This is so Manual! Kornelia Tancheva

1. This is so Manual! Kornelia Tancheva Director of Collections, Reference, Instruction, and Outreach

2. Technology, Libraries, Users • Title: Asian Regional Youth Meeting: youth mobilization for development in Asian settings 17-22 September 1978, Kathmandu (Nepal)Citation: Indian Journal of Social Research (Meerut) 19, nos.1-3 (Apr-Dec 1978) 105-118ISSN: 0019-5626Subjects:  Asia -- Anthropology & Sociology -- Youth & ChildrenID: 3095add to bookbag

3. Changing Technology, Changing Users, Same Old Libraries? • 28% of adult internet users have tagged or categorized content online such as photos, news stories or blog posts and 7% do so on a typical day. (Pew Internet & American Life Project. “Tagging.” 1/31/2007)http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Tagging.pdf • 26% of adult internet users have rated a product, service or person using an online rating system, and 3% do so on a typical day. (Pew Internet & American Life Project. The Use of Online Reputation and Rating Systems 10/20/2004) • http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Datamemo_Reputation.pdf

4. Amazon.com 9

5. Amazon.com

6. General Principles of Social Navigation • Architecture, urban design, sociology • Follow other people’s trails in space • Deliberate or spontaneous • Safe • Space vs. Place

7. General Principles of Social Navigation

8. Short History and Typology of Social Navigation • PERSONA Collaborative Project • 1998 Workshop on personal and social navigation of Information Spaces • 1999 panel on SN at CHI conference • 2000 panel at CHI • 2001 Delos-NSF workshop on personalization and recommender systems (Dublin) • 2003 Social Navigation of Information Space (2nd ed.) • Direct and indirect

9. Recommender Systems • Assist and augment the natural social process • E-commerce and entertainment • University of Karsruhe RS (2002) • Melvyn Project (U of California) • Collaborative Filtering • Pull-active • Push-active • Automated CF • Differences with non-virtual SN • Methods • Ranking • Annotations, reviews • Content analysis

10. Social Navigation and Libraries • Nature of research domains vs. entertainment • Research is not “social”? • Personal vs. general • Expertise vs. ‘the wisdom of crowds” • Philosophical problems • Information is not an objective set of data • Interpretation; subjective view of the world • Cultural differences • Technical problems • Unstructured user-contributed data vs. structured legacy data • Privacy • Limitations of RS

11. Cornell’s Project • General interest amongst library staff • Call for Masters’ projects – Fall 2005 • Three graduate students • Cross disciplinary library staff • Guiding principles • Our materials, our patrons • Patron privacy

12. Data Points • Patron Tags • Undergraduates – College • Staff - Department • Faculty - Department • Graduates – Field of Study or College • Book Tags • HILCC – Hierarchical Interface to Library of Congress Classification • Bib IDs Davis, S.P. "HILCC, A Hierarchical Interface to Library of Congress Classification "Journal of Internet Cataloging, v.5, no 4 (2002), p. 19-49. HILCC at Columbia - http://www.columbia.edu/cu/libraries/inside/projects/metadata/hilcc/

13. Results • Ranking dB – Most circulated books per HILCC category • Less than 10% circulated more than twice in five years • Most level-1 HILCC categories had significant top 20 lists • Most level-2 and beyond did not • Relation dB – People who checked out this book also checked out these books • Matching different bibliographic records of books that were checked out to the same patron on the same day • Connections that could be made: • Graduate students in Field of Study X who checked out this book also checked out the following books • You may find other useful books in the following categories

14. What we learned • We need more and better data • Limiting to graduate students severely limited our quantity of data • The ranking dB had a relatively small number of frequently circulated books • The relation dB had very few instances of books being connected more than once • We need to rethink our approach

15. Next Steps • Access more descriptive data about our patrons, particularly our undergraduates, to expand our scope to more of our constituents. • Collect our data in a more effective way to find more connections between people and books. • Approach peer institutions to increase the amount of relevant data. This would also increase the potential user base for the RS. • Include the ability for users to add their own descriptive tags and ratings. This would increase the total amount of usable data while adding some sense of ownership for the users.

16. Technology, Users, Libraries • 8% of Americans are deep users of the participatory web and mobile application • Another 23% are heavy pragmatic tech adopters—they use gadgets to keep up with social networks or be productive at work • 10% rely on mobile devices for voice, texting, or entertainment • 10% use information gadgets but find it a hassle • 49% of Americans only occasionally use modern gadgetry and many others bristle at electronic connectivity Pew Internet and American Life Project. “A Typology of Information and Communication Technology Users.” May 7, 2007 http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_ICT_Typology.pdf

17. Users vs. Library Patrons?

18. Questions? Kornelia Tancheva Director of Collections, Reference, Instruction, and Outreach Public Services and Assessment Cornell University Library 106E Olin Library Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 Tel. 607 255-3774 kt18@cornell.edu