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

KNOWLEDGE BASES AND RELATED TOOLS:

IMPROVING OPENURL EFFECTIVENESS

Jason Price, PhD Claremont Colleges/SCELCKBART Working Group Member

ER&L 2009 ConferenceUCLA

K ?Xok ?X KBART

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

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;

‘ ‘

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

http://tinyurl.com/59txop

Why we do what we do…

The OpenURL resolver window

Transport to the target database…

…containing the full text

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

OpenURL in Real Life…

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

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.

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: [email protected]

Knowledge bases

Date coverage

Title relations

Licensing

Data & transfer

Supply chain

Compliance

accuracy

format

vol/issue vs date

date granularity (day, month, season, year)

title changes

title mapping

abbreviations

ISSN/ISBN variations

re-use of ISSN effect on

licensing

genericism/granularity

misrepresentation

package variations

accuracy

free content

format

ownership

contacts/feedback mechanisms

incentive

informal structure

unclear responsibilities

duplication of effort

file format

format definitions;

shoe-horning

age of data

accuracy

frequency

link syntax and

granularity

Problem Overview

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

Inaccurate Data – The problem

ErrorLevel

False (+) including links to inaccessible

content

False (-)lacking links to accessible

content

TitleAccess not activated by publisher

Accessible title not listed in KB/Catalog

Date Range

Part of access not activated by publisher OR Years of access over-represented in KB/Catalog

Years of access under-representedin KB/Catalog

Inaccurate Data – Impact

ErrorLevel

False (+) False (-)

Title 290 journal yrs 1205 journal

yrsDate Range 485 journal

yrs

Listing of ≈ 120,000 articles needed correction

(based on estimated ave. 6x/yr & 10 articles/issue)

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

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

Correcting Inaccurate Data – the hard way

Correcting Inaccurate Data – the hard way

226 titles = 16%

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

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

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?

article citation (SOURCE)

query (base URL+ metadata string)

link resolver/knowledge base

target (cited)article

publisherwebsite

database

printcollections gateways

publisher/providerholdings data

repository

Incorrect Implementation – the problem

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]

Incorrect Implementation – an example

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

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

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

Incorrect Implementations – the impact

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

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)

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

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

Thanks!

http://www.uksg.org/kbart http://www.niso.org/workrooms/kbart

Peter McCracken (NISO co-chair) [email protected]

Co-founder & Director for Research, Serials Solutions Charlie Rapple (UKSG co-chair)

[email protected] Head of Marketing Development, TBI Communications

Jason Price (Working group member) [email protected]

Head of Collections @ Claremont; SCELC ejournal package analyst