An Electronic Journal Impact Study: The Factors that Change when an Academic Library Migrates from Print Carol Hansen Montgomery, Ph.D. Dean of Libraries, Drexel University June 3, 2002 Funded in part by a grant from the IMLS, NR-00027

Introduction Institutional Environment Developing E-Journal Collection Operational Impact IMLS-funded Research Impact on Users Lessons Learned Next Steps

Drexel University Technologically Oriented Urban Undergraduates: 10,000 Graduate Students: 2,500 Faculty: 500 Research Intensive

W.W. Hagerty Library Centralized 100K square feet 400K volumes 40 FTE staff $4M budget for 2001/02 Fully wired & wireless network 100 public access desktop computers 50 circulating laptops

E-Journal Collection Goal in 1998: Migrate to an all electronic journal collection as quickly as possible

E-Journal Migration Date/ Type Print 1,7101,4751, E - Journal 2004,4005,0007,6008,600

Institutional Readiness Administrative support Computer literate users Infrastructure in place Poor current journal collection Major budget increase Distance education programs Resource-rich environment

Developing the E-J Collection Much more complex Many more variables than print Purchased in package “Deals” Price/Contract negotiation Database to manage selection Large transition period complete

Additional Variables Comparability Subscription or full-text Competitive sources Pricing plans Access restrictions Provision of statistics Linking capabilities Archiving policy Lending via ILL

Print Collection 2002 “Browsing” Journals Fashion and Design Journals Core Library Science Journals Other Journals not yet Available Electronically

IMLS Project Goals Case Study Impact on staff activities Impact on costs: reduced, increased, re-allocated? Stimulate Research Develop a methodology

Methods* Calculate capital costs, amortize Space for print Computing infrastructure for electronic Calculate operational costs Staff costs Other operational costs e.g. subscriptions, binding Calculate subscription costs Compute/organize use data *Using King model.

Impact on Staff & Costs: Measured by Department Administration Technical Services Infrastructure/Systems & Space Circulation/Access Information Services Document Delivery

Analyzed by Function Re-organized staff data to: Acquisitions Collection development Physical processing Record-keeping Reference Teaching Communications Public relations

Research Question Hypothesis: Electronic journals are less expensive than print journals.

DEFINITIONS What is an Electronic Journal? E-Journal [pure]: Individual subs or publisher packages Aggregator: Individual journals from different publishers Full text database: Search tool with selected full-text

DEFINITIONS What is a Print Journal [Serial]? Continuations/Annuals? Newsletters? Newspapers?

DEFINITIONS What costs matter? What is the unit of measure? Cost per: Journal title? Journal volume? Journal issue? Journal article? Journal “pages”? “words”? Article use?

DEFINITIONS What is a Use? Print Re-shelving an issue or volume? Electronic Opening html file? Downloading a PDF document? Click on E-J database link More than X time spent viewing? What about duplicate views/session?

Impact: Per Title Costs Vary [2002] Print “only” 370 $112/title E-subscriptions 2,542 $137/title Aggregator 347 $ 83/title Full-text database* 11,200 $ 5/title *Allocated half the cost of the database to the electronic journals. Non-unique.

Use Data Print (98/99) Bound & Current Use All 1,710 titles 45,000 Print (00/01) All 300+ titles 34,000 E-Journals (00/01) Measurable Use Individual sub. 2,542 titles 100,881 Aggregator 347 titles 23,058 Full-text dbase 11,200 titles* 269,555 *Not unique.

Cost per Use (00/01) Print Journals $1 Individual subscriptions $3 Aggregator $1 Full-text database* $0.21 * Allocated half the cost of the database.

Cost/Use Range Print $1 to $50 Individual subscriptions $2 to $18 Aggregator $0.42 to $ 5 Full-text database $0.11 to $ 1

Impact: E-Journal Operational Costs Offset Print Savings Higher level staff required Selection/acquisitions costs high Statistics collection not automatic Onerous “claiming” procedure Inventory control made difficult by E- Journal “volatility” Demanding of administrator time

Impact: Lower Use of Print Re-Shelving Statistics

Impact: Development Costs High E-J Management Database MSQL database PEARL to create html Features: Creates web pages Search for print or E-J title Allow updating by non-techie

Impact: Users Prefer E-Journals 84% prefer E-Journals to print Increasing use of E-Journals Need for training/awareness

Impact: Users Satisfied [1=no agreement; 10=strong agreement] Mean E-Journals save time7.7 E-Journals make work easier8.6 E-Journals result in better quality research8.1 E-Js enable me to find more8.5

Lessons Learned Don’t depend on full-text databases for core journals Keep a larger browsing collection Assume a limited paper archiving responsibility if justified Re-develop all related policies, e.g. binding

Next Steps Complete analysis Compare to previous studies of print journal economics Measure cost to users of electronic vs print journals