1 / 32

KNOWLEDGE BASES AND RELATED TOOLS: IMPROVING OPENURL EFFECTIVENESS

X. X. KBART. ok ?. K ?. KNOWLEDGE BASES AND RELATED TOOLS: IMPROVING OPENURL EFFECTIVENESS. Jason Price, PhD Claremont Colleges/SCELC KBART Working Group Member ER&L 2009 Conference UCLA. Today’s Outline. OpenURL Overview Measure of success; Positives and negatives

katheriner
Download Presentation

KNOWLEDGE BASES AND RELATED TOOLS: IMPROVING OPENURL EFFECTIVENESS

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. X X KBART ok ? K ? KNOWLEDGE BASES AND RELATED TOOLS: IMPROVING OPENURL EFFECTIVENESS Jason Price, PhD Claremont Colleges/SCELC KBART Working Group Member ER&L 2009 Conference UCLA

  2. Today’s Outline • OpenURL Overview • Measure of success; Positives and negatives • KBART: Reviewing Problems & Seeking Solutions • KBART background, goals, membership • Main problem areas & Solutions • improve holdings data accuracy • Improve application of OpenURL syntax from “sources” • Improve knowledge of OpenURL & its importance & issues • KBART Deliverables

  3. OpenURL Overview • The evolution of the OpenURL in reality: • If links fail, patrons will turn to the tool that always works • Three main problems with OpenURL today: • Bad data; Bad formatting; Lack of knowledge; ‘ ‘

  4. The Measure of Success • Better access for patrons • Fewer false positives: saying it’s available when its not • Fewer false negatives: saying it’s not available when it is • Best-case scenario: • IF a patron is seeking an item, and her library offers access to it through exactly seven online resources, • THEN the OpenURL resolver returns exactly seven accurate links to the full text • AND the ‘best’ resources appear first

  5. Why we do what we do… http://tinyurl.com/59txop

  6. The OpenURL resolver window

  7. Transport to the target database…

  8. …containing the full text

  9. OpenURL in Real Life… Dan in Real Life… • The Positives – it gets patrons to content they would not otherwise have found • It’s a great leap forward in library services • It’s fairly straightforward; it’s not incredibly complicated • The Negatives – it doesn’t get patrons to content as effectively as it should • Inaccurate data leads to bad and missing links • Incorrect implementation doesn’t transfer metadata properly • Lack of knowledge of its importance means: • some vendors aren’t using it • many of others aren’t investing in improved source implementation or more accurate & timely data transfer • But first, a bit of history

  10. KBART: A History • UKSG 2007 research report by James Culling,“Link Resolvers and the Serials Supply Chain” (at http://www.uksg.org/projects/linkfinal) • Provided ideas on improving usage and accuracy • Recommended follow-up to address some specifics • NISO partnership to broaden reach and include US audience

  11. KBART: An Introduction • Knowledge Bases And Related Tools • UKSG and NISO collaborative project • Get better data for everyone – • Those who provide data (publishers, aggregators) • Those who process data (link resolvers, ERMs, etc.) • Those who present data (libraries, consortia) • All for THOSE WHO USE DATA – library patrons • Ensuring timely transfer of accurate data to knowledgebases, ERMs, etc.

  12. Who’s in KBART? • Core working group chaired by Peter McCracken (Serials Solutions) and Charlie Rapple (TBI Communications; formerly Ingenta) • Link resolver/ERM suppliers – Ex Libris, Serials Solutions • Publishers – British Medical Journal Group, Taylor & Francis • Subscription agents/aggregators – Credo, EBSCO, Swets • Consortia –California Digital Library, SCELC • Libraries – Claremont, Cornell, Edinburgh, Leicester, Princeton, Pacific Northwest Technical Lab • Monitoring group • More of these plus other related groups e.g. NASIG • Anyone can join monitoring group • sign up for updates: kbart_interest-subscribe@list.niso.org

  13. age of data date granularity (day, month, season, year) file format format definitions;shoe-horning vol/issue vs date frequency informal structure accuracy format unclear responsibilities link syntax and granularity incentive accuracy Data & transfer Date coverage ownership duplication of effort title mapping contacts/feedback mechanisms Supply chain Title relations ISSN/ISBN variations abbreviations Licensing Compliance title changes accuracy re-use of ISSN format effect on licensing free content package variations genericism/granularity misrepresentation Problem Overview Knowledge bases

  14. KBART: Examining the problems • “OpenURL’s Negatives” • Inaccurate holdings data leads to bad & missing links • Incorrect implementation doesn’t transfer metadata properly • Lack of knowledge means some vendors aren’t using it and the remainder aren’t improving it

  15. Inaccurate Data – The problem

  16. Inaccurate Data – Impact Listing of ≈ 120,000 articles needed correction (based on estimated ave. 6x/yr & 10 articles/issue)

  17. Inaccurate Data – Current responses • REACTIVE – correcting data for individual articles that patrons report as inaccessible • But what about the (large) majority that go unreported • (esp. the false negatives that prove that “Google has lots of content ’not available through the library’”) • PROACTIVE – before we get (or don’t get) complaints • title by title or package by package • extremely labor intensive • An example

  18. Correcting Inaccurate Data – the hard way Proactive reconciliation of an ejournal package list • General Process – library, consortium or KB vendor • (Re-)Request updated access list from publisher • Sample publisher list for accuracy • Translate publisher list to match KB list • Number of titles never matches • Perform ISSN match with MS Access • Watch for & integrate title changes, mergers, acquisitions and losses • Watch for publisher-reuse of ISSNs/title combinations • Identify date discrepancies manually (inconsistent formats) • Decide when its ‘good enough’ and go live/distribute new list • Lather, Rinse, Repeat

  19. Correcting Inaccurate Data – the hard way 226 titles = 16%

  20. Inaccurate Data – The KBART Solutions • Standardize transfer of data within and among supply chain participants • Phase I - Best practices recommendations specifying: • means of data transfer • frequency of updates • File structure • Data elements – Mandatory and Optional • e.g. Start and end date format & granularity

  21. KBART: progressive data element recommendations Under consideration (Mandatory or optional?) • Title level information • Issue completeness (includes all articles?) • Article completeness (Includes tables & figs?) • Full text format (html vs pdf) • Embargo period (granular specification) • Moving wall (a la Nature/Palgrave) • Genre • Freely accessible content listed separately • Ebook fields

  22. If we build it, & they don’t come … • How do we handle incorrect data? • Grading? Policing? Shaming? • Biggest and most difficult problem to solve • Highlight to content providers how important completely accurate data is to their end users • Consider the ‘false positive’: arrrgh, that’s frustrating… • Consider the ‘false negative’: much, much worse: how would you ever know?

  23. Incorrect Implementation – the problem printcollections gateways database article citation (SOURCE) publisher/providerholdings data publisherwebsite query (base URL+ metadata string) repository link resolver/knowledge base target (cited)article

  24. Incorrect Implementation – an example • A book chapter citation in a database: • Cognitive psychology, new test design, and new test theory: An introduction. Snow, Richard E.; Lohman, David F.; In: Test theory for a new generation of tests. Frederiksen, Norman; Mislevy, Robert J.; Bejar, Isaac I.; Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, 1993. pp. 1-17. [Chapter]

  25. Incorrect Implementation – an example • No self-respecting OpenURL talk… • http://ry6af4uu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/?genre=bookitem&isbn=0805805931&issn=&atitle=Test+theory+for+a+new+generation+of+tests.&volume=&issue=&date=19930101&title=Cognitive+psychology%2c+new+test+design%2c+and+new+test+theory%3a+An+introduction.&aulast=Snow%2c+Richar&spage=1&pages=1-17&sid=XXXX:PsycINFO&pid=%3Cui%3E1992-98936-001%3C/ui%3E&%3Cdate%3E19930101%3C/date%3E&%3Cdb%3EPsycINFO%3C/db%3E

  26. Incorrect Implementations – the Example made worse • http://ry6af4uu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/?genre=article&isbn=0805805931&issn=&atitle=Test+theory+for+a+new+generation+of+tests.&volume=&issue=&date=19930101&title=Cognitive+psychology%2c+new+test+design%2c+and+new+test+theory%3a+An+introduction.&aulast=Snow%2c+Richar&spage=1&pages=1-17&sid=XXXX:PsycINFO&pid=%3Cui%3E1992-98936-001%3C/ui%3E&%3Cdate%3E19930101%3C/date%3E&%3Cdb%3EPsycINFO%3C/db%3E • Genre: Openurl 0.1 vs 1.0

  27. Incorrect Implementations – the impact • Study at Claremont • 5 Results in each of 5 genres from each of 5 databases • Journal Articles, Books, Chapters, Newspaper arts, [Dissertations] • Measure success rate, cause of each failure • Preliminary analysis shows: • Journal articles have significantly lower failure rate • Source URL formation as major cause of failure • Relative consistency within a database/genre combination

  28. Solving the Problems: Lack of Knowledge • Some content providers simply aren’t aware of what OpenURL does and why it benefits them • Education & advocacy • Follow recommendations of Culling/SIS report; provide useful information to those content providers • How to implement correctly • Offer contacts for those needing assistance • The remainder may not recognize the value of and their role in improving OpenURL effectiveness

  29. Solving the Problem: Lack of knowledge • Help content providers determine what is working, and what isn’t • Cornell project to focus on source OpenURLs • Identify correct and incorrect implementations • Give opportunity for vendors to grade selves • Offer more & better examples of why open OpenURL matters • Quiet challenge (ok, at least out loud) to ER community: produce and distribute studies of the effect of OpenUrl (& poor implementations) on usage • There is one underway at Claremont, we need many more • So many possibilities, so little time (shortsighted? –we’re treating the symptoms, not curing the disease)

  30. Summary: KBART Deliverables • Create a report that provides general guidance on problematic issues • Data problems • Incorrect implementation • Limited knowledge • Offer best practices guidelines for how to effectively transfer accurate data among parties • Provide better understanding of supply chain

  31. Challenges • Figuring out how to deal with data accuracy questions • Ensuring uptake among smaller or less-committed content providers • Providing ongoing support for new participants

  32. Thanks! • http://www.uksg.org/kbart • http://www.niso.org/workrooms/kbart • Peter McCracken (NISO co-chair) • peter@serialssolutions.com • Co-founder & Director for Research, Serials Solutions • Charlie Rapple (UKSG co-chair) • charlie.rapple@tbicommunications.com • Head of Marketing Development, TBI Communications • Jason Price (Working group member) • jason.price@libraries.claremont.edu • Head of Collections @ Claremont; SCELC ejournal package analyst

More Related