Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Virtual Windows: Observing Chat Reference Encounters
through Transcript Analysis
Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D.,Marie L. Radford, Ph.D.Lawrence Olszewski, Ph.D.
19 IAPS International ConferenceSeptember 11-16, 2006
Alexandria, Egypt
Morphing Idea of Library
• Proliferation of digital libraries– Virtual Reference Services (VRS)– Electronic collections
• User Preferences– Sources
• Internet– Electronic sources
• Humans– Parents– Colleagues/Friends– Professors
– Interface design• Google-like • Amazon
Privacy and Confidentiality
• Traditional reference (FtF and Telephone)
– Anonymity and privacy assumed
• VRS– Verbatim transcripts allow unobtrusive
research opportunities– Transcripts provide physical evidence of
session
Privacy and Confidentiality
• Known identity of user – Authenticate and improve service– Identify repeat user– Send follow-up information
• Nature and subject of query– Sensitive questions
• Medical• Legal• Personal situations
– Confidentiality of all queries should be respected
Evaluation of VRS
• Sustainability of VRS– Factors that influence selection and use of
VRS– Behavior of users and librarians in VRS
sessions– User and librarian perceptions of satisfaction
Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, and Librarian Perspectives
• $1,103,572 project funded by:
– Institute of Museum and Library Services $684,996 grant
– Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey and OCLC Online Computer Library Center $405,076 in kind contributions
Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, and Librarian Perspectives
Project duration10/1/2005-9/30/2007
Four phases:I. Focus group interviews*II. Analysis of 1,000+ QuestionPoint
transcriptsIII. 600 online surveys*IV. 300 telephone interviews*
*Interviews & surveys with VRS users, non-users, & librarians
Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, and Librarian Perspectives
• Identify what individuals say they do– Focus group interviews– Online surveys– Telephone interviews
• Identify what individuals actually do– Transcript analysis
Phase II:24/7 Transcript Analysis
• Generated random sample– July 7, 2004 through June 27, 2005– 263,673 sessions– 25 transcripts/month = 300 total
• 256 usable transcripts– Excluding system tests and technical
problems
6 Analyses
– Geographical Distribution• Library receiving query• Library answering query
– Type of Library– Type of Questions
• Katz/Kaske Classification
– Subject of Questions• Dewey Decimal Classification
– Session Duration – Interpersonal Communication
• Radford Classification
Librarian Location - Question Received
Other States = 10
United Kingdom = 1
Pennsylvania = 4
Arizona = 4
Kansas = 5
Delaware = 6
Canada = 7
New York = 7
Washington = 8
Utah = 8
North Carolina = 14
Massachusetts = 21
Australia = 36
Maryland = 47
California = 77
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Number of Questions
n=255
Librarian Location - Question Referred/ Answered
Other states = 12
Germany = 1
Pennsylvania = 4
Michigan= 4
Colorado = 4
Hawaii = 6
Canada = 7
Washington = 7
North Carolina = 7
New York = 8
Connecticut = 9
Massachusetts = 10
Maryland = 35
Australia = 36
California = 88
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Number of questionsn=238
Type of Library Receiving Question
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Consortium Public University National Law State NotAvailable
K-12
Num
ber
of Q
uest
ions
n=256
Type of Question Asked
Procedural25%
Research2%
Subject Search37%
Inappropriate0%
Holdings6%
Ready Reference30%
n=273
Procedure and Subject
Language1%
Science8%
Technology5%
Arts & recreation4%
Literature5%
History & geography16%
Library procedure & miscellaneous
25%
Philosophy & psychology
1%
Compuer science, information & general
works4%
Social sciences31%
Religion0%
n=273
Dewey Decimal Classification
Arts & recreation5%
Literature6%
History & geography21%
Philosophy & psychology
1%
Compuer science, information & general
works5%
Religion0%
Social sciences42%
Technology7% Science
11%Language
2%
n=273
Service Duration
• Mean Service Duration: 13:53
• Median Service Duration: 10:37
Positive Transcript Example
U Where can I find the leading drug companies in boston doing diabetes treatment / prevention R&D?
L I can probably give you a few sources to get started, but I may wind up referring you to a business and/or medial librarian specialist.
L Let's start witht eNortheastern library web page...
U ok great thanks
L OK. I'm going to try the "co-browse" option -- that might let us see the same information at once...(if it's working!)
U wonderful
L since what you want to find are drug companies, I'll try to get you into a busienss database...
U perfect thank you
L Sorry, I thought there was a way you could search by sic code and get a ranked list of companies in a certian code.
U thats alright, seemed liek you were on the right track
Positive Transcript Example
Negative Transcript Example
U Which way is ur car accelerating when you’re thrown forward after hitting another bumper car?
L Is this a homework question.
L I'm not an expert on driving so I really can't answer that
U can u find a website or something
L I'm not sure what you are asking.
Negative Transcript Example
U …hello?
L I really don't understand how I can answer that for you.
U can i hav another librarian
L The information you gave you me does not help me find any resources to help you.
Focus Group InterviewsReasons for Using VRS
• Convenient• Efficient• More reliable than search engines & free• Allows multi-tasking• Email follow-up & provision of transcript• Pleasant interpersonal experience
– Librarian on first name basis – more personalized• Less intimidating than physical reference desk
– Feel comfortable abruptly ending session
Focus Group InterviewsReasons for not using VRS
• Graduate students– Fear of
• Bothering librarian• Looking stupid & advisors finding out
– Questions may not be taken seriously– Potential technical problems– Bad experiences in FtF influence expectations of VRS
• Screenagers– Virtual stalkers (“psycho killers”)– Not finding a trusted librarian– Unsure of what to expect
Focus Group Interviews Challenges for Users & Non-Users
• Speed and technical problems• Delayed response time• Librarians are not in users’ libraries
– Fear of no subject expertise
• Fear of overwhelming librarian
Focus Group Interviews Suggestions from Users & Non-Users
• Inclusion of multiple languages• Access to subject specialists• Better marketing and publicity
– Information on how to connect and use VRS– Reassurance that users will not bother librarians – the
library wants the service to be used
• Faster technology• Improved interface design
– More color– More attractive
Service Implications
• Sustainability of VRS– Encourage repeat use
• Protect privacy and anonymity– Encryption programs– “Anonymity Button”– Opt-out after registering– Opt-in only for necessary information
– Sales/Homework Help models• Build interpersonal relationships
– Disclose first name - trusted librarian– Positive relational communication
– Trade-offs in service• Personal service vs. personal disclosure
– Follow-up capability vs. anonymity– Amazon-like services vs. protection of personal information
Conclusions
• Current service models do not address privacy issues– Millennial generation wary of virtual
environments• Remote communication poses less
interpersonal risk than FtF• Positive interpersonal communication
imperative for VRS success• Many users appreciate convenience
and immediacy of VRS
Next Steps• Conduct
– Two additional focus group interviews – VRS users– Online survey & telephone interviews with VRS
• Users• Non-users• Librarians
• Analyses– Gender– User Type
• Child/Young adult• Adult• Unknown
End Notes
This is one of the outcomes from the project Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, and Librarian Perspectives, Marie L. Radford and Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Co-Principal Investigators.
Funded by IMLS, Rutgers University and OCLC, Online Computer Library Center.
Project web site: http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicity/
Questions
Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Email: [email protected] www.scils.rutgers.edu/~mradford
Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D. Email: [email protected] www.oclc.org/research/staff/connaway.htm
Lawrence Olszewski, Ph.D. Email: [email protected]
