Open Access Complements Interlibrary Loan Services, but Additional User Education is Needed

Richard Hayman

摘要

A Review of: Baich, T. (2015). Open access: Help or hindrance to resource sharing? Interlending & Document Supply, 43(2), 68-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ILDS-01-2015-0003 Objective – To examine interlibrary loan (ILL) request rates for open access (OA) materials and determine how OA may affect resource sharing. This research updates the author’s previous study. Design – Quantitative analysis. Setting – A large, urban, public research university library system in the United States of America. Subjects – 1,557 open access ILL material requests among 23,531 total ILL requests submitted during the 2012 and 2013 fiscal years (July 2011-June 2013). Methods – The library has tracked and recorded OA requests that appear among ILL material requests since 2009. Using OCLC’s ILLiad software to manage ILL requests, they have implemented two custom routines. One routine is for open access searching on standard items, and uses software plugins to search across various open resources. All materials published prior to 1923 are treated as being in the public domain, so requests for these materials are automatically routed to this queue. The second custom routine is used for searching for OA electronic theses and dissertations, and is employed when the requested resource is not found in the library’s subscription resources. Other article requests are routed to the RapidILL service for open access availability. Main Results – The research presented reveals that ILL requests for OA materials exhibited a steady increase year over year, while overall ILL requests decreased slightly. This finding is true both for the fiscal years reported in this study and also the years since the author’s original study in 2011 (Baich, 2012). Of the 1,557 OA requests examined, 72% (n=1,135) were for journal articles, 8% (n=125) were for books or book chapters, 9% (n=140) were for theses or dissertations, 3% (n=54) were for conference papers, and 7% (n=105) were for reports. Library staff typically fill these article requests using gold OA or green OA sources. The researcher notes the difficulty in refining by source, though confirmed that 15% of articles requested (n=170) were filled using a gold OA source, and that another 30 article requests (~2.6%) were filled with materials available in the public domain. This leads to the conclusion that the majority of article requests are filled using green OA sources. As the library also includes OA collections within its electronic resources, staff filled 13% of ILL article requests (n=152) using journals and repositories from these sources. Another 16% of article requests were filled using a combination of various online open repositories, including subject repositories (n=83), institutional repositories (n=84), or national or consortial repositories (n=16). The author includes a similar breakdown of fulfillment rates and sources for the other main categories explored – books and book chapters, theses and dissertations, conference papers, and reports – representing a combined 27% of all OA ILL requests. Regarding this content, it is noteworthy that overall open access requests for these material categories has dropped across each category when compared to the author’s previous study, with the exception of report requests, which more than doubled compared to that previous study. The study includes a brief overview of the user status for users making the various open access requests, with undergraduate students (n=283) and graduate students (n=807) combined making 70% of all requests. Subject areas are also briefly examined, with ILL requests coming from 63 different schools or departments across the library system. The top 15 are reported, with Psychology being the top requester (n=198), followed closely by Engineering & Technology (n=182). The author notes that 7 of the top 15 are STEM or health science disciplines. Conclusion – The rate of ILL requests for OA materials shows that library users continue to struggle with information retrieval. The researcher concludes that in many cases, making an ILL request is easier for the user than completing a thorough search. Since staff resources are being redirected to fill user requests for materials that are readily available through open access, this use of staff time may have impacts on resource sharing and the library’s ability to fill ILL requests. The author identifies benefits of using OA resources, including an increased ability of staff to fulfill ILL requests, especially when providing grey literature, theses and dissertations, and conference papers and reports. Another identified benefit was the decreased turnaround time for securing materials, with immediate availability via OA saving 1.15 days to deliver materials to the user. Finally, the library estimates cost savings of over $27,000 (USD), based on estimated traditional per unit ILL costs.

机译：综述：Baich，T.（2015）。开放式访问：对资源共享有帮助还是阻碍？ Interlending＆Document Supply，43（2），68-75。 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ILDS-01-2015-0003目标–研究开放存取（OA）材料的馆际互借（ILL）请求率，并确定OA如何影响资源共享。这项研究更新了作者先前的研究。设计–定量分析。设置–美国的大型城市公共研究型大学图书馆系统。主题–在2012年和2013财政年度（2011年7月至2013年6月）提交的23,531项ILL申请中，共有1,557项开放获取ILL物质申请。方法–自2009年以来，图书馆已跟踪并记录了OA物料请求中出现的OA请求。他们使用OCLC的ILLiad软件管理ILL请求，已实现了两个自定义例程。一种例程是对标准项目进行开放访问搜索，并使用软件插件跨各种开放资源进行搜索。 1923年之前发布的所有资料都被视为属于公共领域，因此对这些资料的请求会自动路由到此队列。第二个自定义例程用于搜索OA电子论文和论文，当在图书馆的订阅资源中找不到所请求的资源时使用该例程。其他文章请求被路由到RapidILL服务，以实现开放访问的可用性。主要结果–提出的研究表明，对OA材料的ILL要求同比增长稳定，而ILL总体需求略有下降。这一发现不仅适用于本研究报告的财政年度，也适用于作者自2011年进行最初研究以来的年份（Baich，2012年）。在审查的1,557个OA请求中，有72％（n = 1,135）是期刊文章，有8％（n = 125）是关于书籍或书籍章节的，有9％（n = 140）是关于论文或学位论文的，3％（n = 54）用于会议论文，而7％（n = 105）用于报告。图书馆工作人员通常使用金色OA或绿色OA来满足这些文章要求。研究人员指出，按来源精炼存在困难，尽管证实了15％（n = 170）的请求物品是用金OA填充的，另外30项请求（〜2.6％）则填充了公众可获得的材料域。由此得出的结论是，大多数文章请求都是使用绿色OA来源填充的。由于图书馆还在其电子资源中包括了OA馆藏，因此工作人员使用这些来源的期刊和存储库满足了ILL文章请求（n = 152）的13％。另有16％的文章请求是使用各种在线开放存储库的组合来满足的，包括主题存储库（n = 83），机构存储库（n = 84）或国家或财团存储库（n = 16）。作者对其他主要类别（书和章，论文和学位论文，会议论文和报告）的完成率和来源进行了类似的细分，占所有OA ILL要求的27％。关于此内容，值得注意的是，与作者先前的研究相比，这些材料类别的总体开放访问请求在每个类别中都有所下降，但报告请求除外，报告请求与先前的研究相比增加了一倍以上。该研究包括对提出各种开放访问请求的用户的用户状态的简要概述，其中本科生（n = 283）和研究生（n = 807）占所有请求的70％。还简要检查了学科领域，图书馆系统中63个不同的学校或部门提出了ILL请求。报告的前15名中，心理学是最高的请求者（n = 198），紧随其后的是工程与技术（n = 182）。作者指出，前15名中有7名是STEM或健康科学学科。结论– ILL对OA材料的请求率表明，图书馆用户继续在信息检索方面苦苦挣扎。研究人员得出的结论是，在许多情况下，对用户发出ILL请求比完成彻底搜索要容易得多。由于人员资源已被重定向以满足用户对可通过开放访问轻松获得的资料的请求，因此这种人员时间的使用可能会影响资源共享和图书馆满足ILL请求的能力。作者指出使用OA资源的好处，包括提高员工满足ILL要求的能力，尤其是在提供灰色文献，论文和论文以及会议论文和报告时。另一个确定的好处是减少了固定材料的周转时间，通过OA可以立即供货，从而节省了1.15天的时间来将材料交付给用户。最后，根据传统的单位ILL成本估算，该图书馆估计可节省超过27,000美元的成本。

Open Access Complements Interlibrary Loan Services, but Additional User Education is Needed

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅