1. The Quest for Information James Mouw The University of Chicago Library ERIL, March 20, 2008 mouw@uchicago.edu

2. So many questions What do I get What do I hold What does it cost What do I actually pay What do I use What’s the quality Where do my people publish What do my people cite

3. What do I get? Purchased paper –Purchase orders –Catalog records Free paper –Maybe p.o.’s –Probably catalog records Online Purchased (individual subs) –Purchase orders –Catalog records –SFX entries Online Packages –As above Online Aggregations –Purchase orders (at product level only) –Catalog records (sometimes) –SFX entries (usually) What are the links? –PO# usually, OCLC# sometimes, VRN sometimes, ISSN/ISBN (P&E) usually, SFX# usually

4. What do I hold? Print –Catalog record with holdings –Presence in Worldcat Online –Catalog without holdings –SFX with Holdings (usually) What are the links? –OCLC# sometimes, ISSN/ISBN (P&E) usually, SFX# usually for online

5. What does it cost? Ulrich’s – individual lookup or via the Serials Analysis Tool Publisher – spreadsheets, usually Vendor data – via their catalog or custom reports What are the links? –ISSN/ISBN normally, VRN if using their feed

6. What do I actually pay? Invoice information from Purchase Orders – payment period usually free text Vendor feeds What are the links? –PO# usually, VRN if using, ISSN/ISBN (P&E) usually

7. What do I use? Print collection –Circulation stats Online collection –Scholarly Stats when available –Publisher reports – COUNTER and non-COUNTER –Vendor aggregations of information –Sushi feeds What are the links –Generally just the ISSN/ISBN (P&E)

8. What is the Quality? Mainly ISI impact factor H-index What are the links? –ISSN/ISBN

9. Where do my people publish? Web of Knowledge Scopus Other tools What are the links? –Mainly ISSN

10. What do they cite? Journal Use Reports What are the links? –ISSN

11. Goal: Performance measures Cost per use Coordination between –Holdings and publication –Holdings and citations –Publications and citations Looking for gaps in collection or for underperforming titles

12. The problem Many bits and pieces coming from many directions No reliable links that cross all sources of information Time! Fall out from each match point with resulting need to hand check the residue

13. The solution Or, a solution to part of the problem Over to the rest of the panel

14. The Usage Data Big Picture: A look at the collection analysis tools and usage standards currently available, and the important questions still surrounding usage data Christine Stamison, MLIS Senior Customer Relations Manager Electronic Resources & Libraries 2008 Conference

15. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 15 We will cover  Current journal usage analysis tools  Electronic Resource Management Systems  E-Gateways  ScholarlyStats  Industry standards that make usage analysis possible  COUNTER (Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources)  SUSHI (Standard Usage Statistical Harvesting Initiative)

16. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 16 Journal Usage Analysis Tools Electronic Resource Management Systems (ERMS):  Can store usage data, but…  Must collect usage data statistics from many vendors  Multiple reports from the vendors may be in a variety of formats that must be consolidated  Then the library must produce own set of reports to compare the statistics  Time-consuming and labor-intensive E-Gateways:  COUNTER standard enables gateways to collect usage data  Provide usage reports from multiple vendors  Library must produce statistics comparison reports

17. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 17 Usage Analysis Tools ScholarlyStats:  Single platform  Consolidates and provides access to a library’s usage statistics from multiple content providers in COUNTER compliant formats  Also provides “dashboard” comparison analysis reports Dashboard Reports Consolidated Reports LIBRARY ScholarlyStats

18. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 18 ScholarlyStats Consolidated Reports Currently 52 Platforms 500+ Databases 70,000+ Journals Including: ACS Publications Blackwell Synergy CSA Elsevier Science BioOne Highwire Press IngentaConnect EBSCOhost Meta Press Nature Publishing Group Proquest SAGE Scitation SwetsWise Thomson Gale Currently 52 Platforms 500+ Databases 70,000+ Journals Including: ACS Publications Blackwell Synergy CSA Elsevier Science BioOne Highwire Press IngentaConnect EBSCOhost Meta Press Nature Publishing Group Proquest SAGE Scitation SwetsWise Thomson Gale  Consolidated Journal Report 1 Full-text article requests by Journal Title, Platform and Month  Consolidated Database Report 1 Searches and Sessions by Month and Database  Consolidated Database Report 2 Turnaways by Month and Service  Consolidated Database Report 3 Searches and Sessions by Month and Service  COUNTER eBook reports in development

19. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 19 Comparison Analysis:  Total Number of titles by Platform  Full text articles by platform  Top Use for each Platform  Average Use by Platform  Proportional usage by title  Top 50 journals across Platforms  Low Usage Journals  Zero Use Journals Sample Report: Total journal use by Platform Sample Report: Average journal use by Platform ScholarlyStats Dashboard Reports

20. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 20 Evaluating Usage Statistics: Historic view and how industry standards make it all possible  Usage of online resources growing exponentially, but usage not measured in a consistent way  Content providers not supplying data to libraries in a format they want  Libraries unable to compare usage stats from various content providers  Usage of online resources growing exponentially, but usage not measured in a consistent way  Content providers not supplying data to libraries in a format they want  Libraries unable to compare usage stats from various content providers

21. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 21 Applying the COUNTER standard librarian ?  Specific requirements that content providers and vendors must meet for usage reports to be designated “COUNTER compliant”  Now provide data to libraries in the format they want  But…stats not available in a consistent data “container” and administrative cost of individual downloads on provider-by- provider basis is high  Specific requirements that content providers and vendors must meet for usage reports to be designated “COUNTER compliant”  Now provide data to libraries in the format they want  But…stats not available in a consistent data “container” and administrative cost of individual downloads on provider-by- provider basis is high

22. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 22 COUNTER + SUSHI librarian !  ERM system has ability to store usage data  SUSHI standard for ERM container now enables automatic request and delivery of usage statistics from content providers  Libraries must still consolidate, analyze, and create reports from providers’ data in ERM system  ERM system has ability to store usage data  SUSHI standard for ERM container now enables automatic request and delivery of usage statistics from content providers  Libraries must still consolidate, analyze, and create reports from providers’ data in ERM system

23. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 23 COUNTER + SUSHI + ScholarlyStats  Vendor can consolidate statistics and generate reports for libraries through automated web processes  Greatly reduces time and effort  Enables efficient, accurate data evaluation for informed decision making  Vendor can consolidate statistics and generate reports for libraries through automated web processes  Greatly reduces time and effort  Enables efficient, accurate data evaluation for informed decision making

24. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 24 ScholarlyStats LOVES the SUSHI Protocol  NISO Z39.93 – APPROVED BY ANSI – American National Standards Institute  As of October 2007 – 15 SUSHI Implementations through:  Innovative Interfaces (US)  Thomson Scientific ISI (US and Australia) —JUR (Journal Usage Report) Customer  Don’t have to go to ScholarlyStats portal and download reports  Automatically loaded into Innovative’s ERM or JUR  Tested with Ex Libris Verde ERM system – not in production yet

25. © Swets 2008 Confidential. Copying and distribution prohibited without express written permission from Swets. 25 Thank you! Christine M. Stamison, MLIS Senior Customer Relations Manager P: 800-645-6595, ext. 2312 F: 856-632-7312 M: 847-707-1428 E: cstamison@us.swets.com