User-defined Value Metrics for Electronic Journals

Chew, Katherine, Stemper, Jim, Lilyard, Caroline and Schoenborn, Mary User-defined Value Metrics for Electronic Journals., 2012 (In Press) [Preprint]

[thumbnail of UserDefinedValueBasedMetricsForElectronicJournalsPDF.pdf]
Preview
 Text
UserDefinedValueBasedMetricsForElectronicJournalsPDF.pdf - Submitted version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial.
Download (1MB) | Preview

English abstract

Building on the work done by the California Digital Library (CDL), the University of Minnesota Libraries is developing a set of user-defined value-based electronic journal usage metrics. User value is assessed in three overall categories: (1) utility or reading value, (2) quality or citing value, and (3) cost effectiveness. In addition to analyzing vendor-generated usage metrics, also included were Affinity String data, derived from the University of Minnesota’s central authentication system that anonymously captures a user’s academic department and degree program or position at the university and combined with vendor-generated usage data, provides a granular picture of journal use down to the title level. Collection management librarians and library users can benefit from a viable, more accurate metric for use and value of library resources than cost-per-download, which would ensure that the most needed/valued resources are available to further research and learning.

Item type: Preprint
Keywords: Usage statistics, journal metrics, electronic journals, reading, citing, cost effectiveness
Subjects: J. Technical services in libraries, archives, museum. > JB. Serials management.
Depositing user: Jim Stemper
Date deposited: 05 Mar 2013 11:37
Last modified: 31 May 2017 08:34
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/18727

References

1. Alan Dawson, “Inferring user behavior from journal access figures.” The Serials Librarian 35 no. 3 (1998): 31-41, DOI:10.1300/J123v35n03_03.

2. Karla L. Hahn and Lila A. Faulkner, “Evaluative usage-based metrics for selection of e- journals.” College & Research Libraries 63 no. 3 (2002): 215-227.

3. Julie M. Hurd, Deborah D. Blecic and Anne E. Robinson, “Performance measures for electronic journals: a user-centered approach.” Science & Technology Libraries 20 no. 2/3 (2001): 57-71.

4. Weiling Liu, Fannie M. Cox, "Tracking the use of e-journals: a technique collaboratively developed by the Cataloging Department and the Office of Libraries Technology at the University of Louisville", OCLC Systems & Services, 18 no. 1 (2002):32 – 39.

5. Philip M. Davis and Leah R. Solla, “An IP-level analysis statistics for electronic journals in chemistry: making inferences about user behavior.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54 no. 11 (2003):1062-1068, DOI: 10.1002/asi.10302.

6. James A. Stemper and Janice M. Jaguszewski. “Usage statistics for electronic journals: an analysis of local and vendor counts.” Collection Management 28 no. 4 (2003):3-22.

7. Brinley Franklin, “Managing the electronic collection with cost per use data.” IFLA Journal 31 no. 3 (2005):241-248.

8. Tina E Chrzastowski, Michael Norman and Sarah Elizabeth Miller, “SFX statistical reports: a primer for collection assessment librarians.” Collection Management 34 no. 4 (2009):286-303.

9. Johan Bollen, Herbert Van de Sompel and Marko A. Rodriquez, “Towards usage-based impact metrics: first results from the mesur project.” In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, Pittsburg, PA, June 16-20, 2008: 231-240, doi:10.1145/1378889.1378928.

10. Rachel A. Fleming-May and Jill E. Grogg, “Practitioner responses on the collection and use of usage statistics.” Library Technology Reports 46 no. 6 (2010):28-34.

11. Ibid. 11-16.

12. The COUNTER Code of Practice for Usage Factors: Draft Release 1. (March 2012): 6.

http://www.projectcounter.org/documents/Draft_UF_R1.pdf

13. Helman, Deborah. “Wendt Library – Faculty Collections Survey 2008.” University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2008. Unpublished survey. Used by permission of the author.

14. Jacqueline Wilson and Chan Li, “Calculating scholarly journal value through objective metrics.” CDLINFO News, February 13, 2012, http://www.cdlib.org/cdlinfo/2012/02/13/calculating- scholarly-journal-value-through-objective-metrics

15. CIBER Research Limited, The Journal Usage Factor: exploratory data analysis: Stage 2 Final Report, 27 May, 3 Aug 2012 http://www.projectcounter.org/documents/CIBER_final_report_July.pdf

16. Cody Hansen, Heather Hessel, John Barneson, Deborah Boudewyns, Jan Fransen, Lara Friedman-Shedlov, Martha Hardy, Chris Rose, Barb Stelmasik and Stacie Traill, “ Discoverability Phase 1: Final Report.” http://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/48258

17. Shane Nackerud, Jan Fransen, Kate Peterson, Kristen Mastel, Krista Soria and David Peterson, “Library data and student success.” Library Technology Conference, Macalester College, St. Paul, MN, March 14-15, 2012. http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu/libtech_conf/2012/sessions/28/

18. Project COUNTER http://www.projectcounter.org 19. The Thomson Reuters Impact Factor.

http://thomsonreuters.com/products_services/science/free/essays/impact_factor/

20. Jevin D. West, Theodore C. Bergstrom and Carl Bergstrom, “The EigenfactorTM metrics: a network approach to assessing scholarly journals.” College and Research Libraries 7 no. 3 (2010):236- 244. http:// www.eigenfactor.org/

21. R Core Team (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/.

22. John D. McDonald, “Understanding journal usage: a statistical analysis of citation and use.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58 no. 1(2007):39-50.

23. Richard Taylor, “Interpretation of the correlation coefficient: a basic review.” Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography 6 no. 1 (1990): 35-39.

24. James Dean Brown, “The coefficient of determination.” SHIKEN: JALT Testing & Evaluation SIG Newsletter 7 no 1(2003):14-16.

25. Anthony C. Redmon, Anne-Maree Keenan, “Understanding statistics: putting p-values into perspective.” Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association 92 no. 5(2002):297-305.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS