June 22-25,
2009
i3 Conference
Aberdeen,
Scotland
Convenience, Connections,
Correctness, and Choice:
Critical Components of
Virtual Reference Service
Quality
Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Ph.D.
Senior Research Scientist
OCLC Research
Marie L. Radford, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Critical Components
•Research to
understand needs of
diverse user
population
•Design services to
meet users’ needs
Information Environment
• Rapidly changing user
characteristics
• Information-seeking preferences
• Communication & behavior patterns
• Global economics
• Decrease in funding sources
• Ongoing budget cuts
• Informed decision-making
critical
Seeking Synchronicity:
Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User,
Non-User, & Librarian Perspectives
IMLS, OCLC, & Rutgers University funded project
Four phases:
Focus group interviews
Analysis of 850 QuestionPoint live chat transcripts
Online surveys
137 VRS Users
184 VRS Non-users
Telephone interviews
76 VRS Users
107 VRS Non-users
Online Surveys & Phone
Interviews
•Descriptive statistical analysis
• Demographics
• Multiple choice (surveys only)
• Likert-type (surveys only)
•Qualitative analysis
• Open-ended questions
• 2 critical incident (CI) questions
User Demographics:
Online Surveys & Telephone
Interviews (N=212)
Net Gen (N=70)
Adult, 29+ (N=142)
•Female (54%, 38)
•Female (72%, 102)
•19-28 years old (53%, 37)
•36-45 years old (34%, 48)
•Caucasian (66%, 46)
•Caucasian (85%, 121)
•Suburban public libraries
•Suburban public libraries
Experience with Service Modes:
User Online Survey (N=137)
70%
60%
50%
40%
64%
87
30%
48%
66
20%
37%
50
10%
0%
Email
Telephone
IM
Frequency of Use: User Online Survey
(N=137)
How often have
you used chat
reference?
4%
7% 6
9
10%
14
2-3 Times Total
4-6 Times Total
22%
30
57%
78
1-2 Times/Month
3-4 Times/Month
5 or More
Times/Month
Chat Least Intimidating: User Online Survey
Net Gens (N=49) Adults (N=88)
“I am least intimidated by”
80%
70%
60%
50%
76%
37
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
4%
15%
2
5
FtF
0%
0
12%
4
Phone
14%
7
36%
12
Email
Net Gen VRS Users
6%
3
36%
12
0%
0
Text
Adult VRS Users
Chat
Likely to Return? User Online Survey
Net Gens (N=49) Adults (N=88)
94%
“The probability that I will use reference
services again is”
92%
90%
88%
92%
81
86%
84%
82%
80%
78%
82%
40
76%
Net Gen VRS Users
Adult VRS Users
Why Users Recommend VRS:
Telephone Interviews (N=76)
•Would recommend VRS (89%, 68)
•Why?
• Speed & efficiency (32%, 24)
• Convenience (32%, 24)
User Telephone Interviews:
Chat is Convenient (N=76)
Chat 1st choice
• 18% (14) quick answers
Why?
• 60% (45) convenience
Recommendation Important: User Online Surveys
Net Gens (N=49)
•Used VRS because
recommended
•Recommended
VRS more than
adults
What Attracts Users to VRS?
Online Surveys (N=137)
•Convenience, Convenience, Convenience
• Available 24/7
• Working from home
• At night or on weekends
• Immediate answers
• Lack of cost
• Efficient
•Less intimidating interactions
Important to All Users
•Knowledgeable librarians
•Positive attitude
•Communication skills
•Valued by “Screenagers”
• Personal relationship
• Successful interactions
Experience with Reference Modes:
Non-User Online Survey (N=184)
30%
25%
20%
28%
52
15%
19%
35
10%
2%
3
5%
0%
Telephone
Email
IM
FtF Preferred: Non-User Online Survey
Net Gens (N=122) Adults (N=62)
•Adults (81%, 50)
•Net Gens (71%, 87)
FtF Preferred by Net Gens:
Non-user Online Survey (N=122)
“I most enjoy using”
Texting
12%
15
FtF
49%
60
Email
27%
33
Phone
12%
14
Email Least Intimidating Mode:
Non-User Online Survey
Net Gens (N=122)
“I am least
intimidated by”
Texting
17%
21
FtF
20%
24
Phone
12%
15
Email
51%
62
Critical Considerations for Info Seeking:
Non-User Online Survey
Net Gens (N=87) Adults (N=51)
•Convenience
• Net Gens (87%, 76)
• Adults (78%, 40)
Critical Considerations for Info Seeking:
Non-User Online Survey
Net Gens (N=41) Adults (N=13)
•Remote access is
important
• Net Gens (95%, 39)
• Adults (85%, 11)
Interpersonal Communication is Valued:
Non-User Online Surveys
Net Gens (N=86) Adults (N=51)
•Personal Relationship
• Adults (43%, 22)
• Net Gens (24%, 24)
•Specific Librarian
• Adults (51%, 26)
• Net Gens (42%, 36)
Friendliness & Politeness Valued:
Non-User Online Survey
Net Gens (N=41) Adults (N=14)
80%
70%
“The librarian is friendly and polite”
60%
50%
40%
69%
28
30%
20%
29%
4
10%
0%
Net Gen VRS Non-users
Adult VRS Non-users
Why They Do Not Choose VRS:
Non-User Online Survey
Net Gens (N=122) Adults (N=62)
•Too complicated
• Adults (53%, 33)
• Net Gens (35%, 43)
•Typing skills poor
• Adults (35%, 22)
• Net Gens (16%, 19)
Why They Do Not Choose VRS:
Non-User Online Survey
Net Gens (N=122) Adults (N=62)
•Believe questions
might annoy librarian
•Net Gens (29%, 32)
•Adults (16%, 10)
Why Net Gens Do Not Choose VRS:
Non-User Online Survey (N=122)
•Don’t know it is available
•Believe librarian couldn’t help
•Lack of 24/7 service
•Satisfied w/ other info sources
Why Adults Do Not Choose VRS:
Non-User Online Survey (N=62)
• Same as Net-Gen, but also…
• Lack computer skills
• Type slowly
• Complexity of chat
environment
Non-User Telephone Interviews
(N=107)
•FtF Preferred (24%, 26)
•Do not know VRS exists
(16%, 17)
•Alternatives to library
• Internet (43%, 45)
• Personal convenience
(38%, 39)
What We Learned
FtF & VRS Users want
• Extended service hours
• Access to electronic
information
• Interact w/ friendly
librarians
• Personal relationship
with librarians
What We Can Do
Provide
• Variety of service modes
• Convenient,
authoritative, reliable
services
• Accurate information
What Else We Can Do
• Creative marketing
• Promote full range of options
• Reassure young people VRS
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.
Slides available at project web site:
http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/synchronicity/
June 22-25,
2009
Questions & Comments
i3 Conference
Aberdeen,
Scotland
Lynn Silipigni Connaway
connawal@oclc.org
Marie L. Radford
mradford@scils.rutgers.edu