Quality Inquiry: User Perspectives on Virtual Reference Practice Marie L. Radford, Ph.D., Associate Professor Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.

Quality Inquiry: User Perspectives on Virtual Reference Practice

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

Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D., Senior Research ScientistOCLC

ASIS&T 2009 Annual MeetingNovember 6-11. 2009 Vancouver, BC

Libraries Today – Rapid Change

• Vying for information seekers’ attention

• Must re-engineer to accommodate users’ workflows & habits

Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, & Librarian Perspectives

IMLS funded project with 4 phases:Focus group interviewsTranscript analysis (850)Online surveys – 496 Total

175 VRS librarians, 184 VRS non-users, 137 VRS users

Telephone interviews - 283 Total100 VRS librarians, 107 VRS non-users, 76 VRS users

Online Surveys

•Descriptive statistical analysis– Demographic– Multiple-choice– Likert-type

•Qualitative analysis– Open-ended – 2 critical incident (CI) questions

•Adults & Net Gen

The Net Generation

•Born 1979 - 1994• Millennials• EchoBoomers• Gen Y

•Socially networked environment •Different communication & information-seeking behaviors

VRS User Demographics (N=137)

Net Gen (N=49)•Female (51%, 25)•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)

"The probability that I will use reference services again is"

82%

92%

76788082848688909294

Net Gen VRS Users Adult VRS Users

Excellent orVery Good

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

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

"I am least intimidated by"

04%14%

6%

76%

016%

5%

33%

47%

01020304050607080

FtF Phone Email Text Chat

Net GenVRS Users

Adult VRSUsers

Recommendation Important to VRS UsersNet Gens (N=49)

• Used VRS because recommended

• Recommended VRS more than adults

What Attracts Users to VRS? Users (N=137)

•Convenience, Convenience, Convenience–Available 24/7 •Working from home• Nights or weekends

– Immediate answers – Lack of cost – Efficient

•Less intimidating

Why Users Don’t Always Choose VRS?Net Gens (N=49)

• Unhelpful answers• Non-subject specialists• Slow connections• Scripted messages• Cold environment

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

What We Learned

• FtF & VRS Users want– Extended hours of service – Access to electronic

information– Interact w/ friendly

librarians – Relationships with

librarians

What We Can Do

• Encourage service use– Creative marketing • Promote full range of

options• Reassure young people VRS

is safe

– Build positive relationships whether FtF, phone, or online

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/