Access to Electronic Journals and Articles in ARL Libraries By Dana M. Caudle Cecilia M. Schmitz

The Question Do U.S. ARL academic libraries offer the same options on their web sites to their users in terms of access to electronic journals and databases?

Definitions Electronic journals: If a library called something an electronic journal, we counted it. Access: Included links to electronic journals and web site design.

Literature review: –Hazard –Rich and Rabine’s 1999 and 2001 studies Methodology: –Checked sites between 11/1/05 and 12/21/05. Access restrictions: –Electronic journals = 5 libraries –Databases = 2 libraries

A-Z list of electronic journals 87% (86 libraries) had an A-Z list. Five could not be evaluated and eight libraries lacked a list. Of these 86: 77 libraries (90%) had a link to the list on the main page. 65 libraries (76%) took two clicks to reach the list. 7 took one click. 11 took three clicks. 3 took four clicks.

Search electronic journals by title 90%, (89 libraries) had title search. Of these 89 libraries: 75 libraries (87%) placed it on separate e-journal page. 8 libraries placed it on main page. 6 libraries placed it on same page as their databases under a generic electronic resources link.

Type of title search 44 libraries had title/keyword search with an ISSN option. 21 libraries had title/keyword search without the ISSN option. 20 libraries had combination of title searches, often with search engine that also searched databases. 4 libraries had title search and TDNet.

Search electronic journals by subject 70% (69 libraries) provided subject access. 25% (25 libraries) did not. Of these 69: 62 libraries (90% ) placed it on electronic journal page. 2 libraries placed it on main page. 5 libraries placed it on same page as their databases under a generic electronic resources link.

Type of subject search Of the 69 libraries with a subject search: 54 (78%) provided an alphabetical list: –Straight list (15 libraries) –Drop-down box (38 libraries) 9 libraries provided a search engine. 6 libraries combined a search engine with an alphabetical list.

Frequency on electronic journal list Simple list: 27 libraries (27%) Time Time etc. Databases under title list: 54 libraries (55%) Time Database Database etc. Journal titles combined with a citation linker box which listed all the databases + boxes for volume, issue, year, and page numbers: 12 libraries (12%)

Coverage on electronic journal list 71% (70 libraries) listed the holdings with journal title. 21% (21 libraries) required clicking on title to get holdings. 1 library linked the holdings to the “About” button. Of the 21 libraries that required clicking on the title: 3 libraries (14%) led to the catalog. 14 libraries (67%) led to a citation linker box. 4 libraries (19%) led to a new window.

Electronic journals in catalog 70 libraries (71%) put their electronic journals in the catalog. 29 libraries (29%) did not. Of the 70 libraries that put their electronic journals in the catalog: 36 (51%) had a catalog search engine on the main page.

Catalog search box on main page 57 libraries (58%) had a catalog search on the main page: 17 keyword search 14 title search 2 title and ISSN search 18 journal title search 6 journal title and ISSN search 42 libraries (42%) had no search on main page.

Best type of catalog search More specific searches like journal title or ISSN are better because user will get more focused list. Keyword only search is not helpful because it returns a huge list with many irrelevant hits. User must search again to find the journals.

Single record vs. multiple records Of the 70 libraries that cataloged electronic journals: 40% (28 libraries) used the single record approach. 54% (38 libraries) put all electronic versions on one record with a separate record for other formats.

Holdings in catalog vs. list In 38 cases, the number of links in the catalog matched the number of databases listed in the journal list. In 27 cases, the number of links did not match the number of databases in the journal list. In 5 cases, there was a link from the catalog to the electronic journal list instead of direct links to the journals.

List of databases? 97 libraries (98%) had a link to their databases. Of these: 92 libraries (95%) had the link main page. Only five libraries did not. 62 libraries (64%) required two clicks to get to the database list. 29 libraries (30%) required only one click. 6 libraries required three clicks.

Database access Of the 97 libraries that had a database link: 94 had an A-Z list of databases. 49 had a title search of some sort. 35 had a title/keyword search. 8 had a search engine, 4 of which combined it with title/keyword searching. 3 had a link for searching Academic Search Premier.

Database options 35 libraries (35%): databases only. 37 libraries (37%): databases and citation linker. 10 libraries (10%): databases and federated search. 17 libraries (17%): databases, citation linker, and federated search.

Subject access to databases 95 libraries (96%) provided subject access. Of these: 89 libraries (94%) provided a list of databases under subjects: –Straight list (55 libraries) –Drop-down box (34 libraries) 4 libraries had a list and a search engine. 2 libraries just had a search engine.

Federated search (Search across multiple databases) 27 libraries (27%) had a federated search. 70 libraries (71%) did not. Of the 27 libraries that had a federated search 17 libraries (63%) placed link on main page. 10 libraries (37%) placed link on a secondary page.

Customizable federated searching Of the 27 libraries with federated searching: 17 libraries (63%) had customizable federated searches where the user could pick the databases they wish to search. 12 libraries had “quick” federated searching which allowed the user to make their own list of databases to search from using a tool called “my databases.” This is a more powerful type of customizable federated search.

Citation linkers (Take users directly to an article) 55 libraries (56%) provided some form of citation linker. 44 libraries (44%) did not.

Types of citation linkers Of the 55 libraries with a citation linker: 21 libraries (38%) had general citation linkers which stood alone. 8 libraries (15%) had journal citation linkers tied to a specific journal. 4 libraries (7%) had citation linkers embedded in databases. 17 libraries (31%) combined general and journal citation linkers. 1 library combined general and database citation linkers. 4 libraries had citation linkers within TDNet.

Location of general citation linkers Of the 39 libraries with a general citation linker: 13 libraries put the link to their general citation linkers on the main page. 25 libraries put them on a secondary page. 1 library put their general citation linker in the catalog.

Citation linkers and ISSN Of the 39 libraries with general citation linkers: 32 required the ISSN to link directly to the article or the user had to pick the correct title from a list of similar titles. 6 did not have an option for entering the ISSN. 1 citation linker automatically supplied the ISSN. 4 libraries had TDNet citation linkers which did not require an ISSN but it was an option.

Link resolvers Link resolvers allow users of one library website to access their databases through another library’s web site by reconciling IP addresses against the database in question. 70 libraries (71%) didn’t use link resolvers or enable them. 29 libraries (29%) had them and we were able to access some Auburn databases from these sites.

Web site design We evaluated sites for usability and documentation. We had to agree on our evaluations. Usability factors: jargon, familiarity with library culture, confusing, irritating. Documentation. Clarity, size, and layout of links.

Jargon All library sites used library jargon. 9 libraries used too much of it. 90 libraries (91%) did not overuse it.

Familiarity with library culture 51 libraries (52%) required user to be somewhat familiar with library culture. 42 libraries (42%) required user to be familiar with library culture. 6 libraries required the user to be very familiar with library culture.

Require bibliographic instruction 24 library sites (24%) were clear enough not to require bibliographic instruction to use the site. 75 library sites (76%) would seem to benefit from some bibliographic instruction to make maximum use of them.

Confusing site If we came up with wildly separate answers to the questions, we deemed a site confusing. We had to agree that a site was confusing. 20 sites (20%) rated as confusing.

Irritating site If a site didn’t allow access to information that the majority of other sites allowed access to, we deemed it irritating. We had to agree that a site was irritating. We deemed irritating the 16 sites where you had to drag the mouse over the headings to get to the links. 30 sites (30%) rated as irritating, including those with the drag mouse operation.

Instructions 42 libraries (42%) had links to instructions on finding electronic journals. 52 libraries (53%) had no instructions. Of the 42 libraries with links to instructions: 33 libraries (79%) had them on a secondary page. 9 libraries (21%) had them on the main page. Out of 99 libraries: 40 of libraries (40%) had instructions on their electronic journal page. Some libraries have instructions in more than one place.

Content specific help If a site is going to have a help page, it should be content specific for the page it is on or it will be of no use. Of 99 libraries: 10 libraries had a content specific FAQ. 8 libraries had content specific help links or help at the side of the page.

Clarity of electronic journal links 87 libraries (88%) had electronic journal links that gave the user some idea of what they led to, while 12 did not. 70 libraries (71%) had specific electronic journal links while 29 libraries had generic links that led to electronic resources in general. 16 libraries had more than one link that said electronic journals.

Journal links vs. instruction links Of the 99 libraries: 48 libraries (48%) had named instruction links. 4 libraries had instruction links that could be confused with the actual link to the electronic journals. 15 libraries (15%) had links that would lead a user to believe that they led to electronic journals when they only led to instructions.

Article links 32 libraries (32%) had links that mentioned articles. It was not clear what they led to. Of these 32 article links: 25 linked to some combination of databases, electronic journals, citation linker, federated search, and/or instructions. 1 linked to a citation linker. 4 linked to a federated search page. 2 just linked to instructions.

Layout of links No consistency of layout among libraries, but mixture of good and bad practices, sometimes on the same site. All of the libraries displayed their electronic journal or resources link near the top of the page. 37 libraries (37%) had too much information or too many links on the main page.

Access restrictions and remote access messages 57 libraries (58%) explained access restrictions to electronic journals. Tulane was the only library to have a statement indicating that the user was leaving the library’s web site for a remote vendor’s site. Such links are important, because many users think that they are still on the library’s site when they are accessing remote electronic resources.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Recommendation Muted earthen tones are much easier on the eyes than a school’s colors. A user of a library website is going to be looking at it for a longer time than a user of the school’s main website.

Recommendation There should be a link from the university’s main page to the library. We had to use Google to find Tulane University’s library page because there was no link from the university.

Recommendation Don’t bury the search engine on your site like Dartmouth College did.

Recommendations Standardize terminology. Get rid of generic and jargon terms like “e-resources” and “full text periodical titles.”

Recommendations Have a general citation linker, preferably with a button to look up the ISSN. Have a federated search feature. Have a catalog search box, but with specific search options like journal title instead of keyword.

Recommendations Have an electronic journal search box or search engine to aid users in finding a specific title more quickly than browsing a huge unwieldy list. Search engines that can also search by subject are better than constructed lists. Being able to search a subset of the catalog is even better than a search box as you only need to maintain one file.

Recommendation Library web site designers should take advantage of the resources of their universities, such as web site designers.