Prioritisation, Resources and Search Terms: A Study of Decision-Making at the Virtual Reference Desk

  • Simon Attfield
  • Stephann Makri
  • James Kalbach
  • Ann Blandford
  • Stephen De Gabrielle
  • Mark Edwards
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5173)

Abstract

The reinterpretation of the traditional reference service in an online context is the virtual reference desk. Placing reference services into an online setting, however, presents many challenges. We report a study and analytic framework which addresses support for decision-making during virtual enquiry work. Focusing on specialist law-libraries, the study shows that enquirers do not volunteer important information to the service and that asynchronous communication media and some social obstacles present barriers to prompting. Also, previous enquiries are frequently used to inform current enquiry strategies but barriers exist in accessing this information. We conclude that email is an inadequate medium for supporting virtual reference services, and that system should support automatic, speculative matching between new enquiry content and integrated enquiry knowledge bases. The contribution of the framework is to offer a structured approach to evaluation in multiple virtual reference contexts and enable rapid convergence on barriers to efficient and effective service.

Keywords

virtual reference service evaluation collaborative information access 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Borgman, C.L.: What are Digital Libraries? Competing Visions. Inf. Proc. and Man. 35(3), 227–243 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marchionini, G., Fox, E.: Progress Towards Digital Libraries. Inf. Proc. and Man. 35(3), 219–225 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chowdury, G.G.: Digital Libraries and Reference Services: Present and Future. J. Doc. 58(3), 258–283 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bunge, C.A.: Reference Services. Reference Librarian 66, 185–199 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Taylor, R.S.: Question-negotiation and Information Seeking in Libraries. College and Research Libraries 29, 178–194 (1968)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saracevic, T.: Modeling and measuring user-intermediary-computer interaction in online searching: Design of a study. In: Proc. of the Annual Meeting of ASIST, vol. 33, pp. 3–9 (1989)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dervin, B., Dewdney, P.: Neutral Questioning: A New Approach to the Reference Interview. RQ 25, 506–513 (1986)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kuhlthau, C.C., Spink, A., Cool, C.: Exploration into Stages in the Information Search Process in On-line IR: Communication Between Users and Intermediaries. In: Proc. of the Annual Meeting of ASIST, vol. 29, pp. 67–71 (1992)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dewdney, P., Ross, C.S.: Flying a Light Aircraft: Reference Service Evaluation from a User’s Viewpoint. RQ 34, 217–230 (1994)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lankes, R.D.: The Digital Reference Research Agenda. JASIST 55(4), 301–311 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reftracker, A.: (accessed March 17, 2008), http://www.altarama.com.au/reftrack.htm
  12. 12.
    OCLC QuestionPoint (accessed March 7, 2008), http://www.oclc.org/questionpoint/
  13. 13.
    Beyer, H., Holtzblatt, K.: Contextual Design: Defining Customer-Centered Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Strauss, A., Corbin, J.: Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage, London (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon Attfield
    • 1
  • Stephann Makri
    • 1
  • James Kalbach
    • 2
  • Ann Blandford
    • 1
  • Stephen De Gabrielle
    • 1
  • Mark Edwards
    • 2
  1. 1.UCL Interaction CentreUniversity College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.LexisNexis UKLondon 

Personalised recommendations