Images, Reviews, Tags, and Recommendations: Do enhanced contents and user contributed contents improve access to library resources in an academic library?
Ya Wang
Leonard Library
San Francisco State University
Speaking about patron usage of 3 services they subscribe to:
Syndetic Solutions - Images, reviews, summaries, and TOCs
LibraryThing for Libraries - Tags and recommendations
bX Recommender - Article recommendation services
During a building construction project, users have lost the ability to browse the shelves. Syndetic and LibraryThing were implemented to give users a way to browse without having access to the physical shelves. The library promoted LibraryThing and Syndetic, but did not promote bX.
Syndetic - use cover images in catalog browse and records; also use to promote new books on their home page: http://www.library.sfsu.edu/
Has a year of usage data divided out into image clicks, content clicks (summary, first chapter, and TOC), and reviews. Syndetic charges per review category, so will be able to refine the package to keep only the most frequently used services.
LibraryThing for Libraries - Shows tags and recommendations in catalog record. Has almost 2 years of data on LibraryThing; tag brows is very low for two years; clicked tags and recommendations link have more usage; recommendations is the most popular of the three. Expresses surprise that tags are not more heavily used; it compares very unfavorably to subject heading use. Comparing usage to the cost, they might recommend dropping the service.
bX Scholarly Recommender Service - Implemented in Sept 2009 and ranked #7 in total clickthroughs; by Dec 2009 it ranks #3 - without promotion. Shows ILLiad clickthrough data for same period - it has dropped as bX has risen. Speculates that users are finding alternate articles to use right now rather than placing ILL requests for articles without full text. Wants more solid data to see whether bX really affects ILL usage.
Comments