driving discovery: do you have the keys to fair linking? (it’s about knowledge and library...
DESCRIPTION
2014 Charleston Conference Presentation by Scott Bernier, EBSCO Charleston Neapolitan Session Thursday, Nov 6, 10:30 AMTRANSCRIPT
Charleston Conference
November, 2014
Fair Linking &
Library Choice
A discussion of custom full-text link set up
What makes linking “Fair”?
the discovery vendor steps aside and
gives libraries complete control over
the full text links that appear in their
result list – when and how
In simplest terms
Hence, the title of this session….
• But how do you adjust the seats?
• Which radio station do you tune into?
• At what temperature do you set the
climate control?
Libraries are driving: You have the
controls & keys [to the car]…
Best Practices?
…but if we collectively understand the way
the services work, we are in a position to
consider the options and move toward an
ideal implementation (for each library)
Is there a driver’s manual for all of this?
It may not be that one-size-fits-all….
Perception vs. Reality
Discovery Bias
& Fair Linking
A conversation that brought
me here
A 2-Part Equation
These 2 components are completely
de-coupled in the EDS experience.
1.Records appearing in the result list
(Relevance Ranking)
2.The full text associated with a given record
(Linking Set-up)
Relevance Ranking Results
The Search Team at EBSCO really has one
goal as it relates to EDS relevancy ranking:
Ensure that the best possible
results for every search
query appear at the top of the
result list every time.
Relevance Ranking Results
The source/provider of a record is not a
factor in the ranking algorithms
But, the level of data
available on which to base
ranking decisions is very
important.
EDS Relevance Ranking Ingredients
1. Matching word frequency
2. Metadata field weighting
3. Value ranking
4. Exact field match boost
5. Local collection weighting
No simplistic
formula for
relevance ranking–
multiple factors
blend to deliver
relevant results.
Metadata Field Weighting
1. Match on subject headings from controlled vocabularies
2. Match on article titles
3. Match on author keywords
4. Match on keywords within abstracts
5. Match on keywords within full text
Some metadata fields count more than others for scoring.
There is NO weighting differentiation for content source/provider
More fields than
these are used for
field weighting.
Each available data field heightens
knowledge about an article, which contributes
to the ranking potential of an article.
There is only benefit to the content partner
(and ultimately the end user) when EDS has
more information about their titles (subject
indexing, full text, abstracts, etc.)
EDS aims to improve the user’s experience
with the library and its resources
usability studies with undergraduate
students, graduate students and faculty lead
us to include a “value” ranking based on user
expectations and preferences.
Usability Studies
Value Ranking
1. Publication date
2. Publication type
3. Peer reviewed or not
4. Document length
Specific content attributes of matching records contribute to
relevance scoring.
More attributes than
these are used for
value ranking.
EDS
Full-Text Links
Library Choice
Full Text Links in EDS: Custom Links
Each customer controls these custom
links in the following ways:
1. Which full text they wish to display
2. The order in which their links may appear
(their full text preference)
3. Whether multiple links to the same full text
displays (simultaneously)
Multiple Links from Same Record?
Full Text Links in EDS
Because customers choose their links and
link order preferences, the provider/
source of a record has no bearing on
which link may appear within that record.
Sample Record from Business Source
Sample Record from Business Source
Sample Record from Business Source
Custom Links “Default Setting”
• There are no default settings
• We first must enter a library’s collection, then
they can determine their link preferences
• If we did include certain collections by default,
users could easily run into unintended pay-walls
– This is because we are likely to include resources the
library does not own
– What if we knew of customer collections in advance?
(This could have multiple benefits)
0 ACM Digital Library (EDS)
0 American Chemical Society (EDS)
0 American Institute of Physics (EDS)
0 American Physical Society (EDS)
0 Annual Reviews (EDS)
0 BioMed Central/Chemistry Central/SpringerOpen EDS)
0 Cambridge University Press (EDS)
0 Elsevier ScienceDirect (EDS)
0 IEEE Xplore (EDS)
0 Institute of Physics (EDS)
0 Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins (EDS)
0 MIT Press (EDS)
0 Nature Publishing (EDS)
0 Oxford University Press (EDS)
0 Project Muse (EDS)
0 Royal Society of Chemistry (EDS)
0 S. Karger AG (EDS)
0 Sage (EDS)
0 SpringerLink (EDS)
“Digging into the Data: Exposing
the Causes of Resolver Failure”Cindi Trainor, Eastern Kentucky University
and Jason Price , Claremont Colleges
• Link resolvers “fail nearly
a third of the time”
• Even when the link resolver
does not fail, it requires
multiple clicks to get
to the full text
Opportunities – Link Resolver
Determine Best Practices of when & how
to use or by-pass the link resolver:
• What does the user tell us?
• Consistency. Familiarity. Simplicity.
• In the user experience – is it a link that says “full
text”, or a custom branded name for the link resolver
that takes us to a menu with multiple options?
SmartLinks Plus
• What are these are how are they set up?
– Automated direct links to publisher e-journal
– For customer who purchase
journals/packages from EBSCO
• Upcoming changes to SmartLinks Plus –
to follow the rules of custom links
JSTOR Specific Links - Example
• There are 6,000+ sites using EDS
• In order to look at the full text link set-up
for a customer, we must look at the “profile
level” for each customer
• Across traditional academic sites only, we
have 7,978 current EDS profiles
JSTOR Specific Links
Of the 7,978 academic EDS profiles:
• 2,764 (34%)
have NO JSTOR LINKS AT ALL
• 3,530 (44%)
have only the “free” JSTOR link
Opportunities
An understanding of a content provider’s
customers, would:
• Provide potential to turn on links “out of the gate”
(“Defaults” without the pay-wall concern)
• Allow us to specifically identify any existing
customer that as of today has NO link turned on
in EDS for content to which they subscribe
Opportunities
We can look closely at customer link profiles
An opportunity for libraries to fine-tune
the rank/order/inclusion of links – as well
as how these links display
Opportunities for Content Providers
• Providing Full Text Data for Searching?
• eBooks Chapter Level Data?
• Documentation Improvements
– Quick Reference Guides
• EDS “how to” video on full-text link set up
Ensuring Customers & EDS Partners Are
Aware of Linking Options/Opportunities
Other Opportunities
• “The Catalog Factor”
• With discovery, the Catalog is now “competing”
with journals in a direct way
• Libraries still ‘favor’ catalog records over other
records?
• Ability to adjust catalog weighting in discovery
services – best practices
The Great News…
• We all want the same thing
• More usage & value of library resources
• Exposure of the ENTIRE collection
• Enhanced perception of the library
• But ultimately…satisfied end users who
return to the library (and tell their friends)
– Because of expedient, fruitful experience
Perception vs. Reality& Now What?
• Overarching goal is to better communicate
• Know the facts (how it works)
• Eliminate the [false] perception of bias
• Move forward
– Optimize (the user experience)
– Improve collaboration (we all want the same thing)
– Best Practices