1 / 33

Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Associate Professor Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Convenience, Connections, Correctness, and Choice: Critical Components of Virtual Reference Service Quality. Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist OCLC Research. Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Associate Professor Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.

hector-hoffman
Download Presentation

Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Associate Professor Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Convenience, Connections, Correctness, and Choice: Critical Components of Virtual Reference Service Quality Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D. Senior Research Scientist OCLC Research Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Associate Professor Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

  2. Critical Components • Research to understand needs of diverse user population • Design services to meet users’ needs

  3. Information Environment • Rapidly changing user characteristics • Information-seeking preferences • Communication & behavior patterns • Global economics • Decrease in funding sources • Ongoing budget cuts • Informed decision-making critical

  4. IMLS, OCLC, & Rutgers University funded project Four phases: Focus group interviews Analysis of 850 QuestionPoint live chat transcripts Online surveys 137 VRS Users 184 VRS Non-users Telephone interviews 76 VRS Users 107 VRS Non-users Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, & Librarian Perspectives

  5. Descriptive statistical analysis Demographics Multiple choice (surveys only) Likert-type (surveys only) Qualitative analysis Open-ended questions 2 critical incident (CI) questions Online Surveys & Phone Interviews

  6. Net Gen (N=70) Female (54%, 38) 19-28 years old (53%, 37) Caucasian (66%, 46) Suburban public libraries Adult, 29+ (N=142) Female (72%, 102) 36-45 years old (34%, 48) Caucasian (85%, 121) Suburban public libraries User Demographics:Online Surveys & Telephone Interviews (N=212)

  7. Experience with Service Modes: User Online Survey (N=137)

  8. Frequency of Use: User Online Survey(N=137) How often have you used chat reference?

  9. Chat Least Intimidating: User Online Survey Net Gens (N=49) Adults (N=88) “I am least intimidated by”

  10. Likely to Return? User Online Survey Net Gens (N=49) Adults (N=88) “The probability that I will use reference services again is”

  11. Why Users Recommend VRS:Telephone Interviews (N=76) • Would recommend VRS (89%, 68) • Why? • Speed & efficiency (32%, 24) • Convenience (32%, 24)

  12. User Telephone Interviews: Chat is Convenient (N=76) • Chat 1st choice • 18% (14) quick answers • Why? • 60% (45) convenience

  13. Recommendation Important: User Online Surveys Net Gens (N=49) Used VRS because recommended Recommended VRS more than adults

  14. What Attracts Users to VRS?Online Surveys(N=137) Convenience, Convenience, Convenience Available 24/7 Working from home At night or on weekends Immediate answers Lack of cost Efficient Less intimidating interactions

  15. Knowledgeable librarians Positive attitude Communication skills Valued by “Screenagers” Personal relationship Successful interactions Important to All Users

  16. Experience with Reference Modes:Non-User Online Survey (N=184)

  17. FtF Preferred: Non-User Online SurveyNet Gens (N=122) Adults (N=62) Adults (81%, 50) Net Gens (71%, 87)

  18. FtF Preferred by Net Gens:Non-user Online Survey (N=122) “I most enjoy using”

  19. Email Least Intimidating Mode: Non-User Online SurveyNet Gens (N=122) “I am least intimidated by”

  20. Critical Considerations for Info Seeking:Non-User Online SurveyNet Gens (N=87) Adults (N=51) Convenience Net Gens (87%, 76) Adults (78%, 40)

  21. Remote access is important Net Gens (95%, 39) Adults (85%, 11) Critical Considerations for Info Seeking:Non-User Online SurveyNet Gens (N=41) Adults (N=13)

  22. Interpersonal Communication is Valued:Non-User Online SurveysNet Gens (N=86) Adults (N=51) Personal Relationship Adults (43%, 22) Net Gens (24%, 24) Specific Librarian Adults (51%, 26) Net Gens (42%, 36)

  23. Friendliness & Politeness Valued:Non-User Online SurveyNet Gens (N=41) Adults (N=14) “The librarian is friendly and polite”

  24. Why They Do Not Choose VRS: Non-User Online SurveyNet Gens (N=122) Adults (N=62) Too complicated Adults (53%, 33) Net Gens (35%, 43) Typing skills poor Adults (35%, 22) Net Gens (16%, 19)

  25. Why They Do Not Choose VRS:Non-User Online SurveyNet Gens (N=122) Adults (N=62) Believe questions might annoy librarian Net Gens (29%, 32) Adults (16%, 10)

  26. Why Net Gens Do Not Choose VRS:Non-User Online Survey (N=122) Don’t know it is available Believe librarian couldn’t help Lack of 24/7 service Satisfied w/ other info sources

  27. Why Adults Do Not Choose VRS: Non-User Online Survey (N=62) Same as Net-Gen, but also… Lack computer skills Type slowly Complexity of chat environment

  28. Non-User Telephone Interviews (N=107) • FtF Preferred (24%, 26) • Do not know VRS exists (16%, 17) • Alternatives to library • Internet (43%, 45) • Personal convenience (38%, 39)

  29. What We Learned FtF & VRS Users want Extended service hours Access to electronic information Interact w/ friendly librarians Personal relationship with librarians

  30. What We Can Do • Provide • Variety of service modes • Convenient, authoritative, reliable services • Accurate information

  31. What Else We Can Do Creative marketing Promote full range of options Reassure young people VRS safe Build positive relationships whether FtF, phone, or online

  32. End Notes This is one of the outcomes from the project Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, and Librarian Perspectives Funded by IMLS, Rutgers University, & OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. Slides available at project web site:http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicity/

  33. Questions & Comments Lynn Silipigni Connaway connawal@oclc.org Marie L. Radford mradford@scils.rutgers.edu

More Related