Seeking Synchronicity: Revelations and Recommendations for Virtual Reference

A new membership report from OCLC Research, in partnership with Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, Seeking Synchronicity distills more than five years of virtual reference (VR) research into a readable summary that features memorable quotes that vividly illustrate very specific and actionable suggestions. Taken from a multi-phase research project that included focus group interviews, surveys, transcript analysis, and phone interviews, with VR librarians, users, and non-users, these findings are meant to help practitioners develop and sustain VR services and systems. The report asserts that the "R" in "VR" needs to emphasize virtual "Relationships" as well as "Reference".Among the topics addressed are:The exaggerated death of ready referenceThe importance of query clarification in VRWays to boost accuracy and build better interpersonal relationships in VRWhat can be learned from VR transcriptsHow convenience is the "hook" that draws users into VR servicesGenerational differences in how people perceive reference interactions and determine successThe need for more and better marketingThe report is based on a multi-year study funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS); Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey; and OCLC. A rich resource for further exploration of this important topic, it includes valuable statistics, lists of references, additional readings, and specific recommendations for what libraries and librarians can do to move VR forward in local environments.Today's students, scholars and citizens are not just looking to libraries for answers to specific questions—they want partners and guides in a life long information-seeking journey. By transforming VR services into relationship-building opportunities, libraries can leverage the positive feelings people have for libraries in a crowded online space where the biggest players often don't have the unique experience and specific strengths that librarians offer

Service sea change: clicking with screenagers through virtual reference

Web-based reference services such as synchronous, (chat reference or \u27Ask-a-Librarian\u27 services) and asynchronous (email) virtual reference services (VRS) have become common features of academic library home pages. In the current economic and technological environment, evaluation to determine the sustainability of VRS is crucial. An international research project, funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Services, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, and OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc., investigates factors that influence the selection and use of synchronous VRS. This study, one of the first large-scale VRS studies to include both users and non-users of the Millennial Generation, innovatively addresses issues concerning the evaluation, sustainability, and relevance of VRS for academic libraries by soliciting screenagers\u27 perceptions. Three focus group interviews were conducted with "screenagers" - twelve to eighteen year-old non-users of VRS. These potential future academic library users are comfortable in a virtual environment, use instant messaging (IM) for socializing and collaborative homework yet perceive VRS differently than these other virtual encounters. The results of these focus group interviews provide new insights to why screenagers choose not to use VRS and what would make them try VRS. The study identifies ways to increase the visibility and use of VRS, and to improve service, which could help secure funding allocations, and the growth and improvement of services. These results can influence the development of academic library services and systems for the Millennial Generation

Re(Casting) Call: Sculpting Services & Strategies for Cultivating Online Scholarly Identity

Scholarly Identity (SI) encompasses scholars’ efforts to promote their reputation and impact (Brigham 2016) using digital tools and social networking sites (SNS) (e.g., ORCID). The need to cultivate an academic SNS presence is pressing, particularly for individuals who are in tenure-track positions, working towards promotion, etc. Managing SI is complex, and disciplinary standards differ for selecting SNS and establishing impact measurements. This panel provides diverse perspectives from academic librarians and researchers to address: a) How should/could academic librarians assist users who wish to build their SI? b) What services are currently offered? c) What opportunities, as well as concerns, surround SI work? The library and information science (LIS) literature has shed some light on academic libraries’ SI assistance (Ward et al. 2015). Reed et al. (2016) assert that academic libraries can build support services to help users craft and manage their SI. Academic librarians also use SNS to promote their own work (Brigham, 2016)

“People Need a Strategy:” Exploring Attitudes of and Support Roles for Scholarly Identity Work Among Academic Librarians

Exploring Attitudes of and Support Roles for … This study explores this challenge by investigating academic librarian practice and potential support for SI management and addresses the following research questions: RQ 1. What, if any, practices do...“People Need a Strategy:

“People Are Reading Your Work, : Scholarly Identity and Social Networking Sites

Scholarly identity refers to endeavors by scholars to promote their reputation, work, and networks using online platforms such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu, and Twitter. This exploratory research investigates benefits and drawbacks of Scholarly Identity efforts and avenues for potential library support. Data from 30 semi-structured phone interviews with faculty, doctoral students, and academic librarians were qualitatively analyzed using the constant comparisons method (Charmaz, 2014) and Goffman’s (1959, 1967) theoretical concept of impression management. Results reveal that use of online platforms enables academics to connect with others and disseminate their research. Scholarly Identity platforms have benefits, opportunities, and offer possibilities for developing academic library support. They are also fraught with drawbacks/concerns, especially related to confusion, for-profit models, and reputational risk. This exploratory study involves analysis of a small number of interviews (30) with self-selected social scientists from one discipline (communication) and librarians. It lacks gender, race/ethnicity, and geographical diversity and focuses exclusively on individuals who use social networking sites for their Scholarly Identity practices. Results highlight benefits and risks of Scholarly Identity work and the potential for adopting practices that consider ethical dilemmas inherent in maintaining an online social media presence. They suggest continuing to develop library support that provides strategic guidance and information on legal responsibilities regarding copyright. This research aims to understand the benefits and drawbacks of Scholarly Identity platforms and explore what support academic libraries might offer. It is among the first to investigate these topics comparing perspectives of faculty, doctoral students, and librarians

Electronic Health Literacy Across the Lifespan: Measurement Invariance Study

Background: Electronic health (eHealth) information is ingrained in the healthcare experience to engage patients across the lifespan. Both eHealth accessibility and optimization are influenced by lifespan development, as older adults experience greater challenges accessing and using eHealth tools as compared to their younger counterparts. The eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) is the most popular measure used to assess patient confidence locating, understanding, evaluating, and acting upon online health information. Currently, however, the factor structure of the eHEALS across discrete age groups is not well understood, which limits its usefulness as a measure of eHealth literacy across the lifespan. Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the structure of eHEALS scores and the degree of measurement invariance among US adults representing the following generations: Millennials (18-35-year-olds), Generation X (36-51-year-olds), Baby Boomers (52-70-year-olds), and the Silent Generation (71-84-year-olds). Methods: Millennials (N=281, mean 26.64 years, SD 5.14), Generation X (N=164, mean 42.97 years, SD 5.01), and Baby Boomers/Silent Generation (N=384, mean 62.80 years, SD 6.66) members completed the eHEALS. The 3-factor (root mean square error of approximation, RMSEA=.06, comparative fit index, CFI=.99, Tucker-Lewis index, TLI=.98) and 4-factor (RMSEA=.06, CFI=.99, TLI=.98) models showed the best global fit, as compared to the 1- and 2-factor models. However, the 4-factor model did not have statistically significant factor loadings on the 4th factor, which led to the acceptance of the 3-factor eHEALS model. The 3-factor model included eHealth Information Awareness, Search, and Engagement. Pattern invariance for this 3-factor structure was supported with acceptable model fit (RMSEA=.07, Δχ2=P>.05, ΔCFI=0). Compared to Millennials and members of Generation X, those in the Baby Boomer and Silent Generations reported less confidence in their awareness of eHealth resources (P<.001), information seeking skills (P=.003), and ability to evaluate and act on health information found on the Internet (P<.001). Results: Young (18-48-year olds, N=411) and old (49-84-year olds, N=419) adults completed the survey. A 3-factor model had the best fit (RMSEA=.06, CFI=.99, TLI=.98), as compared to the 1-factor, 2-factor, and 4-factor models. These 3-factors included eHealth Information Awareness (2 items), Information Seeking (2 items), and Information and Evaluation (4 items). Pattern invariance was supported with the acceptable model fit (RMSEA=.06, Δχ2=P>.05, ΔCFI=0). Compared with younger adults, older adults had less confidence in eHealth resource awareness (P<.001), information seeking skills (P<.01), and ability to evaluate and act upon online health information (P<.001). Conclusions: The eHEALS can be used to assess, monitor uniquely, and evaluate Internet users’ awareness of eHealth resources, information seeking skills, and engagement abilities. Configural and pattern invariance was observed across all generation groups in the 3-factor eHEALS model. To meet gold the standards for factor interpretation (ie, 3 items or indicators per factor), future research is needed to create and assess additional eHEALS items. Future research is also necessary to identify and test items for a fourth factor, one that captures the social nature of eHealth

(Measuring Research Impact) "I Stay Away from the Unknown, I Guess," Measuring Impact and Understanding Critical Factors for Millennial Generation and Adult Non-Users of Virtual Reference Services

This paper reports results from a large, international grant-supported project to study the evaluation of live chat virtual reference services (VRS) from user, non-user, and librarian perspectives. It focuses on results from two phases of the research, online surveys and telephone interviews for non-users. Non-users were defined as those who had never used VRS, but may be using Instant Messaging (IM) or chat for social or business purposes and may also be users of physical or digital libraries). VRS non-users completed 184 online surveys and 107 telephone interviews featuring quantitative and qualitative questions. The team used descriptive statistics for quantitative data and grounded theme analyses and the Critical Incident Technique (CIT) for qualitative data. Findings indicate that although accuracy and correct answers and the delivery of specific content were reported as the most important factors of successful reference interactions, non-users of VRS also value librarians who are knowledgeable about information sources and systems, display a positive attitude, and demonstrate good communication skills. Differences in communication and information seeking behaviors were found between Millennials and older adults. A personal relationship with a librarian was more important to Millennials who also valued the librarians? friendliness and politeness in interpersonal communications more than adults. A greater number of adults than Millennials believed that chat reference would be too complicated; therefore, chose not to use it. Results have implications for system development, improving VR practice, and for theory development