scholarly journals Undergraduate and postgraduate students in a North American University are choosing to use chat reference services for all kinds of reasons

2006 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 96
Author(s):  
Gill Needham
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
The United States ◽  
User Survey ◽  
Technical Problems ◽  
Postgraduate Students ◽  
Reference Services ◽  
Chat Reference ◽  
Survey Form ◽  
Chat Reference Services

A review of: Ward, David. “Why Users Choose Chat: A Survey of Behavior and Motivations.” Internet Reference Services Quarterly 10.1 (2005): 29-46. Objective – To investigate reasons why undergraduate and postgraduate students choose to use chat reference services and their satisfaction with the experience. Design – User survey. Setting – Large academic library in the United States. Subjects – A total of 341 library users took part in the survey. Of these, 79 were graduate students, 215 undergraduates, 21 staff, 5 alumni and 21 members of the public. Method – A user survey form was posted on the library website for a period of one month (March 2003). Users of the chat reference service received an automatic closing message asking them to complete the survey. Responses were fed into a database to be analysed by the research staff. Additional data was also gathered about the behaviour of all users of the chat service during that period – both responders and non-responders. Main results – The most popular reason for choosing to use a chat service was the desire for a speedy response, followed by ‘distance from the library’. Responders chose to use chat to ask a range of different kinds of questions. Nearly half (45%) were looking for a specific resource and 23% were seeking help at the beginning of their research. There were notable differences between undergraduate and graduate students. Twice as many undergraduates as graduates used the service to help them get started on their research. Graduates were three times as likely as undergraduates to be using the service to address technical problems they were having with the website. Overall satisfaction with the service was extremely high, with 77.5% rating it 5 out of 5 and 94.5% giving it 4 or 5 out of 5. Conclusion – Chat reference services are popular with users primarily because they are quick and convenient. However, users expect that these services will be able to deal with all types of questions, including help with research. This challenges an assumption by library staff that the medium is only suitable for short factual enquiries and general questions about library services. It is suggested that a detailed analysis of the chat transcripts from this period could provide a valuable addendum to the survey results.

scholarly journals Adherence to RUSA’s Guidelines for Virtual Reference Services is Below Expected in Academic Libraries

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Annie M. Hughes
Keyword(s):  
Academic Libraries ◽  
Staff Member ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
The United States ◽  
Virtual Reference ◽  
Staff Members ◽  
Reference Services ◽  
Chat Reference ◽  
Library Staff ◽  
Chat Reference Services

Objective – To evaluate the quality of academic libraries’ virtual reference services and measure compliance to the Reference & User Services Association’s (RUSA’s) Guidelines for Virtual Reference & User Services. Design – Qualitative research study evaluating virtual reference chat sessions using RUSA’s Guidelines for Virtual Reference & User Services. Setting – Virtual reference environments in public academic libraries in the United States. Subjects – Twenty virtual reference providers from public academic libraries. Methods – Initially researchers selected 1 academic library out of each of the 50 states to evaluate for quality virtual chat reference services, however because of factors including time and availability of virtual chat services to unaffiliated institutions; the sample included only 20 academic libraries. After selecting the 20 academic libraries for evaluation, researchers posed as virtual chat reference patrons using emails and aliases that had no affiliation to any particular institution. Researchers then asked the librarian or library staff a two-part question making sure to leave out any library jargon or anything that would lead the virtual chat reference operator to recognize that they are also affiliated with a library or library school. Using the RUSA Guidelines for Virtual Reference & User Services, researchers then evaluated their virtual chat reference experience for the following: Approachability; Interest; Listening/Inquiring; Searching; Follow-Up; Suggests patron call or visit the library. Main Results – When evaluated for jargon-free websites and overall usability in finding all types of reference services, 80% of the library’s websites were easy to use and jargon free, reflecting overall high usability. Evaluation of library staff’s ability to maintain “word contact” by writing prompts to convey interest in the patron’s question left some room for improvement. Sixty percent of researchers coding their virtual reference experience thought the level of contact was below expected. Information regarding question and answering procedures, question scope, types of answers provided and expected turnaround time for questions was only available in 30% of examined websites. Thirty-five percent of researchers felt that library staff members gathered enough information to answer the question without compromising privacy, however, 25% thought that staff members gathered a very small amount of information on the patron’s need, although privacy never felt compromised. When researchers evaluated the library staff member on their ability to explain how to utilize resources properly, 50% thought the instruction provided was below average. Although 15% believed they received “superior instruction.” Seventy-five percent of the researchers were not asked by a library staff member if the question received an adequate answer, 50% of reference transactions library staff did not consult a librarian or expert, and in 55% of transactions the staff member did not suggest that the patron visit or call the library. Conclusion – While the researchers received some valuable information about the need to improve virtual reference services in academic libraries, there were some flaws in their research. The question they developed was almost too clear and made it difficult for the individual answering the chat reference to adequately perform a reference interview or ask probing questions. It is possible that because researchers carefully planned out their question they set themselves up to create an interaction that would not normally occur in a virtual chat reference environment. Also, because researchers were unable to evaluate what was occurring in the environment surrounding the virtual chat reference providers it was impossible to make a judgment on the speed or length of the interaction. The researchers did come away from the study with results that point to a need to utilize the RUSA guidelines in order to conduct effective reference interviews, maintain appropriate contact with the user when engaging in chat reference, provide instruction and point patrons to quality resources as well as consult an expert on the topic if needed. They surmised that if libraries utilized these guidelines, virtual chat reference services would be improved.

Referring academic library chat reference patrons: how subject librarians decide

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula R. Dempsey
Keyword(s):  
Information Literacy ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Subject Area ◽  
Empirical Examination ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Reference Services ◽  
Chat Reference ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Doctoral Universities

Purpose The purpose of this study is to learn what factors liaison librarians in academic research libraries consider in determining whether to refer chat reference patrons to subject specialists. Design/methodology/approach Subject specialists were asked what policies guided their decisions to refer to a specialist and then assessed unreferred chat session transcripts both within and outside their specializations to determine need for a referral. Findings Few respondents were guided by formal policies. Contrary to an initial hypothesis, subject area was not a key factor in referring chat. A broader set of criteria included reference interviewing, provision of relevant resources and information literacy instruction. Respondents valued both the depth that subject specialists can provide to reference interactions and the ability of a skilled generalist to support information literacy. Research limitations/implications Findings are most applicable to large, public doctoral universities with liaison librarian programs. Assignment of respondents to subject specialist categories was complicated by their broad range of background and expertise. Practical implications The study contributes new understanding of referrals to subject specialists who have potential to guide development of formal referral policies in academic library virtual reference services. Originality/value The study is the first empirical examination of chat reference referral decisions.

scholarly journals Surging virtual reference services: COVID-19 a game changer

2021 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 106
Author(s):  
Marie L. Radford ◽  
Laura Costello ◽  
Kaitlin Montague
Keyword(s):  
Academic Library ◽  
The United States ◽  
User Interactions ◽  
Virtual Reference ◽  
Longitudinal Surveys ◽  
Reference Services ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Academic Librarian ◽  
Two Phases ◽  
The Impact

In March 2020, academic libraries across the United States closed and sent everyone home, some destined to not reopen for months. University offices closed. Classes were moved online. Suddenly, librarians and staff pivoted to working from home and to all remote services, without time for planning logistics or training. To study the impact of this extraordinary and sweeping transition on virtual reference services (VRS), we conducted a major study of academic library responses to the pandemic that focused on librarian perceptions of how services and relationships with users morphed during this COVID-19 year.Academic librarians rallied to our call, and we collected a total of 300 responses to two longitudinal surveys launched at key points during the pandemic. Data collection focused on two phases in 2020: 1) shutdown and immediate aftermath (mid-March to July), and 2) fall ramp up and into the semester (August to December). Via Zoom, we also interviewed 28 academic librarian leaders (e.g., heads of reference and/or VRS, associate directors for User Services) from September to November. Surveys and interviews centered on adaptations and innovations to reference services, especially VRS and perceptions of changes in user interactions.

The Value of Chat Reference Services: A Pilot Study

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
JoAnn Jacoby ◽  
David Ward ◽  
Susan Avery ◽  
Emilia Marcyk
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Reference Services ◽  
Chat Reference ◽  
Chat Reference Services

scholarly journals “There is Nothing Inherently Mysterious about Assistive Technology” A Qualitative Study about Blind User Experiences in US Academic Libraries

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adina Mulliken
Keyword(s):  
Academic Libraries ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
Screen Reader ◽  
Blind Users ◽  
Screen Readers ◽  
Reference Services ◽  
Chat Reference ◽  
Reference Librarians ◽  
High Level

Eighteen academic library users who are blind were interviewed about their experiences with academic libraries and the libraries’ websites using an open-ended questionnaire and recorded telephone interviews. The study approaches these topics from a user-centered perspective, with the idea that blind users themselves can provide particularly reliable insights into the issues and potential solutions that are most critical to them. Most participants used reference librarians’ assistance, and most had positive experiences. High-level screen reader users requested help with specific needs. A larger number of participants reported contacting a librarian because of feeling overwhelmed by the library website. In some cases, blind users and librarians worked verbally without the screen reader. Users were appreciative of librarians’ help but outcomes were not entirely positive. Other times, librarians worked with users to navigate with a screen reader, which sometimes led to greater independence. Some users expressed satisfaction with working with librarians verbally, particularly if websites did not seem screen reader user friendly, but many users preferred independence. Participants agreed it would be helpful if librarians knew how to use screen readers, or at least if librarians were familiar enough with screen readers to provide relevant verbal cues. Many users liked and used chat reference and many preferred Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL) to learn citation style, though learning citation style was challenging. Questions such as reference librarians’ role when e-resources are not equally accessible deserve wider discussion in the library literature and in practice. Given the challenges described by the research participants and legal requirements for equally effective electronic and information technologies, libraries and librarians should approach reference services for blind users more proactively. Recommendations are provided. This paper was originally published in Reference and User Services Quarterly at https://journals.ala.org/index.php/rusq/article/view/6528

Reference

2013 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Rosanne M Cordell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Libraries ◽  
Academic Library ◽  
The United States ◽  
Academic Librarians ◽  
Reference Services ◽  
Reference Librarians ◽  
Library Users ◽  
Virtual Services ◽  
Online Sources

Reference services in libraries in the United States were first described and organized in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. However, these first attempts at formalizing “reader’s assistance” were in public libraries. Academic libraries lagged behind public libraries in the appointment of reference librarians and in the recognition of the need for reference services for their library users. The appointment of academic librarians became more common in the first quarter of the twentieth century. As academic library faculty and staff increased, so too did the use of technologies for reference services. The digitization of reference sources ushered in an era of re-evaluation and revitalization of reference services, as well as the transition to online sources and virtual services.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document