Abstract
Many libraries subscribed to discovery services in the hope of boosting the use of their local collections such as print materials, DVDs, or even subscribed ejournals and ebooks that are separate from licensed databases. However, anecdotal evidence shows that the implementation of a discovery service will increase the usage of the vendors’ electronic resources instead. This study aims to find out how well local collections are promoted through EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS), Primo, Summon, and WorldCat Discovery Services (WorldCat) by comparing results of queries in the discovery services versus the number of actual listings from these libraries’ traditional catalogs.
Authors conducted three searches based on real-life student assignments in science, history, and sociology in each of the four discovery services. To offset the bias of location configuration, ten libraries with the same discovery tool were selected for each search and total results are averaged. ANOVA and Tukey Honest Significant Difference statistical analyses show differences among the four discovery services investigated. Discovery tools promote local collections in different ways. Some tools provide the possibility to list libraries’ local collections before listing the vendor’s database items, but others are less inclined to do so.
References
Asher, A. D., Duke, L. M., & Wilson S. (2013). Paths of discovery: Comparing the search effectiveness of EBSCO Discovery Service, Summon, Google Scholar, and conventional library resources. College & Research Libraries, 74(5), 464-488.
Borrego, A. & Lluis A. (2016). Faculty information behaviour in the electronic environment: attitudes towards searching, publishing and libraries. New Library World, 117(3/4), 173-185. Retrieved December 9, 2019 from https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/NLW-11-2015-0089
Burke, J. (2012). Web-scale management solution. [Serial Solutions-Webinar]. Retrieved March 10, 2012 from http://www.serialssolutions.com/en/services/intota
Calvert, K. (2015). Maximizing academic library Collections: Measuring changes in use patterns owing to EBSCO Discovery Service. College & Research Libraries, 76 (1), 81-99. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.76.1.81
Cohen, R. A. & Thorpe A. (2015). Discovering user behavior: Applying usage statistics to shape frontline services. Serials Librarian, 69 (1), 29-46. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2015.1040194
Copenhaver, K. & Koclanes A. (2016). Impact of Web-scale discovery on reference inquiry. Reference Services Review, 44(3), 266-281. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/RSR-11-2015-0046
Dempsey, M. & Valenti, A.M. (2016). Student use of keywords and limiters in Web-scale discovery searching. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(3), 200-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2016.03.002
EBSCO. (2019). How Is Relevance Ranking Determined in EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS)? Retrieved December 6, 2019 from
https://help.ebsco.com/interfaces/EBSCO_Discovery_Service /EDS_FAQs/relevance_ranking_determined_in_EDS
Enis, M. (2018). E-Resources continue academic gains. Library Journal, 143(6), 16-18.
Ex Libris. (2014). Summon: Relevance. Retrieved June 27, 2017 from
https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Summon/Product_Documentation/Searching_in_The_Summon_Service/Search_Results/Summon%3A_Relevance_Ranking Ex Libris Knowledge Center
Ex Libris. (2017). Relevance ranking in Primo. Retrieved June 27, 2017 from http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/Relevance-Ranking
Fitzpatrick, S. (2010). Summon summons 100th customer. American Libraries, 41(10): 24-25.
Greiner, T. (2011). How does switching to a discovery tool affect circulation? In Declaration of Interdependence: The Proceedings of the ACRL 2011 Conference in Philadelphia, PA, 2011. Retrieved July 25, 2018 from http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/ content/conferences/confsandpreconfs/national/2011/papers/how_does_switching.pdf
Guan, J. & Jia, G. (2016). A comparison of discovery tools in Chinese academic libraries. National Library Journal, 108 (6), 71-79.
Hanneke, R. & O'Brien, K.K. (2016). Comparison of three Web-scale discovery services for health sciences research. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 104(2), 109-117.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.104.2.004
Lawton, A. (2015). Use of ESBCO Discovery Tool at one university reveals increased use of electronic collections but decreased use in circulation of print collections. Evidence Based Library & Information Practice, 10(4), 244-246. https://doi.org/10.18438/B8J88H
Levine-Clark, M., McDonald J., & Price J.S. (2014). The effect of discovery systems on online journal usage: A Longitudinal study. Insights:The UKSG Journal, 27(3), 249-56. https://doi.org/ 10.1629/2048-7754.153
Meirose, J. & Lian, B. (2019). User testing: Gathering data from first-year medical students as they interact with the EBSCO Discovery Services (EDS). Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 16(1), 1-7.
OCLC. 2017. "How Does Relevance Ranking Work in WorldCat Local?" Accessed June 27, 2017. https://www.oclc.org/support/services/WorldCatlocal/faq/search.en.html
O’Hara, L. (2012). Collection usage pre- and post-Summon implementation at the University of Manitoba. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 7(4), 25-34.
Parry, M. (4/25/2014). As researchers turn to Google, libraries navigate the messy world of discovery tools. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 60, (32), 18. Retrieved June 29,2017 from http://www.chronicle.com/article/As-Researchers-Turn-to-Google/146081
Power, J.A. (2018). EBSCO Information Services usability study on accessibility. Reference Services Review, 46(3), 449-459.
Regier, R. (2015). Relevancy ranking in discovery services. A Way of Happening: Library Research Blog. Retrieved June 28, 2017 from
https://awayofhappening.wordpress.com/2015/06/24/relevancy-ranking-in-discovery-services/
Ridga, C., Hoogland, M., & Morales, J. (2018). But I just want a book! Is your discoverylayer meeting your users’ needs? Journal of Web Librarianship, 12(4), 246-260.
Statistics How To. (2019). Retrieved December 9, 2019 from
https://www.statisticshowto.datasciencecentral.com/tukey-test-honest-significant-difference/
Teolis, M. G., Stephenson, P.L., Taylor, M.V., & Poletti, E.J. (2019). Change in information professionals’s satisfaction with discovery services. Journal of Hospital Librarianship,
(4), 321-329.
Walker, S. & Sims, L.L. (2012). “Implementing a Discovery Tool at Two HBCUs.” College & Undergraduate Libraries, 19(2-4), 312-326. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691316.2012.693370
Wang, X., Cui, Y., Xu, S. (2018). Evaluating the impact of Web-scale discovery Services on scholarly content seeking. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44(5), 545-552.
Warren, R. M. L. (2017). Usability study identifies vocabulary, facets, and education as Primary Primo Discovery System interface problems. Evidence Based Library & Information Practice, 12(3), 177-179. https://doi.org/ 10.18438/B89M14
Woods, J., Gillespie, E., & McManamon, C. (2016). Discovering discovery: Lessons learnt from a usability study at the University of Liverpool. Insights: The UKSG Journal, 29(3), 258-265. https://doi.org/ 10.1629/uksg.320
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and the initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).