Search (81 results, page 2 of 5)

0.0023678814 = product of:
  0.0047357627 = sum of:
    0.0047357627 = product of:
      0.009471525 = sum of:
        0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 4789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009471525 = score(doc=4789,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4789, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4789)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0023678814 = product of:
  0.0047357627 = sum of:
    0.0047357627 = product of:
      0.009471525 = sum of:
        0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 4820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009471525 = score(doc=4820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4820, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4820)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0023678814 = product of:
  0.0047357627 = sum of:
    0.0047357627 = product of:
      0.009471525 = sum of:
        0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 4976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009471525 = score(doc=4976,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4976, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4976)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0023678814 = product of:
  0.0047357627 = sum of:
    0.0047357627 = product of:
      0.009471525 = sum of:
        0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009471525 = score(doc=694,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 694, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=694)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Two studies are presented that investigate information seeking behaviour on the Internet. In study one, soccer fans' information seeking on the World Wide Web is investigated. In study two, access rates to a cancer information Web site are analysed. It is tentatively argued that there is a tendency for people to access information more commonly avoided in "real life", although in the case of football fans, the tendency to "bask in reflected glory" remains when online, while cutting off reflected failure is minimised. Implications for understanding and researching psychological processes of Web browsing behaviour are discussed.

Type

a

0.0023678814 = product of:
  0.0047357627 = sum of:
    0.0047357627 = product of:
      0.009471525 = sum of:
        0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 2852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009471525 = score(doc=2852,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2852, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2852)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This brief communication describes the results of a questionnaire examining certain aspects of the Web-based information seeking practices of university students. The results are contrasted with past work showing that queries to Web search engines can be assigned to one of a series of categories: navigational, informational, and transactional. The survey results suggest that a large group of queries, which in the past would have been classified as informational, have become at least partially navigational. We contend that this change has occurred because of the rise of large Web sites holding particular types of information, such as Wikipedia and the Internet Movie Database.

Type

a

0.002269176 = product of:
  0.004538352 = sum of:
    0.004538352 = product of:
      0.009076704 = sum of:
        0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009076704 = score(doc=578,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 578, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=578)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article reports the results of a survey of reference librarians in public and academic libraries of various sizes in the United States, asking them about their experiences with and attitudes towards the use of digital and networked technologies and resources in reference work. A total of 648 responded. In general, respondents were positive and optimistic in their outlook, but not unreservedly so. Among the strongest findings was a correlation between recent experience at doing digital reference and positive attitudes towards it, a clear set of opinions about what such services would be best and worst at, and differing perspectives and patterns of responses between academic and public librarians. In addition, questions asking about characteristics of librarians, their current and planned reference services, and some of their professional choices in doing reference work are reported.

Type

a

0.002269176 = product of:
  0.004538352 = sum of:
    0.004538352 = product of:
      0.009076704 = sum of:
        0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009076704 = score(doc=579,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 579, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=579)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The proliferation of digital information resources and electronic databases challenges libraries and demands that libraries develop new mechanisms to facilitate and better inform user selection of electronic databases and search tools. We developed a prototype, Web-based database selection expert system based on reference librarian's database selection strategy. This system allows users to simultaneously search all databases available to identify databases most relevant to their quests using free-text keywords or phrases taken directly from their research topics. This article reports on (1) the initial usability test and evaluation of the Selector-the test design, methodology used, performance results; (2) summary of search query analyses; (3) user satisfaction measures; (4) the use of the findings for further modification of the Selector; and (5) the findings of using randomly selected subjects to perform a usability test with predefined searching scenarios. Future prospects of this research have also been discussed in the article.

Type

a

0.0022374375 = product of:
  0.004474875 = sum of:
    0.004474875 = product of:
      0.00894975 = sum of:
        0.00894975 = weight(_text_:a in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00894975 = score(doc=2017,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This article is an edited version of a report commissioned by the British Library and JISC to identify how the specialist researchers of the future (those born after 1993) are likely to access and interact with digital resources in five to ten years' time. The purpose is to investigate the impact of digital transition on the information behaviour of the Google Generation and to guide library and information services to anticipate and react to any new or emerging behaviours in the most effective way. Design/methodology/approach - The study was virtually longitudinal and is based on a number of extensive reviews of related literature, survey data mining and a deep log analysis of a British Library and a JISC web site intended for younger people. Findings - The study shows that much of the impact of ICTs on the young has been overestimated. The study claims that although young people demonstrate an apparent ease and familiarity with computers, they rely heavily on search engines, view rather than read and do not possess the critical and analytical skills to assess the information that they find on the web. Originality/value - The paper reports on a study that overturns the common assumption that the "Google generation" is the most web-literate.

Type

a

0.0020714647 = product of:
  0.0041429293 = sum of:
    0.0041429293 = product of:
      0.008285859 = sum of:
        0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 2348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008285859 = score(doc=2348,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 2348, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2348)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper seeks to understand how users determine credibility in the internet environment from a conceptual level and the implications of these new methods of credibility determination on internet tools (primarily software) and services. Design/methodology/approach - The author first examines the underlying reasons for increased dependence on the internet for information, using electronic commerce as a starting point. The central concept of "information self-sufficiency" is introduced and then examined through the lens of the internet and conversation theory. Findings - The author finds that users are shifting from more traditional "authority" methods of credibility determination, where users cede determinations to trusted third parties, to a "reliability" approach where users seek commonalities and coherence among multiple information sources. This has led to an increased pressure for participation and openness at all levels of the internet. Research limitations/implications - Studies on users and credibility must better account for often invisible technical factors. Practical implications - Libraries must take into account a greater need for participation and technical fluency when dealing with patrons, particularly in information literacy programs and instruction. Originality/value - This paper presents a large-scale conceptual approach to credibility on the internet. It seeks to inform current approaches to the subject nested in communications and instruction with the unique technical environment of the internet.

Type

a

0.0020714647 = product of:
  0.0041429293 = sum of:
    0.0041429293 = product of:
      0.008285859 = sum of:
        0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008285859 = score(doc=2841,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - In a 31-month period, 1,184 questions addressed to the Internet Public Library's (IPL) reference service remained unanswered on the grounds that they were "out of scope". This paper aims to analyze the questions as artifacts of users' expectations to better chart the distinction between user and librarian views of reference service. Design/methodology/approach - Each question is examined to identify two user expectations, i.e. what kinds of information librarians could provide and what kinds of needs librarians could help meet. Emergent coding with a code-recode rate of 97 per cent identifies 23 types of expected librarian assistance and 28 characteristics of expected applications of that assistance. Findings - Users expect IPL librarians to provide personal advice, analysis, facts, procedures, instruction, technology guidance and evaluation. IPL librarians are expected to help users in making decisions, solving problems, completing processes and developing understanding. Research limitations/implications - Limitations include the use of a single coder and the use of single institution's data set. Mapping these user expectations suggests a need for librarians to consider further development of reference service in terms of its judgment, form, and involvement parameters. Practical implications - Reference service policies and training should be examined to enhance librarians' abilities to consider judgment, form, and involvement parameters primarily from the user's perspective. Originality/value - This paper analyzes that which is rarely seen, i.e. e-mail reference questions which are considered beyond the scope of service. Additionally, the IPL question pool provides a broader range of user mental models than would be found in any geographically bound institution.

Type

a

0.0020296127 = product of:
  0.0040592253 = sum of:
    0.0040592253 = product of:
      0.008118451 = sum of:
        0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 2038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008118451 = score(doc=2038,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 2038, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2038)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0020296127 = product of:
  0.0040592253 = sum of:
    0.0040592253 = product of:
      0.008118451 = sum of:
        0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 4410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008118451 = score(doc=4410,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4410, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4410)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0020296127 = product of:
  0.0040592253 = sum of:
    0.0040592253 = product of:
      0.008118451 = sum of:
        0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 6002) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008118451 = score(doc=6002,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6002, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6002)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0020296127 = product of:
  0.0040592253 = sum of:
    0.0040592253 = product of:
      0.008118451 = sum of:
        0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 6226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008118451 = score(doc=6226,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6226, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6226)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0020296127 = product of:
  0.0040592253 = sum of:
    0.0040592253 = product of:
      0.008118451 = sum of:
        0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 6268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008118451 = score(doc=6268,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6268, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6268)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0020296127 = product of:
  0.0040592253 = sum of:
    0.0040592253 = product of:
      0.008118451 = sum of:
        0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008118451 = score(doc=591,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 591, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=591)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0020296127 = product of:
  0.0040592253 = sum of:
    0.0040592253 = product of:
      0.008118451 = sum of:
        0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 4759) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008118451 = score(doc=4759,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4759, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4759)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reports on the performance of five free digital reference services (DRS) in answering ten reference questions. The first five questions were of a simple, factual, nature which should have ready answers. The second set of five were based on the subject of film studies. The answers to these questions varied from a simple one- or two-word response, to more extensive information, such as question 10. This study notes the use of various delivery methods for DRS: chat, Web forms, e-mail. It outlines the individual and co-operative approaches; and the challenges posed to the academic libraries by the so-called expert services. This study also intends to check if the services would ask for further information to ensure accuracy or simply provide the best answer based on the first query. It finds that there is often a trade-off between speed of response and quality or accuracy of response.

Type

a

0.00202785 = product of:
  0.0040557 = sum of:
    0.0040557 = product of:
      0.0081114 = sum of:
        0.0081114 = weight(_text_:a in 4818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0081114 = score(doc=4818,freq=46.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1527411 = fieldWeight in 4818, product of:
              6.78233 = tf(freq=46.0), with freq of:
                46.0 = termFreq=46.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4818)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 56(2005) no.11, S.1238-1239 (D.A. Stirling): "Virtual reference services are becoming an important tool as librarians strive to stay current with patron's information demands. In 2001, the Washington State Library initiated the Statewide Virtual Reference Project (SVRP) to support electronic reference services throughout the state. An element of that project, termed "Anytime, Anywhere Answers," was designed to train librarians in the effective use of virtual reference services. The results of that project, including precautions and pitfalls, as well as the curriculum used in the project, are recounted in this book. The book begins with a short review of the Washington State experience with virtual reference training (VRT) and the means by which the guide can be used. The very first page begins with an example of a virtual reference session gone wrong and the authors set the tone for the remainder of the book, which decries the "Shazam! You're a virtual librarian" phenomenon. The second chapter provides a thorough overview of the Washington State SVRP, including planning elements, budgeting, convening of focus groups, and training development. Perhaps the most important information in this chapter is the identification of eight key skills, aptitudes, and knowledge critical in online environments: chat skills, online reference interview, internet searching, database searching, collaborative browsing, customizing scripts, methods for evaluating success, and coping with technical glitches. Building an the aforementioned eight key skills, Chapter Three of the book examines the "core competencies" needed for virtual reference. These 14 competencies are wide ranging and clearly demanding of the librarian training in VRT. In addition, the authors expound upon the eight key skills, aptitudes, and knowledge identified in Chapter Two. Constructivist learning, which has garnered controversy in recent years, was identified as the learning platform for Washington State's SVRP and is the subject of the book's fourth chapter. The authors explain why this learning Format was chosen-primarily because VRT developers felt that participants would learn better by reaching their own conclusions. In this case, constructivist learning involved virtual field trips, secret patron activities, and weekly chat meetings. The challenge of developing the SVRP is described in Chapter Five, with a focus an descriptions of in-person training, online training, and individual and collaborative learning. While earlier chapters discuss theory, practical issues involved in developing and maintaining a VRT program are the subject of Chapters Six through Nine. Important issues, such as curriculum development, training activities, online behavior, and post-program assessment, are examined in detail. Many of the issues examined in these chapters are those that information professionals are faced with an a regular basis. In discussing curriculum development, the authors describe the important questions that need to be asked, as well as important issues such as identifying and qualifying trainers and staff, course timing, determining curriculum efficacy, methods of training delivery, and methods of evaluation.
The real core of the SRVP, that is, the VRT training activities actually utilized by Washington State, are presented in Chapter Seven in roughly the same order as they took place in the course (train the trainer, orientation, chat practice, multitasking skills, virtual field trips, secret patron, transcript review, checking out the competition, policy and procedure review, sharing via a discussion list, and online meetings). Most interestingly, Chapter Eight deals with behavior, an issue rarely discussed in the context of librarianship, let alone providing reference services. As stated by the authors, "the most difficult aspect of digital reference service involves incorporating model reference interview techniques into an online transaction" (p. 74). The SVRP utilized an "online secret patron scenario" as a training tool that helped the student get the question straight, kept the customer informed, and provided the information required by the patron. The final chapter of the book reviews the important tasks of evaluation, modification, and follow-up. To that end, evaluative material is described and linked to Appendix A (assessment tools). In addition, evaluative tasks such as trainer debriefings and consultation with others participating in the SVRP are described. Finally, the chapter includes examples of unexpected consequences experienced in evaluating VRT services (from total inability to handle online transactions to poor marketing or branding of online services). Many useful appendices are included in this book. Appendix A provides examples of several assessment tools used during the "Anytime, Anywhere Answers" program. Appendix B consists of actual transcripts (edited) designed to illustrate good and bad virtual reference transactions. The transcripts illustrate transactions involving helping with homework, source citing, providing an opinion, suggesting print materials, and clarifying a question. This appendix should be required reading as it provides real-world examples of VRT in action. Appendix C is a copy of a VRT field trip questionnaire. The next appendix, like Appendix B, should be required reading as it includes an actual transcript from seven secret patron scenarios. A policies and procedures checklist is provided in Appendix E. Yet another critical source of information is presented in Appendix F, online meeting transcript. This transcript is the result of an online meeting conducted during a VRSP training class held in 2003. According to the authors, it is an example of the positive working relationship developed during a five-week learning course. The remaining appendices (G through 1) present information about support materials used in the VSRP, the VSRP budget, and trainer notes and tips. Clearly, VRT is a skill and resource that information professionals need to embrace, and this book does a fine job of outlining the essentials. It is apparent that the Washington State experience with VRT was a pioneering venture and is a model that other information professionals may seek to embrace, if not emulate, in developing their own VRT programs. However, this book is not a "complete guide" to VRT. There is too rapid development in virtual environments for any one to claim such an achievement. However, it is likely the most "complete" guide to the Washington State experience that will be published; therefore, this book should serve as a thorough and revelatory guide to VRT for several years to come."

0.001965164 = product of:
  0.003930328 = sum of:
    0.003930328 = product of:
      0.007860656 = sum of:
        0.007860656 = weight(_text_:a in 2230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007860656 = score(doc=2230,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1480195 = fieldWeight in 2230, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2230)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 55(2004) no.4, S.366-368 (L. Mon): "The early years of the 21st century have been marked in the library community by a sharp increase in "chat reference" Services offered through library Web sites. Variously called "live reference," "virtual reference," or "chat reference," these Services utilize chat, MOO, instant messaging, and other online technologies to extend the live, synchronous interaction of the library reference desk to the Internet. In 2001, Stephen Francoeur found 272 libraries with chat reference Services worldwide, and in June 2003 Bernie Sloan's online listing of chat consortia included 47 consortia, which together represented more than 550 U.S. libraries. (Francoeur, 2001; Sloan, 2003) Jana Ronan's book is the latest entrant among recent works intended to guide librarians in the growing trend of setting up synchronous online "chat reference" services, and provides information about selecting software, setting service policies, conducting training, and managing staffing for a variety of different service configurations. Ronan, who serves as Interactive Reference Coordinator for the George A. Smathers Libraries at the University of Florida, Gainesville, covers the practical aspects of launching and managing chat reference services in 10 chapters, followed by five chapters of individual case studies contributed by other authors who describe chat reference implementations at SUNY Morrisville, Austin Peay State University, Paradise Valley Community College, University of South Florida, and the University of Florida.
Other recent works in this field include Marc Meola and Sam Stormont's 2002 "how to do it manual" for starting and operating live reference services, and Anne Grodzins Lipow's 2003 "handbook" for virtual reference librarians (Meola & Stormont, 2002; Lipow, 2003). As with Ronan's book, each of these is targeted toward librarians who are considering offering live interactive online reference services as part of a digital library presence. While Meola and Stormont provide extensive guidance an adapting chat services to specific staffing configurations and Lipow focuses more deeply an developing staff skills for the chat reference interaction, Ronan's book offers the most comprehensive overview for analyzing and selecting among chat reference software choices. Ronan's first two Chapters are focused an software choices. Chapter 1 describes "basic" software such as Internet Relay Chat (IRC), MOO, instant messaging, and Web-based chat, while Chapter 2 covers "advanced" options such as online distance education courseware and Web-based call center software. In Chapter 3, Ronan discusses the audience for chat reference services. Chapter 4 concerns the criteria for selecting "real time software" appropriate for the library and its users. Chapter 5 explores staffing models of all types, from recruitment of regular staff to work extra hours to outsourcing of chat reference work among vendors, consortia, and independent contractors.
Training techniques are the focus in Chapter 6, including ways to relax trainees and reduce cognitive load as well as to maximize training utility when the software limits the number of logins available. Ronan covers everyday administration and policy issues in Chapters 7 and 8. These include a list of daily routines such as checking that the software is functioning, plus monthly routines of updating statistics, policies, and procedures. Chapter 9 offers guidance an the chat reference interview, which Ronan likens to "information therapy" within an online environment of diminished contextual cues. Marketing and publicity are discussed in Chapter 10, with advice an advertising and publicity campaigns as well as a checklist of 20 promotional strategies for attracting users to a new chat service (p. 165). In the final section of the book, Chapters 11-15 provide individual case studies written by six contributors describing how live different academic libraries have been able to launch and operate chat reference services using a variety of different types of software including instant messaging, MOO, Internet Relay Chat, and call center software. Each case study begins with a statement of the software used, launch date, staffing, and hours of the service, and most include statistical information an chat reference traffic. These final live chapters provide "voices from the front lines" giving details of individual librarians' experiences in launching chat services.
Overall, Ronan's book serves as an excellent guide for librarians interested in launching chat reference services and provides a particularly comprehensive overview of software and considerations for selection and expansion. However, the strong focus an basic hands-on setup, administration, and management may limit the appeal of the book for other readers interested in exploring issues of chat reference service in a larger context-such as whether library schools are adequately preparing the next generation of librarians to function in this new virtual environment, or whether the volume of chat reference traffic sufficiently justifies a refocusing of resources and staffing from e-mail, telephone, and face-to-face service points, especially in a 24/7 context. As chat reference moves beyond text into voice and video, and as the current chat start-ups either disappear or become strongly integrated within digital libraries, there will be a continuing need for writers such as Ronan to move beyond the basics and guide us in considering the next steps and the transformations that online reference services are both creating and reflecting within our libraries and the larger society."

0.001913537 = product of:
  0.003827074 = sum of:
    0.003827074 = product of:
      0.007654148 = sum of:
        0.007654148 = weight(_text_:a in 5239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007654148 = score(doc=5239,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 5239, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5239)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a