordings<br />
  27. 27. Interviews, Group Interviews, Focus Groups<br />Time intensive, but productive if you are careful about what you ask!<br />Different stakeholders:<br />Project team: Positive view of the work only<br />Broader stakeholders: While the digital project was good, it also introduced tensions in the broader setting of the library<br />New kinds of serendipity, wide range of users<br />
  28. 28. News<br />Engagement officer<br />
  29. 29. Project 4 – British Official Publications Collaborative Reader Information Service (BOPCRIS): 18th Century Official Parliamentary Publications Portal 1688-1834<br />
  30. 30. Project 4 – British Official Publications Collaborative Reader Information Service (BOPCRIS): 18th Century Official Parliamentary Publications Portal 1688-1834<br />
  31. 31. Webometrics<br /><ul><li>Some resources are available through multiple outlets
  32. 32. Webometrics can capture comparative awareness
  33. 33. These results show how powerful known resources and/or publishers can be</li></li></ul><li>Project 5 – Wellcome Medical Journals: the backfiles project<br />
  34. 34. Project 5 – Wellcome Medical Journals: the backfiles project<br />
  35. 35. Webometrics<br />Wellcome Medical Journals Backfiles project page records strong links, links to Pub Med for WMJB material impossible to trace<br />
  36. 36. Knowing the Users<br />Historians? (would be looking at older articles)<br />Not typical PubMed users<br />Search interface issues / limited search<br />Clinicians? (would be looking at newer articles)<br />Not typically reading 100 year old articles<br />Other users?<br />Paths of discovery?<br />
  37. 37. New uses?<br />Majority of downloads targeted more recent material – opening up of new resources to clinicians<br />More thorough and comprehensive searches<br />Historians reported more comprehensive search results (quantitative results)<br />Also reported increased browsing, greater serendipity, due to time saved finding articles<br />
  38. 38. Awareness of Resource by Country<br />
  39. 39. How did you find this resource?<br />
  40. 40.<br />
  41. 41.
  42. 42. University of Oxford Podcasts<br />
  43. 43. Proceedings of the Old Bailey Online<br />
  44. 44. British History Online<br />
  45. 45.
  46. 46. Siobhan Davies RePlay<br />
  47. 47.<br />Bulger, M., Meyer, E.T., de la Flor, G., Terras, M., Wyatt, S., Jirotka, M., Eccles, K., Madsen, C.<br />
  48. 48. The Case Studies<br />
  49. 49. Browsing and Searching<br />Libraries<br />Journals<br />Peers<br />
  50. 50. Reconfiguring Resources<br />
  51. 51. “<br />Old Bailey Online hasn’t replaced anything for me or displaced anything for me, but it is part of this general transformation of how I do what I do.<br />
  52. 52. “<br />The amount of time I now spend doing the very mechanical, laborious, time-consuming work is much smaller.You can now do things in 5 seconds which it took you 3 months to do a few years ago. <br />
  53. 53. Transformations in Use<br />
  54. 54. “<br />It’s a huge change. You can do things much more quickly, read much more widely, find connections…it’s very, very important. <br />
  55. 55. “<br />With something like the Burney Collection, 5 years ago for writing an article I would need to review the newspapers, I would have gone into the British Library and done it on microfilm.<br />20 years ago, I would have gone into the British Library and done it with the actual paper in front of me.Now I sit at home and I do a keyword search.<br />
  56. 56. “<br />Asking new questions?<br />
  57. 57. “<br />I’m not sure all of this raises the quality of anybody’s work.I think it would be quite daft to pretend that all of this makes us better scholars, or makes our books or papers of higher quality. I don’t know if that is true by any means, but it certainly makes it easier and I suppose makes the quantity of stuff that you can produce greater.<br />
  58. 58. “<br />What might take you several months if not years of research, you could do in hours, days, a week. So I think that means that it makes the nature of your research different because it allows you quantitative information much more quickly, which then allows you to maybe think about how you might use that information differently,because you’ve got so much more time. <br />
  59. 59. Eric T. Meyer<br /><br />Kathryn Eccles<br /><br />Oxford e-Social Science Project<br />Project work funded by:<br />