1 / 37

Seeking Synchronicity: Viewpoints of VRS Users, Librarians, and Non-Users on Live Chat Reference

Seeking Synchronicity: Viewpoints of VRS Users, Librarians, and Non-Users on Live Chat Reference. Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Associate Professor Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey British Columbia Library Conference Burnaby, BC April 17, 2009. Libraries Today – Rapid Change.

frayne
Download Presentation

Seeking Synchronicity: Viewpoints of VRS Users, Librarians, and Non-Users on Live Chat Reference

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. Seeking Synchronicity:Viewpoints of VRS Users, Librarians, and Non-Users on Live Chat Reference Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Associate Professor Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey British Columbia Library Conference Burnaby, BC April 17, 2009

  2. Libraries Today – Rapid Change • Vying for information seekers’ attention • Must re-engineer to accommodate users’ workflows & habits

  3. Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, & Librarian Perspectives IMLS, Rutgers Univ. & OCLC funded project Focus group interviews Transcript analysis (850) Online surveys (496) 175 VRS librarians, 184 VRS non-users, 137 VRS users Telephone interviews (283) Total 100 VRS librarians, 107 VRS non-users, 76 VRS users

  4. Online Surveys • Descriptive statistical analysis • Demographic • Multiple-choice • Likert-type • Qualitative analysis • Open-ended • 2 critical incident (CI) questions

  5. The Net Generation • Born 1979 - 1994 • Millennials • EchoBoomers • Gen Y • Socially networked environment • Different communication & information-seeking behaviors

  6. Screenagers • Youngest of Net Generation • Born 1988 -1994 • Now 15-21 years old • Affinity for technology • Expect instant access

  7. VRS User Demographics (N=137) Net Gen (N=49) • Even nos. M-F • 19-28 years old (47%, 23) • Caucasian (67%, 33) Adult, 29+ (N=88) • Female (68%, 60) • 36-45 years old (38%, 33) • Caucasian (84%, 74)

  8. Chat Least Intimidating to VRS Users Net Gens (N=49) Adults (N=88)

  9. VRS Users Likely to be Repeat Users Net Gens (N=49) Adults (N=88)

  10. Recommendation Important to VRS UsersNet Gens (N=49) • Used VRS because recommended • Recommended VRS more than adults

  11. What Attracts Users to VRS? Users (N=137) Convenience Available 24/7 Working from home Nights or weekends Immediate answers Lack of cost Efficient Less intimidating

  12. Why Users Don’t Always Choose VRS?Net Gens (N=49) Unhelpful answers Non-subject specialists Slow connections Scripted messages Cold environment

  13. What Would Attract Users to VRS?Net Gens (N=49) Faster & easier software Personalized interface Reliable co-browsing More service hours Kiosk & cybercafe access Experienced, tech-savvy librarians

  14. VRS Non-user Demographics (N=184) Net Gen (N=122) Female (66%, 81) 19-28 years old (51%, 62) Caucasian (65%, 79) Adult, 29+(N=62) Female (71%, 44) 46-55 years old (31%, 19) Caucasian (87%, 52)

  15. FtF Preferred by VRS Non-users Net Gens (N=122) Adults (N=62) Adults (81%, 50) Net Gens (71%, 87)

  16. FtF Preferred by VRS Non-users Net Gens (N=122) “I most enjoy using”

  17. Email Less Intimidating to VRS Non-users Net Gens (N=122) “I am least intimidated by”

  18. Phone Reference Never Used by VRS Non-users Net Gens (N=122) Adults (N=62) Net Gens (78%, 95) Adults (60%, 27)

  19. Convenience Also Important to VRS Non-UsersNet Gens (N=87) Adults (N=51) Net Gens (87%, 76) Adults (78%, 40)

  20. Net Gens (95%, 39) Adults (85%, 13) Remote Access Important to VRS Non-users Net Gens (N=41) Adults (N=13)

  21. Personal Relationship Adults (43%, 22) Net Gens (24%, 24) Specific Librarian Adults (51%, 26) Net Gens (42%, 36) Interpersonal Communication Valued by VRS Non-usersNet Gens (N=86) Adults (N=51)

  22. Interpersonal Communication Valued by VRS Non-Users Net Gens (N=41) Adults (N=14)

  23. Why Don’t Non-Users Choose VRS? Net 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)

  24. Why Don’t Non-Users Choose VRS?Net Gens (N=122) Adults (N=62) Believe questions might annoy librarian Net Gens (29%, 32) Adults (16%, 10)

  25. Don’t know it is available Believe librarian couldn’t help Lack of 24/7 service Satisfied w/ other info sources Why Don’t Non-Users Choose VRS?Net Gens (N=122)

  26. Why Don’t Non-Users Choose VRS ?Adults (N=62) • Same as Net-Gen: • Don’t know it is available • Believe librarian couldn’t help • Lack of 24/7 service • Satisfied w/ other info sources • But also: • Lack computer skills • Type slowly • Complex chat environment

  27. Critical Incident Technique (CIT) Flanagan (1954) Qualitative technique Focuses on most memorable event/experience Allows categories or themes to emerge rather than be imposed

  28. VRS User Positive CIs Net Gens (N=48) Successful Experience • Accurate answers/info • Quick assistance • Located specific resources • Convenient

  29. VRS User Negative CIs Net Gens (N=30) Unsuccessful Experience • Librarian • Impeded info delivery or retrieval • Didn’t answer question

  30. VRS Non-user Positive CIsNet Gens (N=108) • Successful Experience Librarian • Info delivery/retrieval • Answered questions • Located specific resources • Positive attitude (them & task)

  31. VRS Non-user Negative CIsNet Gens (N=74) Unsuccessful Experience Librarian • Impeded information delivery or retrieval • Missing resources • Slow providing answers • Negative attitude to task

  32. Librarians - What is Important for Success? (N=82) • Content – Highly Valued • Accuracy of answers/information • Relational – Highly Attuned • User’s positive attitude • User’s willingness to be patient & open to suggestions

  33. What We Learned • FtF & VRS Users want • Extended hours of service • Access to electronic information • Interact w/ friendly librarians • Relationships with librarians • Personalized service

  34. Encourage Future Users - What We Can Do • Creative marketing • Promote range of options • Promote convenience • Reassure VRS is safe • Teach VR in Info. Literacy • Emphasize personal service • Build positive relationships FtF, phone, or online

  35. What We Can Do • Understand them to provide better service • Can’t beat ‘em – join ‘em • Leverage impatience • Enjoy their enthusiasm!

  36. 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. Special thanks to Co- PI, Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D., Senior Research Scientist, OCLC Project web site:http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicity/

  37. Questions & Comments? Marie L. Radford, Ph.D. Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey mradford@scils.rutgers.edu

More Related