th
Steen Ammentorp
Lecturer, MLI.Sc.
Royal School of Library and Information Science
Institute of Library and Information Management
Langagervej 4
DK 9920 Aalborg Oest, Denmark
E-mail: sta@db.dk
Marianne Hummelshoj
Associate Professor, MLI.Sc.
Royal School of Library and Information Science
Institute of Information Studies
Langagervej 4
DK 9920 Aalborg Oest, Denmark
E-mail: mhh@db.dk
Within the last five years nearly all libraries, both academic and public, have introduced web sites presenting a variety of new services to their patrons. These new services include, among others,
Web-Based Reference Question Services , a mediated service in which the patron poses a reference question to a librarian, either through e-mail or by filling out a form on the web. This paper focuses on several aspects of such a service, which enables patrons to use the service and to formulate and express their information needs.
Despite the fact that this kind of service is presented on most public libraries’ web sites, either managed by a single library or in cooperation with others, very little has been done to overcome the patron’s information illiteracy using this kind of service and to help the patron in formulating his or her information needs . This paper produces a triangular model for the interactions of the patron’s information need and information literacy with a web-based reference question form . The model is based on the theories of the nature of the information need , question negotiation and communications problems within the traditional patron-intermediary dialogue. The model reviews aspects of the traditional reference interview and how they influence the interaction in a web environment.
Furthermore, a survey of Web-Based Reference Question Services selected from fifteen
Scandinavian public libraries based on the above-mentioned model is presented. Our paper prove that existing and future services can be improved by using the triangular model for developing webbased reference question forms , thereby enabling patrons to overcome their information illiteracy with respect to this kind of service and to formulate their information needs more effectively.
1

The traditional reference interview has proven no easy thing to handle. Often it is hindered by miscommunication between the patron and the intermediary, and by the fact that the patron is unable to verbalise his information need. In this paper we present a brief review of the experience and theories behind the traditional reference interview within the physical library between the patron and the intermediary face-to-face.
We define the reference interview by looking at what it strives to achieve. Basic to any reference interview is of cause the patron and his information need, and in discussing the nature of the patron’s information need we examine three different ways of describing its nature: Taylor (1968),
Belkin (1978), and Dervin & Nilan (1986). We see how the nature of the information need affects the patron’s ability to formulate his need.
In the traditional reference interview the intermediary plays a crucial role in helping the patron formulate his information need clearly and precisely, despite the fact the interview is often hindered by communication barriers between the patron and the intermediary. We describe this as the patron’s information illiteracy, because the communication barriers are often caused by the fact that the patron lacks knowledge and understanding of why, the intermediary needs to conduct an interview in order to help the patron.
We present a number of these communication barriers and review what different authors have suggested to avoid these by using different interviewing techniques, e.g. closed, open and neutral questions. How the intermediary with knowledge of the difficulties and the right tools can act as a catalyst in the patron’s process of formulating his information need and overcoming his information illiteracy.
In an effort to match this experience with electronic reference services we take a brief look at the problems in conducting a reference interview in an electronic environment by e-mail based on
Abels’ (1996) findings.
Together with the experience from the traditional reference interview this is used to develop a triangular model for web-based reference interview using a web-based reference question form. In this model we present how three parts: the patron’s information need, the patron’s information literacy, and the reference question form interact. We examine which elements affect these interactions, and how using the experience from the traditional reference interviews the interaction can be improved.
Based upon the triangular model we produced a Reference Question Service evaluation chart addressing the various elements in the model, showed in appendix A, and used it to evaluate various
Scandinavian Web-Based Reference Question Services.
The evaluations were conducted between the 26 th and 28 th of Marts 2001 visiting all Scandinavian public libraries’ web sites listed at Netlab’s web site 1
in search of Web-Based Reference Question
Services. In all we found 54 services, which clearly stated that the patron could submit questions to the library, and that an intermediary, in other words a mediated service, would handle the questions.
1 http://www.lub.lu.se/resbyloc/Nordic_lib.html
2

Not all the libraries’ web sites listed were accessible at the time of the survey, so there may be more than 54 Web-Based Reference Question Services.
Looking at the 54 services we found they could be classified in three categories already established by Josiasen & Ammentorp (1998): the e-mail pattern, the simple form, and the elaborated form. Of these 54 services we decided to evaluate 15, choosing five from each Scandinavian country and five within each of the three categories. The services in question were from the following public libraries: Allerød (DK) 2 , Drammen (NO) 3 , Jämtland Län (SWE) 4 , København (DK) 5 , Linköbing
(SWE)
6
, Nedre Eiker (NO)
7
, Det nordjyske Landsbibliotek (Aalborg) (DK)
8
, Odder (DK)
9
,
Steinkjer (NO)
10 , Tønsberg (NO) 11
, Vejle (DK)
12 , and Ängelholms (SWE) 13
All of these were chosen randomly. As the last three services we decided to include the three national Web-Based Reference Question Services: BiblioteksVagten (DK)
14
, Deichmanske
Bibliotek (Oslo) (NO)
15 , and Fråga Biblioteket (SWE) 16
.
These 15 services are presented, evaluated and discussed according to the triangular model within the three categories: the e-mail pattern, the simple form, and the elaborated form. We discuss advantages and disadvantages of each category, and how they can be improved by using the triangular model.
Seeing the mediated Web-Based Reference Question Services as an alternative to the traditional reference services in the physical library, we find it natural to review the experiences and theories concerning the traditional interaction between the patrons and the intermediaries, when dealing with the patrons’ questions. Crucial to this interaction is the reference interview, and therefore we would like to address the following questions: What is a reference interview? What is the purpose of the interview? What is the nature of the information need of the patron? And finally what role does the intermediary play in the reference interview.
Defining the traditional reference interview has been done several times in the literature and renders many different definitions (Katz, 1997, Jennerich & Jennerich (1997), Sutton & Holt (1995)). Thus we will define the traditional reference interview very broadly as the dialogue between the patron and the intermediary taking place when the intermediary tries to help the patron. The main purpose
2 http://www.alleroed.bibnet.dk/blanket2.htm
3 http://www.drammen.folkebibl.no/referanse.htm
4 http://www.z.lanbib.se/fraga.htm
5 http://www.kkb.bib.dk/find_bestil/askalib/skema.htm
6 http://www.linkoping.se/bibliotek/infodisk/default2.asp
7 http://www.buskerud.fylkesbibl.no/nedre-eiker/
8 http://www.njl.dk/spoergbibl/formular/formular.htm
9 http://www.oddernettet.dk/bibliotek/spoergos.htm
10 http://www.steinkjer.folkebibl.no/spor.html
11 http://www.tonsberg.folkebibl.no/cgi-bin/webmail?form=spor
12 http://www.vejlebib.dk/lsal/index.htm
13 http://www.kommun.engelholm.se/kultur/inftjnst.htm
14 http://www.biblioteksvagten.dk/
15 http://nyhuus.deich.folkebibl.no/deichman/spor.html
16 http://www.dds.se/bibl/fraga.htm
3

of the traditional reference interview is clarifying the patron’s information need and enabling the intermediary to find information, which fulfils the need of the patron.
This broad definition of the traditional reference interview covers every thing from short answers for short factual questions too an ongoing dialogue between the intermediary and the patron concerning a problematic research request. It could be argued that this is to wide a definition since there are different kinds of reference interviews and one should sort them according to the information sought by the patron or the sources used to find the information. Sutton & Holt (1995) has done this. However, we find that the principles in the dialogue are the same: The intermediary has to clarify the information need of the patron and get enough information himself in order to help the patron.
Although there exist various definitions of the reference interview in the literature, there is a broad consensus on what the intermediary needs to find out about the patron’s information need, that is which aspects needs to be clarified so that the intermediary is able to answer the patron’s question.
Katz (1997) describes the kind of essential information the intermediary needs to know, if the question requires more than a single, quick answer:
“a. What kind of information is needed? For example, if the query is about flying saucers, does the user want a definition, a history, an illustration, a news story, a confirmation – or what? b. How much is needed – a simple fact, a book, or a mass of material? How much information does the user already have about the topic? (It helps to know this in order to avoid duplication.) c. How is the information going to be used – for a talk, to answer an idle question, as a beginning for research? d. What degree of sophistication is required – a beginning article or an advanced monograph? e. How much time does the user wish to spend (1) finding the information and (2) using the information? Obviously, if each is a short amount of time, then one ends up with a small amount of essential data. f. When is the information needed? Is there a definite deadline?”
(Katz, 1997 p. 167)
Without this kind of information the intermediary will not be able to locate the information suited for the patron in his current situation. It should seem very easy and unproblematic to get this kind of information, yet it is not. As Katz (1997) points out, the intermediary is not able to address these aspects until he has clarified the patron’s question, i.e. patron’s information need, which is not quite the simple task it seems to be.
The information need of the patron
4

While it is rather simple to define the purpose of the reference interview from the above, it is often a very difficult job to clarify the patrons’ information needs. The patrons’ are often having difficulties in formulating their needs clearly and precisely to the intermediary and their questions do not always represent their actual information need. Because of this, the nature of the patron’s information need has often been under discussion.
In his well-known article Taylor (1968) examines the patron’s information need, how it manifests itself and how it is presented to the intermediary. Taylor describes the manifestation and formulation of the information need within a patron as an ongoing process in four stages Q1-Q4.
The process begins as a subconscious need of dissatisfaction within the patron and evolves until the patron is able to formulate a question to the intermediary. Taylor points out that this question does not always represent the actual information need, because he finds that patrons often compromise their questions in order to adjust them to their expectations to the intermediary and their knowledge of the library.
The main point in Taylor’s text is that the intermediaries often encounter patrons in different stages of manifesting and formulating their information need. Some times the questions are very vague at other times they are more precise but not representing the real needs.
Although Taylor’s description of the nature of the patron’s information need has been controversial to both practitioners and theorists e.g. Oser (1987) and Hjørland (1997) it no less has resemblance with other descriptions of the nature of the information need.
Belkin (1978) has also dealt with the nature of the information need in introducing the Anomalous
States-of-Knowledge (abbreviated to ASK). Belkin’s ASK arise in a situation in which someone with a problem needs help from some kind of information system. Belkin does not specifically deal with the nature of the information need but rather with the patrons in problematic situations.
Situations in which the patrons’ knowledge are incomplete or limited in some way, and they need further information to get on, the patrons are seen to be in an anomalous state of knowledge. Belkin points out that the patrons often have difficulties speaking about or recognising what is wrong in this ASK because they face gaps, lacks, uncertainties, and incoherencies, and therefore they are often unable to specify what information is needed to resolve the anomalies.
Dervin also deals with the nature of the information need linked with the patrons’ specific situations in her Sense-Making approach. Dervin describes an information-need situation as one in which the individual’s internal sense has “run out”, and therefore the person must create a new sense. This has been incorporated into the Situation-Gap-Use model where the patron is seen as being locked in a situation unable to move further because of some kind of gap in his knowledge. However the patron tries to bridge this gab by asking questions and using the answers to closing the gab, making new sense. As Belkin, Dervin sees the nature of the information need as something situational changing as the patrons tries to bridge the gap. Therefore it can often be difficult to address the patrons information-need situation as you need information about all three elements in the model, not least how the patron cognitively tries to bridge the gab, as it is difficult for the patron to specify this.
(Dervin & Nilan (1986); Dervin & Dewdney (1986)).
In general these three descriptions of the nature of the information need bear some resemblance.
They all describe it as arising from something situational, whether it is a subconscious
5

dissatisfaction or a problematic situation, which is not fixed but changes. Finally it is also seen as something, which is very difficult for the patron to formulate and specify.
The intermediary’s role in the reference interview
Consequently the most essential in the traditional reference interview would be to formulate and specify the patron’s information need, and in this the intermediary plays a very important role.
However, communication barriers between the intermediary and the patron often hinder this role, because the patron often lacks understanding and knowledge as to why the intermediary needs to address the aspects mentioned by Katz (1997), or as Taylor (1968) argues, because the patrons’ questions do not represent the actual information need, because it has been compromised. This we may call the patron’s information illiteracy.
In his article Taylor mentions five filters, which he see as important for the reference interview, as they secure the information needed by the intermediary to answer the patron’s question:
1.
Determination of subject;
2.
Objective and motivation;
3.
Personal characteristic of the inquirer;
4.
Relationship of the inquiry description to file organisation;
5.
Anticipated or acceptable answers.
(Taylor, 1968 p. 183)
These five filters bear resemblance to the aspects mentioned by Katz (1997). The intermediary must clarify the subject of the patron’s question: find out why the patron needs the information, get to know the patron so he can get the right information, get information that makes the intermediary able to find the information in the library, and finally find out what answers the patron anticipates and will accept. Communication barriers may hinder getting all of this and especially the second filter, which Taylor considers crucial to the reference interview, can be hindered. Determining the patron’s objective and motivation is very important because it is through this, the intermediary get ideas for what kind of information is needed and how to find it. Also knowledge of the question’s objective is of crucial importance in those cases, where the patron is not able to clarify or formulate his information need precisely.
“Inquirers frequently cannot define what they want, but the can discuss why they need it.” (Taylor, 1968 p. 185)
Sadly it is often this aspect which is most hindered by the communication barriers. We shall now take a look at some of the communication barriers, which affects the traditional reference interview.
Communications barriers
In the traditional reference interview the communication between the patron and the intermediary can be hindered by the physical appearance of the library, e.g. is it quiet? Can they conduct their talks in privacy? Does the patron have to stand while the intermediary sits? Etc. All this may affect
6

the patron’s willingness to talk to the intermediary, and as a result affect the successful outcome of the reference interview (Lederman, 1981). Also the nonverbal communication affects the outcome, as body language plays an important part in human communication. It is important that the intermediary makes the right signals, e.g. by having a positive attitude, by showing interest in the patron’s query through eye contact or nodding (Muños, 1977). We will not be going further into these elements of the traditional reference interview, as they are of little importance, when we later turn to Web-Based Reference Question Services.
Of more interest is however some of the communication barriers identified by Mount (1966). He mentions that the patron’s lack of knowledge of the library collection or the terminology used within the library, can affect the communication between the intermediary and the patron and cause the patron to formulate his questions imprecisely or generally, so that the patron does not stand as an illiterate when speaking to the intermediary or not to cause embarrassment to the intermediary by asking a question, he is unable to answer, e.g. where do I find your dictionaries? Mount also addresses the fact the patron does not always know what he wants. Nor is it safe to assume that the patron wants to talk about why he wants the information. This may be because the patron finds that it is no business of the intermediary, or the question is of a sensitive nature, e.g. about medical or legal matters. Patrons can feel uneasy talking about their information need because they do not understand why it is necessary for the intermediary to obtain further information about the question and the patron himself.
As Taylor (1968) mentions, determining the objective and motivation behind the patron’s question is often very useful to the intermediary. However, posing direct questions as to why the patron needs some specific information can act as a communication barrier, if the patron feels himself cross-examined or threatened by the intermediary. This critical aspect is underlined by the fact that some (Hauptmann 1987; Oser, 1987) argue that the intermediary should refrain from asking to the objective and motivation of the patron. They advise against this because it can have a very negative if not destructive, influence on the reference interview, if the patron misinterprets the intermediary’s intentions.
Generally speaking the literature agree that it can influence the outcome of the reference interview negatively if the intermediary is seen as too personal or intrusive by the patron. So the literature generally advices caution when asking about the patron’s objective and motivation.
That is why Naiman (1987) argue that the intermediary should avoid direct questions to the patron like:
“Why do you want this information?”
or
“How are you going to use this information”
because this can offend the patron. Instead she suggests that these questions should be rephrased, so that they express a necessity for information by the intermediary and make sense for the patron to answer, e.g.:
“Hmm … I think I could help you better if I understood how you’re going to use this information” (Naiman, 1987 p. 33)
According to Naiman this prevents bringing the patron in a defensive position when talking to the intermediary, which would have been the result if using direct questions. Rephrasing direct questions as the one above also helps to show the intermediary’s interest in helping the patron and it changes the roles, it is now the intermediary who seeks the help of the patron rather than the other way round. It also involves the patron more actively because instead of a passive role, he is
7

encouraged to take responsibility for how the dialogue with the intermediary evolves. This could be one of the techniques the intermediary could use during the reference interview in order to secure the needed information, and enable the intermediary to avoid some of the communication barriers and ultimately answer the question.
Interviewing techniques
In order to clarify the patron’s information need and to get the relevant information the intermediary can use a variety of interviewing or questions techniques. Used correctly these can also minimise some of the communication barriers between the patron and the intermediary. When the intermediary initiates a reference interview he needs some information from the patron, e.g. “what is the information for?” or “what is the patrons background?” It could also be that the patron has formulated his question vaguely and the intermediary needs to have it more precisely stated. This can be achieved through different question techniques, which we will introduce briefly.
King (1972) and Ross (1987) describe closed questions as questions, which begin with the following words “is, was, do or does” e.g. “Do you need an article or a book?”
Closed questions are in nature dikotome, limiting the possible answers from the patron. It is often yes or no answers or the patron is left with few options to choose between. Using closed questions the intermediary has already made some choices on behalf of the patron in regard to the answers. This kind of questions can be prohibiting on the reference interview, if the patron is not quite sure what he wants, nor is it sure that the real information need is discovered if the patron is continually forced to make confirmations. So at the beginning of the reference interview the closed questions can be rather prohibiting but on the other hand they can be most helpful at the end of the reference interview clarifying and specifying the last details.
As an alternative to the closed questions both King (1972) and Ross (1987) mention the open questions. This is a different way of asking with questions starting with words like “what, when, how, who and where” e.g. “How do you plan to use this information?”
In contrast to the closed questions the open questions encourage the patron to speak freely with his own words, which can be useful at the beginning of the reference interview. It can though be difficult for the intermediary to control and structure the reference interview, and it can be difficult getting the right information by using only open questions. On the other hand using open questions enhances the chances of revealing the patron’s information need, because they make the patron focus on his need and force him to describe it in his own words. Some open questions can nevertheless, as mentioned earlier, appear too direct to the patron, especially when asking
“why…?”
, and they primarily originate from the intermediary’s point of view.
The neutral questions offer the point of view that the intermediary through his questions during the reference interview should try to get an understanding of the patron’s situation. This kind of question technique has been developed by Dervin & Dewdney (1986), and it arises from the earlier mentioned sense-making approach suggested by Dervin. According to Dervin & Dewdney the neutral questions should focus on the three elements in the situation-gap-use model in order to derive an understanding of the patron’s situation. They give some examples of questions assessing these elements:
“To assess the situation:
8

Tell me how this problem arose.
What are you trying to do in this situation?
What happened that got you stopped?
To assess the gaps:
What would you like to know about X?
What seems to missing in your understanding of X?
What are you trying to understand?
To assess the uses:
How are you planning to use this information?
If you could have exactly the help you wanted, what would it be?
How will this help you? What will it help you to do?”
(Dervin & Dewdney, 1986 p. 509)
This question technique is reminiscent of the open questions, but according to Dervin & Dewdney it is much easier for the intermediary to control and structure the reference interview through neutral questions, as they still allow the patron to talk freely but within a framework that gives the intermediary an understanding of the patron’s situation and at the same time they secure the necessary information.
Announcing intensions
As previously mentioned the reference interview can be affected negatively if the intermediary asks directly to the objective and motivation behind patron’s question, e.g. if the patron find it to be too personal or feels uncomfortable discussing it. Dervin & Dewdney (1986) is aware of this problem in regard to the neutral questions, and they advise against using the word “why” in questions to the patron and state that these questions should be rephrased. As mentioned earlier Naiman (1987) has also conceded to this but also Dewdney & Michell (1997) has touched this point. They have examined why the patrons often misinterpret the intermediary, when he inquires to the objective and motivation behind the patron’s question. They conclude that direct questions like “why do you want this information”
is ambiguous and the intermediary’s intentions behind are misunderstood because the patrons do not share the intermediary’s background and understanding of the reference interview.
Despite the fact that inquiring into the patron’s objective and motivation can be difficult Dewdney
& Michell find that it is a necessity for the intermediary to do so, as they agree with both Katz
(1997) and Taylor (1968) that it is through a clarification of this the intermediary obtains the most useful information about the patron’s information need. So Dewdney & Michell agree with Naiman that direct question should be rephrased. They also argue that questions about why the patron need the information, should be made in a context that explains the intermediary’s intention, and the reason why the intermediary would find the information useful. This will remove the patron’s feeling of unease, and make him more motivated to answer the question thereby removing one of the communication barriers between the patron and the intermediary.
Because the reference interview is an encounter between two people with different backgrounds and understanding of the situation, de Souza (1996) finds it important that the intermediary throughout
9

the reference interview explains the intentions behind his questions, thereby giving the patron a understanding of the intermediary’s situation e.g.:
“Yes, the library may have many different kinds of information on this topic. Not all are suitable. I want to ask you about what you need so that I will know exactly what kinds of materials to suggest. This way, I can help you better.” (Author’s italics) (de Souza,
1996 p. 45)
So through the reference interview the intermediary should also be improving the patron’s knowledge and understanding of why the aspects mentioned by Katz (1997) and Taylor (1968) must be addressed during the interview. Consequently the intermediary may be successful in removing one of the greatest communication barriers, the patron’s information illiteracy, and he may enhance his chances of obtaining the needed information successfully. This can be done by explaining intentions or by using examples from previous encounters with other patrons.
Acting as a catalyst
As it is seen, the traditional reference interview is not easy to perform for the intermediary. Often the intermediary is confronted with questions that do not represent the patron’s actual need, or with situations where the patron do not yet have a clear information need or is not able to formulate it.
The intermediary must be able to handle this during the reference interview. He has to clarify the patron’s real information need while at the same time obtaining information that allows him to give an acceptable answer and fulfil the patron’s need. During the interview the intermediary must also be aware of several pitfalls, which can influence the reference interview negatively.
So it is important that the intermediary is conscious of his role during the interview. By applying different interviewing techniques, explaining intentions or giving examples the intermediary helps the patron clarify and formulate his information need. As Taylor (1968) points out, it is during the interview the patron becomes aware of his real information need and is able to formulate it.
Consequently the intermediary should have in mind that he acts as a catalyst in the process the patron is going through, thereby removing the patron’s information illiteracy. However, the question now arises whether this role can be transferred to an electronic environment without the personal face-to-face encounter between the intermediary and the patron. How does one make an electronic reference interview?
Since the late 80’ties and the beginning of the 90’ties electronic reference services has slowly become one of the libraries’ offered services. The e-mail has long been part of the library as a communication form internally or between libraries handling, e.g. interlibrary loans. Slowly it has also become a communication form between the library and its patrons as a way of extending loans or ordering photocopies. With the appearance of the World Wide Web many of these services has evolved into full-scale reference services (Josiasen & Ammentorp, 1998).
But will these kinds of services be able to handle the same questions as the traditional reference services within the physical library? In an electronic environment you do not have the same kind of
10

possibilities as the only way to communicate with the patron would be through e-mail or through a chat session, and whether this can replace the traditional reference interview is a question. Abels &
Liebsher (1994) and Abels (1996) has made a thorough examination of the e-mail dialogue between the intermediary and the patron to see whether it is possible to make a successful reference interview by e-mail.
E-mail communication problems
Abels (1996) points out several advantages and disadvantages of conducting a reference interview by e-mail in comparison to the traditional interview face-to-face of by phone. She mentions that the e-mail is an easy way to communicate; the mails are short, spontaneous, effective, cheap and quick.
The e-mail represents an alternative for the patron for posing a question rather than visting the library. E-mails are not restricted to the library’s opening hours, they can be written and read at convenience and they leave an electronic trail, which was helpful to the intermediary.
However, Abels argues that e-mail is an asynchronic way of communication, as the interaction or dialogue between the intermediary and patron does not take place within a short period of time. It could take some time before e-mails got back and forth between the patron and the intermediary, and these interruptions often led to several radical changes in the patron’s original question, which was frustrating to the intermediary. At the same time however these interruptions also allowed both the patron and the intermediary to give the questions some thought. So a reference interview by email proved to have both positive and negative affect on the interview.
Abels (1996) found it possible to conduct a successful reference interview by e-mail, handling the same questions as the traditional reference services. The most successful way to handle the e-mail reference interview is to adopt a systematic approach using a form, as it makes the patron clarify his information need and secures the necessary information for the intermediary. According to Abels an ideal e-mail reference interview is composed of three mails: the question by the patron using a form, a summation of the question by the intermediary, and finally a confirmation on this by the patron. Should it be necessary to continue the dialogue, then Abels suggest a change of communication form (phone or have the patron visit the library), and one should also be aware that some questions are too complex to handle by e-mail.
These findings were supported by a survey made by Josiasen & Ammentorp (1998), which also showed that many elements from the traditional interview appears in the electronic environment.
Patrons still submit general or unclear questions, and some of the pitfalls also appear, e.g. some patrons feel uneasy when being asked why they need the information, despite the fact they remain somewhat anonymous when using e-mail. The patron still lacks understanding of why the intermediary needs to address different aspects of the information need and they can still misunderstand each other.
If the Web-Based Reference Question Services should be able to handle the same kind of questions as the traditional reference services they should be able to come up with something similar to the traditional reference interview, something that clarifies the patrons information need and secure the necessary information for the intermediary to handle the questions. We will now introduce a triangular model for the Web-based Reference Interview showing the elements affecting the
11

interview, and elements important to be aware of, when offering a Web-Based Reference Question
Service.
When offering a Web-based Reference Service on the Internet one should consider how to overcome the patron’s information illiteracy using this kind of services, and to help the patron formulate his information need just as in the traditional reference interview. One should also consider how to obtain the necessary information for the intermediary, which will enable him to answer the question.
Because of the difficulties in performing an e-mail reference interview as stated by Abels (1996),
Hahn (1997) and Josiasen & Ammentorp (1998), they found that using some kind of form, which patrons should fill-out when submitting a question, is helpful. This limited the e-mail correspondence between patron and the intermediary and secured a better outcome. We have produced a model for a Web-based Reference Interview, using a Web-based Reference Question
Form showing that the experiences and theories from the traditional reference interview also can be used when transformed into an electronic environment.
The Model
The triangular model consists of three parts, which interact. The patron’s information literacy, the patron’s information need and the reference question service. It is presented below in figure 1.
As mentioned previously we define information literacy as the patron’s ability to find the Web-
Based Reference Question Service, to judge whether it is relevant for his information need, and finally his ability to formulate his information need clearly and precisely, giving the necessary information.
The reference question form refers to the way this service is outlined to the patron by the library on its web site.
Finally there is the patron’s information need, which needs no explaining, as it is the question, which the patron wants to pose.
These three parts would be the same in the traditional reference interview, where of cause the presentation of the reference question service would be replaced by the intermediary personally. So the elements affecting the three parts in the triangular model will also to a degree be present in the traditional reference interview.
12

Information Literacy
The Patrons’
* Educational level
* Knowledge of the
Internet
* Prior experience
with the service
* General
knowledge of the
library
Presentation
* Introduction
* Explanations
* Examples
* Communication
* Alternatives
Information Need Cognitive tools Reference Question Form
* Structure
* Interviewing
techniques
* Examples
13

The Patrons’
If we look at the patrons, which elements affect both their information need and information literacy in the traditional reference interview? Here we can take a look at some of the earlier mentioned communication barriers. If the patron is lacking general knowledge and understanding of the library, this would affect his ability to formulate his question precisely and clearly, say if he does not know the depth of the library collection this may cause him to phrase the question in general terms. It could also be that he is not aware of which kind of questions the reference service can handle so that he compromises his question in a way that he expects it to be answered.
If the patron does not have any prior experience with the reference service (the intermediary) he may not understand why the intermediary needs to clarify his information need and to get further information, e.g. what is the patron’s background or why does he need the information. This would also influence his ability to formulate the question, and it may even cause him to deliberately withhold important information because he finds it too personal or embarrassing.
Where as the traditional reference interview requires some verbal communication skills for the patron to formulate his question, using a Web-Based Reference Question Service will require some different skills. The patron would have to be able to navigate the Internet, to be able to use an email or to chat. This would seem obvious. The patron must be able to navigate through the library’s web sites in order to find the Web-Based Reference Question Service, and he must understand how to fill in a form, write an e-mail or chat in order to pose his question.
Finally the patron’s educational level may often affect both his information literacy and his information need. Having a higher educational level may often, but not always, have the result that the patron has a better understanding of what he wants, and it also gives him a better chance of formulating it precisely and clearly. Because of this it may influence his information literacy, as it would give him a better understanding of why the intermediary needs certain information, plus a higher educational level would properly also result in a better knowledge and understanding of the library generally.
The elements affecting both the patron’s information need and his information literacy has been placed within the frame called “The Patron’” in the triangular model. And while the elements may be natural to consider when talking about the traditional reference interview it should also be considered when offering a Web-Based Reference Question Service. Although it would be impossible to influence the affect of the patron’s educational level, the other elements can be affected, and this will mostly be done in the interaction between the patron’s information literacy and the presentation of reference question service.
Presentation
Overcoming the patron’s information illiteracy must be done in the presentation of the service.
Firstly the patron must be able to find the service within the library’s main page, so the service should be clearly labelled or described in such a way that the patron has no trouble finding it. As a result a small number of steps from the library’s main page to the service would be preferable so the patron does not get lost.
14

When the patron arrives at the service, it is important that it includes a thorough introduction to the service. There should be a description of who can use the service, what kind of questions can be submitted to the service, how soon can the patron expect an answer, who is answering the questions, and how to use the service. Information of this kind will help the patron judge whether the service would be relevant to his information need. It would also help him formulate his information need if he were to know what kind of questions, he can submit. A way of doing this could be to include examples of previous questions submitted to the service, i.e. showing how the questions should be formulated.
This would also give the patron some idea what kind of information should be included when formulating his question. But as in the traditional reference interview the patron might be uneasy about offering all the information needed by the intermediary. Therefore it would also be important that the presentation of the service includes some explanation of why the intermediary answering the question needs the information. As in the traditional reference interview this should be done in a way that shows the intentions behind the questions and expresses the importance of the patron helping the intermediary rather than the other way around.
The findings of Abels (1996), Hahn (1997) and Josiasen & Ammentorp (1998) showed it is not always easy to communicate by e-mail because it is an asynchronic form of communication.
Presenting alternatives to the patron might be a good thing, e.g. fax, phone, chat etc. Pending how the patron wants to receive his answer, or if further negotiation of the patron’s question is needed, the patron might prefer to do it by phone or by meeting the intermediary personally rather than by email. It is of cause important to let the patron chose the time and way of communication, e.g. to let him decide when he may be reached by phone.
It might also be a good idea to include alternative sources; the patron can consult, if he wants to find the answer himself rather than being forced to submit the question to the reference question service.
All of this is placed in the “Presentation” frame in the triangular model, and the elements affect the patron’s information literacy. These elements help the patron find the reference question service and to judge whether it is relevant to him. They also help him formulate his question and may also help the patron understand, why the intermediary requires certain information from the patron in order to answer the question, thereby removing some of the barriers present between the patron and the intermediary.
Cognitive tools
In the traditional reference service it has been found that the patrons are not always sure what they want, and it is likewise in the electronic reference work. Although according to Josiasen &
Ammentorp (1998) some libraries have found that the patrons have given their questions more thought when forced to formulate them in writing. As in the traditional reference interview the appearance of the Web-Based Reference Question Service must function as a catalyst. It must be able to help the patron in his cognitive process to clarify what he wants, and how he should formulate it clearly and precisely.
15

In the traditional reference interview this is done by applying a number of different interviewing techniques, which besides making the patron think about his question also provides the intermediary with important information on how to answer the question. This can also be done in the Web-Based
Reference Question Service.
Taylor (1968) argues that the traditional reference interview is best when structured, and one is able to analyse it. Abels (1996) also found that the e-mail reference interview was most successful when structured and presented in a logical order. So there is no reason to think the structure of the reference question service will not affect the thought the patron gives to his information need, and the information the intermediary receive from the patron. Consequently one must consider how to structure the reference question service; how can the patron be forced to give his question some thought? Raising some questions, the patron must think about when formulating his question could be doing this.
The questions could be about the elements mentioned by Katz (1997) or Taylor (1968), e.g. “For what do you need the information?”, “what do you already know about the subject?” or
“Do you need an article or a book?”
It could be done by a combination of open, closed and neutral questions. However, as in the traditional reference interview one must be aware that this can be regarded as personal information and of no business to the intermediary. Accordingly, the structure of a reference question service should include explanations why the patron must address these questions, so that he will not feel uneasy and leave out important information.
Another way of helping the patron to consider his question would be to include examples of previously answered questions, as the patron would be able to relate these to his own question, and this might help him in formulating it clearly and precisely.
Implanting these elements in the Web-Based Reference Question Service can be regarded as cognitive tools, which affect the interaction between the patron’s information need and the service itself. The elements will help the patron to a better understanding of his own need, while they also provide the intermediary with valuable information, which help the intermediary answer the question satisfyingly. The elements have been placed in the frame called “cognitive tools” in the triangular model.
It is our opinion that having these considerations when offering a Web-Based Reference Question
Service will enhance its chances of becoming successful. The triangular model is primarily based on the experience and theories of the traditional reference interview. It is indicated how the same elements might also influence the Web-based Reference Interview, and how incorporation of these elements in a reference question form will help the patron overcome his information illiteracy and secure the intermediary the necessary information. We will now present a survey of fifteen
Scandinavian public libraries’ Web-Based Reference Question Services with an evaluation based upon the triangular model.
As mentioned at the beginning of this paper we have gone through all Scandinavian public libraries’ web sites in search of Web-Based Reference Question Services; that is services that clearly states that the patron can ask a question, which is then answered by a human intermediary in the library.
16

In all 54 different Web-Based Reference Question Services was found (although not all the libraries’ web sites was accessible at the time of the survey). We chose to evaluate 15 of these with a Reference Question Service evaluation chart based upon the triangular model; it can be seen as appendix A.
When examining the electronic reference interview in 1998 Josiasen & Ammentorp categorised
Web-Based Reference Question Services into to three types: the E-mail pattern, the simple form, and the elaborated form. We found it useful to maintain these three categories when presenting the survey, and of the chosen 15 Web-based Reference Services we deliberately chose five within each category.
The E-mail pattern
This type of Web-Based Reference Question Services are characterised by a rather simple outline, as the libraries can be reached through a mailto-link or by a mentioned e-mail address whereto the patron can write and submit his question. The libraries offering this kind of services is Drammen
(NO), Jämlands Län (SWE), Nedre Eiker (NO), Vejle (DK), and Ängelsholm (SWE).
All of theses service is labelled clearly with a name indicating what kind of service is in question:
“Fråga Biblioteket”, “Fråga Oss”, “Spør Biblioteket” or
“Spørg Biblioteket”
, and in three cases it is easy to find the services via the libraries’ main page, as there is a link directly to the service.
However, in the cases of Drammen and Vejle it is more difficult, as there are no direct link and you have to use two or three steps before you reach the services and become aware of their existence. In the case of Vejle one has to pick the link to the introduction of the library’s reference section and then scroll down to the service
“Spørg Biblioteket”
. For the information illiterate patron this can be difficult to figure out.
It is significant for the e-mail pattern Web-Based Reference Question Services that they only include a very short introduction to the service:
“Fråga oss!
Här får du hjälp av personalen att söka efter information i kataloger och databaser, böcker och tidskrifter. Utlånade böcker kan reserveras; böcker som inte finns på vårt bibliotek kan kanske fås via fjärrlån (se nedan).
Vi försöker också hjälpa till att besvara de flesta frågor inom många områden. Kom in, ring eller skicka en epostfråga genom att klicka här!!” (Ängelholm) 17
Or:
“Spørg Biblioteket !
Du kan ringe til Læsesalens oplysningstjeneste (75823200) hvis der er en konkret oplysning du står og mangler: Hvad er det nyeste pristal ? - Hvor mange indbyggere er der i Vejle Kommune ? Hvordan staver man til hierarki ? - Adressen på den danske
17 http://www.kommun.engelholm.se/kultur/inftjnst.htm
17

ambassade i Brasilien ? - Hvor langt er der til Hamburg ? - Hvor høj er Vejlefjordbroen
? etc.
Du kan også sende dit spørgsmål på telefax (75823213 att.: Læsesalen) eller på e-mail info@vejlebib.dk” (Vejle) 18
These introductions give a view of the kind of service the patron can expect, when submitting an email to the library. They do not state who can use the services, how quickly the library will respond to the questions or who will answer the questions. Nor do the introductions give any clear idea of what kind of question can be submitted. In the case of Vejle is there a clear definition of what kind of questions the service can handle, as it states that only short factual questions can be submitted.
The introduction gives examples of this e.g.:
“Adressen på den danske ambassade i Brasilien?”
(What is the address for the Danish embassy in Brazil?).
Because the services only relay on a mailto link there is no structure that helps the patron in the process of clarifying or formulating his information need. Nor do the introductions give any clues as to how the question should be formulated, or what kind of information is needed by the intermediary in order to answer the question satisfyingly.
As a result there are no written questions using different interviewing techniques asking the patron for information. As a consequence it might be necessary for the intermediary to follow up on the patron’s question by e-mail in order to clarify it. Even very simple questions may require followups. Consider the rather simple question: “When did Johannes Blaskowitz die?” In order to find the answer to this question the intermediary needs to know who Johannes Blaskowitz (a German WWII general) was, and the only person who can provide this information is the patron. Nor can the intermediary be sure the question really covers the patron’s information need, e.g. “ did he also mean how he died?”
(by a never fully explained suicide in 1948) and
“does he want further information about Johannes Blaskowitz?”
.
The absence of this information could result in a difficult e-mail interview, because an e-mail address might be the only thing the intermediary has on the patron. None of the introductions ask the patron to include name or phone number in their question, so the patron may be very anonymous to the intermediary, which make it difficult to handle the question satisfyingly.
Generally speaking we find the e-mail pattern Web-Based Reference Question Services does little to overcome the patron’s information illiteracy and help him formulate his information need, as there is nothing acting as a catalyst. Because the service depends on a mailto link or the mentioning of an e-mail address, the patron may easily overlook it, despite the fact they might appear directly on the library’s main page. This is somewhat different in the two other categories of Web-Based
Reference Question Services.
The simple form
This is a more sophisticated and visible way of offering a Web-Based Reference Question Service.
These services include a text-box in which the patron can submit his question. This kind of services often include text-boxes where the patron can write his name and e-mail address.
18 http://www.vejlebib.dk/lsal/index.htm
18

The libraries offering this kind of services are Deichmanske Bibliotek (Oslo) (NO), Fråga
Biblioteket (SWE), Linköping (SWE), Det nordjyske Landsbibliotek (Aalborg) (DK), and Tønsberg
(NO).
As in the case of the E-mail pattern Web-Based Reference Question Services these are also named in a way easy for the patron to understand, e.g.
“Fråga Online”
or
“Spørg Biblioteket”.
All the mentioned libraries have a direct link from their main page to the service. The exception of cause being the Swedish
“Fråga Biblioteket”
, which is a national service offered in cooperation by 21 libraries and existing as an independent web site. The Deichmanske Bibliotek’s Web-Based
Reference Question Service also functions as a national service, but it is part of Oslo’s public library’s web site.
All of these services have an introduction, and they can be more detailed than the ones in connection with the e-mail pattern services, as this example from the Deichmanske Bibliotek shows:
“Her kan du få hjelp til å finne svaret på rene faktaspørsmål, få henvisning til kilder eller hjelp til å finne ressurser på Internett. Vi lager ikke handlingsreferat av bøker, gjør ikke prosjektoppgavene for skoleelever og besvarer heller ikke kryssord- og konkurransespørsmål. Mer informasjon om Spør biblioteket finner du her.
For å besvare spørsmålene dine, tar våre erfarne bibliotekarer i bruk hele vårt apparat av trykte og elektroniske hjelpemidler.
Før du sender oss et spørsmål, anbefaler vi at du prøver et søk i vår spørsmål/svar base for å se om du finner svaret der. Når det gjelder spørsmål om bøker i bibliotekets egen samling, kan du kanskje finne svaret selv ved å søke i bibliotekets kataloger.
Hvis du ønsker at vi skal hjelpe deg, fyll ut skjemaet nedenfor og du vil motta et svar fra oss i løpet av påfølgende arbeidsdag.
Dersom du skriver feil e-post adresse, vil du ikke få svar.”(Deichmanske Bibliotek)
19
This introduction clearly states the kind of questions it handles, namely short factual questions; finding resources in books or on the Internet answering the question. It points out that the service do not make abstracts of books, helps students with their projects or answers crosswords.
So it states rather clearly what questions the patron can expect to be answered, although the introduction does not include any examples of questions. The introduction also informs the patrons that librarians will answer the question, and that he can expect an answer within the next working day. The introduction above is very similar to that of Det nordjyske Landsbibliotek, although this is placed on a different page than the one where the patron submits his question, so one cannot be sure that the patron actually has read the introduction. These two introductions are rather detailed, but in the cases of the other three they bear more resemblance to the e-mail pattern services with only a short introduction.
19 http://nyhuus.deich.folkebibl.no/deichman/spor.html
19

None of the services with a simple form help the patron formulating the question. They do not ask for any information about the patron’s question, e.g. why he needs the information or the kind of sophistication needed in the answer. As an exception, the Deichmanske Bibliotek asks the patron to state in what language he wants references. Nor do they secure much information about the patron himself besides name and e-mail address, although Tønsberg also asks for the patron’s address, and as an option his library card number, and the Deichmanske Bibliotek asks for his phone number. So this simple form does not apply any structure pointing to different aspects of the patron’s information needs, nor do they apply interviewing techniques securing the necessary information for the intermediary. As a result further negotiation of the patron’s question may be necessary as in the e-mail pattern services.
As already mentioned none of the five simple form services have included examples of questions in their introduction but both the Deichmanske Bibliotek and Fråga Biblioteket have produced a data base of answers for previously asked question, thereby offering an alternative to the patron, as they suggest he should ascertain, whether his question already has been answered.
Nearly all five services offer a different way of communication than e-mail. Linkøbing offers a chat-session for submitting questions, thereby making some sort of real time interview possible.
The Deichmanske Bibliotek has the phone as an option for follow-ups, and Fråga Biblioteket asks if the patron would prefer to receive his answer in another way than through e-mail e.g. by phone or fax.
Generally using a simple form of a Web-Based Reference Question Service, it becomes more visible to the patron, and it may be easier for the patron to use than the e-mail pattern service filling out the text-box rather than to use a mail-program. The simple form includes some information about the patron, although not his information need, and by suggesting other ways of communication it appears to us there has been given some thought on how to run the services.
Still the simple forms do not help the patron to formulate, say even give his question much consideration before submitting it. Nor do the simple forms address the aspects mentioned by Katz
(1997) and Taylor (1968), which may result in a need for further contact between the patron and the intermediary, as we have seen even simple questions may be difficult. These aspects could be included in the introduction to the services but none have done so.
The elaborated form
This type of Web-Based Reference Question Service is characterised by introducing an elaborated form with several text-boxes that the patron has to fill-out when submitting a question.
Of the libraries offering this kind of service we have chosen the following: Allerød (DK),
Biblioteksvagten (DK), København (DK), Odder (DK), and Steinkjer (NO). Like all the previous services mentioned, these services are also named in a distinctive way making them recognisable to the patron.
Not counting BiblioteksVagten, the national Danish Web-Based Reference Question Service offered in cooperation between 3 libraries, all the services are easily found within 2-3 steps from the library’s main page, with the exception of København where you have to use the link “Find og
20

bestil” (Find and order) in order to get to the service “Spørg Biblioteket”
, this may not appear logical to the patron. Only Steinkjer has a direct link from their main page to the service.
It is significant that the services using an elaborated form do not have a lengthy introduction. Only
BiblioteksVagten has one but it is placed on a separate page from the form itself, and the patron will have to use the link to it, if he wants to read it. They only provide a short, if any, introduction to the service; stating that you can submit any question you would normally go the library to find the answer for e.g.
“BiblioteksVagten
– hjælper med svar på alle de spørgsmål, der normalt stilles til et folkebibliotek.
– træffes også uden for bibliotekernes normale åbningstid!
– svarer dig hurtigt tilbage. Se nærmere om svartider.”(BiblioteksVagten) 20
Allerød, København, and Odder do not give any introduction at all. There is no indication of the kind of questions, which can be submitted, and only BiblioteksVagten informs of the response time.
In contrast to the two previously mentioned categories of Web-based Question Services the elaborated form is structured and it addresses several aspects of the patron’s question. In this the four Danish services resemble each other.
Firstly they ask the patron to write his question in a large text-box. Then he has to state his name, email address, address and in some cases also give his age, if he wants to. At this point the patron may freely send his question to the intermediary handling the questions, and as such it resembles the simple form. However, the form now asks the patron to consider several aspects of his question in a number of text-boxes, pointing out it will be very useful for the intermediary to know these aspects in order to answer the question satisfyingly e.g.:
“OBS! For at kunne besvare spørgsmålet bedst muligt vil vi gerne vide lidt mere om spørgsmålet, og beder dig om at udfylde nedenstående felter. Det er dog ikke et krav at du skal udfylde felterne, hvis du ikke ønsker det.” (Allerød) 21
It does, however, state that the patron does not have to fill-out the text-boxes, if he does not want to.
Then the forms ask about the objective and motivation behind the patron’s question using examples, e.g. schoolwork or hobby. They ask about the patron’s work and educational level. København and
Odder wants know what the patron already knows about the subject or which resources he has already consulted.
By including these aspects within the form the intermediary is certain of getting more information about the patron’s question. Consequently the intermediary has a better chance of answering the question but it also helps the patron to think about his question, especially when asked why he needs the information as pointed out by Taylor (1968)
Although the forms indicate it would be useful to the intermediary if the patron were to answer these questions, one could argue it would be useful to explain and show the intentions behind each question as suggested by Naiman (1987) and de Souza (1996), e.g. by including examples. The
20 http://www.biblioteksvagten.dk/
21 http://www.alleroed.bibnet.dk/blanket2.htm
21

forms only use open questions, which might be too direct and make the patron feels uneasy.
Consequently questions could be rephrased as neutral questions, just as other aspects could have been addressed, say the patron’s time frame.
Steinkjer has chosen another form, as it is specialized to school projects, helping students with their problems. Besides information about name, school level, and e-mail address the form asks for the title and subject of the project, what the student already knows of the subject, and what he precisely wants. The form also asks about when the project started and when it is due. The student is also asked to give the name of the teacher and the classes involved in the project. Like the Danish forms
Steinkjer’s form makes the student ponder about what he wants, and it provides the intermediary with a lot of information about the project. This limits the need for follow-ups by e-mail, as the information need will be more precise, and the intermediary gets much of the necessary information.
All the forms expect Steinkjer suggest other ways of communication than e-mail, e.g. phone or fax for receiving the answer. BiblioteksVagten also allows the patron to submit his question in a chatsession during opening hours.
Finally BiblioteksVagten also suggests several alternatives to the patron by presenting special subject question services and subject specialist listings.
As observed in this evaluation this last category of Web-Based Reference Question Services includes many of the elements in the triangular model. Due to the structure and questions within the elaborated Web-based Reference Question Form it helps the patron overcome his information illiteracy and formulate his question. Potentially it gives the intermediary the information needed to answer the questions, and thereby it has to a degree replaced the traditional reference interview.
The survey shows the existing Scandinavian Web-Based Reference Question Services can be improved in dealing with the patron’s information need and overcoming his information illiteracy, specially the e-mail patterned services and those using a simple form. Neither of these provide the structure, which helps the patron formulating his information need or to secure the intermediary all the necessary information. The presentation of the Web-Based Reference Question Services do little to replace the traditional reference interview, which may result in a difficult question negotiation between the intermediary and the patron by e-mail.
The Web-Based Reference Question Services using an elaborated form is better off dealing with the patron’s information need and his information. The elaborated form provides a structure and helps the patron consider his information need and to formulate it. The form also secure much of the information needed by the intermediary. Yet, there is room for improvement.
We find that the survey has showed that the triangular model can be used for developing wed based reference question forms replacing the traditional reference interview. Considering the elements within the model affecting the patron’s information need, his information, and the service itself, when offering a Web-Based Reference Question Service, we find that it will improve the service. It
22

will help both the intermediary and the patron, as it would remove or minimise communication barriers.
Abels, E.G. (1996). The E-mail Reference Interview. In: RQ. Vol. 35, No. 3, p. 345-358.
Abels, E.G. & Liebscher, P. (1994). A New Challenge for Intermediary-Client Communication: The
Electronic Network. In: The Reference Librarian. Vol. 41/42, p. 185-196.
Belkin, N.J. (1978). Progress in Documentation: Information Concepts for Information Science. In:
Journal of Documentation. Vol. 34, No. 1, p. 55-85.
Dervin, B. & Dewdney, P. (1986). Neutral Questioning: A New Approach to the Reference
Interview. In: RQ. Vol. 25, No. 4, p. 506-513.
Dervin, B. & Nilan, M. (1986). Information Needs and Uses. In: Annual Review of Information
Science and Technology (ARIST). Vol. 21. p.3-33.
Dewdney, P. & Michell, G. (1997). Asking “Why” Questions in the Reference Interview: A
Theoretical Justification. In: RQ. Vol. 67, No. 1, p. 50-71.
Hahn, K. (1997). An Investigation of an E-mail-Based Help Service: CLIS Technical Report No.
97-03. URL: http://oriole.umd.edu:8000/Services/tr97/03/9703.htm
Hauptman, R. (1987). The Myth of the Reference Interview. In: Reference Service Today: From
Interview to Burnout / ed. By B. Katz & R.A. Fraley. New York: The Haworth Press, 1987 p. 47-
52.
Hjørland, B. (1997). Information Seeking and Subject Representation: An Activity Theoretical
Approach to Information Science. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press.
Jennerich, E.Z. & Jennerich, E.J. (1997). The reference interview as a creative art. 2 nd
ed.
Englewood: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Josiasen, C.L. & Ammentorp, S. (1998). Et referenceinterview på World Wide Web. Aalborg:
Danmarks Biblioteksskole, Aalborg afdeling.
Katz, W.A. (1997). Introdution to Reference Work, Vol. II: Reference Services and Reference
Processes. 7 th
ed. New York : McGraw-Hill Book Company.
King, G.B. (1972). Open and closed questions - the reference interview. In: RQ. Vol. 12, No. 2, p.157-160.
Lederman, L.C. (1981). Fear of talking: Which students in the academic library ask librarians for help? In: RQ. Summer, p. 382-389.
23

Mount, E. (1966). Communication barriers and the reference question. In: Special Libraries. Vol.
57, No. 8, p. 575-578.
Muños, J.L. (1977). The significance of nonverbal communication in the reference interview. In:
RQ. Vol. 16, No. 3, p. 220-224.
Naiman, S.M. (1987). The Unexamined Interview Is Not Worth Having. In: Reference Service
Today: From Interview to Burnout / ed. By B. Katz & R.A. Fraley. New York: The Haworth Press,
1987 p. 31-46.
Oser, F. (1987). Reference Simplex or the Mysteries of Reference Interviewing Revealed. In:
Reference Service Today: From Interview to Burnout / ed. By B. Katz & R.A. Fraley. New York:
The Haworth Press, 1987 p. 53-78.
Ross, C.S. (1987). How to Find Out What People Really Want to Know. In: Reference Service
Today: From Interview to Burnout / ed. By B. Katz & R.A. Fraley. New York: The Haworth Press,
1987 p. 19-30.
Souza, Y. de (1996). Reference work with international students: making the most use of the neutral question. In: RSR. Vol. 24, No. 4, p. 41-48.
Sutton, E.D. & Holt, L.E. (1995). The Reference interview. In: Reference and information services / ed. E. Richard & L.E. Smith. 2 nd
ed. Englewood: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Taylor, R.S. (1968). Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries. In: College and research libraries. Vol. 29, No. 3, p. 178-194.
24

Date:
Name of Library:
The library main page:
Name of Web-Based Reference Question Services:
Location:
1.
Is there a link from the library main page to the reference question service?
2.
Does this link include an annotation describing the reference question service?
3.
What is the smallest number of steps from the library main page to the reference question service?
4.
How is the reference question service outlined? a.
Only an E-mail link? b.
A simple form? c.
An elaborated form? d.
Chat-sessions?
5.
Does it include an introduction to the reference question service? a.
Who can submit questions? b.
What kind of questions can be submitted? i.
Does it include examples? c.
Does it state how quickly the library will respond to the questions? d.
Does it state, who will respond to the questions?
6.
What helps the patron formulating his or her information need? a.
A structure pointing to different aspects of the information need and the patron? b.
What kind of interviewing techniques is imbedded in the reference question services? c.
Is it explained why the library needs detailed information regarding the patrons question and the patron himself? d.
Are there examples on previously answered questions?
7.
What kind of options is there for further negotiation of the patron’s question? a.
Phone? b.
E-mail? c.
Chat? d.
Personal encounter?
8.
Does the reference question service suggest any alternative sources? a.
Ready-reference sites? b.
Subject specialist listings?
25