Perceptions of Value and Value Beyond Perceptions

Carol TenopirUniversity of Tennesseectenopir@utk.eduweb.utk.edu/~tenopir/

WhatWhoWhy

What:Journals

What: Articles

What: Parts of articles

Why?

1. To make decisions and rethink old ones

2. To demonstrate return on investment or the value of the library’s collections and services

3. To improve services and collections

Who = Readers What = Scholarly Articles Why = To provide data useful for

librarians, publishers, researchers

Explicit Value of Reading Articles

Ask directly What was the purpose of your reading? How valuable was the reading to you?

Principal Purpose of Reading

Research

Teaching

Current Awareness

Writing

Other

Universities 2004-2006

20.6%

8.9%

10.5%

9.3%

50.7%

Purposes of Readings by Students

Help complete a course assignment or required reading in a course (46-50%)

Thesis/dissertation (33-37%) Keep up with the literature (7-8%) Personal interest (2-4%)

Values of reading by reading purposes

Values of Reading

Not at all important

Somewhat important

Absolutely essential

writing proposals or reports 2.0% 54.7% 43.3%

research

1.0% 59.9% 39.2%

teaching

.7% 64.7% 34.6%

current awareness

6.3% 85.7% 7.9%

Value of Reading in Order of Frequency of Responses (faculty)

Inspired new thinking/ideas (33%) Improved results (25%) Changed focus (17%) Resolved technical problems ( 7%) Saved time ( 6%) Faster completion ( 4%) Collaboration ( 3%) Wasted my time ( .6%)

Surveys UsingCritical Incident

Specific (last incident of reading) Includes all reading--e & print, library &

personal Purpose, motivation, outcomes Last reading=random sample of

readings

What faculty say…

How did we ever get along without electronic journals?

The ability to obtain articles online has made [my work] much more efficient and more thorough.

I use electronic media for 90% of my literature searching. This has been true for 10 years now.

What faculty say…

I have dropped some personal subscriptions as they have become available on-line. I rarely visit the library in person anymore… which, compared with the ease and convenience of doing literature searches, downloading and printing from my office/computer, takes too much time.

What students say…

Finding articles online is so much easier and faster than finding articles in dusty journals in musty corners of the library.

I have found electronic journals an invaluable aide as it means I do not have to travel to the Uni for every little article (which takes AT LEAST 1 hour.)

Implicit Values of Reading Articles

are easier to collect (downloads) don’t necessarily involve users directly

(log files) are easier to quantify are particularly valuable for measuring

changes over time, such as increased use of e-journals.

Implicit Value of Reading Articles

Users are “willing to pay” with their time

-Faculty spend on average ~143-159 hours per year just reading

-Medical faculty spend on average ~168 hours per year just reading

Achievers read more than others

150172 188

216252

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1977 1984 93-98 00-03 04-06*

Average Articles Read per year per University Faculty Member

*280 with outliers

48 47

36 34

05101520253035404550

1977 1993-1998

2000-2003

2004-2006

Average Minutes per Article by University Faculty Member

Ave

rage

Min

utes

Per

Art

icle

Definition of Contingent Valuation

Contingent Valuation is an economic method used to assess the benefits of non-priced goods and services (e.g., libraries or specific library services) by examining the implication of not having the product or service. (Donald W. King)

I would not bother getting the information 19% (209)

I would obtain the information from another source (ILL most common)

81% (889)

Proportion of Readings of Scholarly Articles by Faculty

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Personal Library-Provided Other

1977 1993-1998 2001-2003 2004-2006

1st1st YearYear 2-5 Years2-5 Years

Older articles are judged more valuable Older articles are judged more valuable & are & are more likely to come from more likely to come from librarieslibraries

Over 5Over 5 YearsYears

28.8%

18.1%

53.2%

Library

Personal

Separate

9.2%

17.5%

73.3%

33.5%

10.3%

56.3%

Readings by Students

Only 18-25% of readings of current year articles

Over 80% of readings from library, mostly electronic collections

As You Like ItAll’s Well That

Ends Well

All Individual Reports

web.utk.edu/~tenopir/

research/survey_instruments.html