Search results

The aim of this study is to compare print and e-book use for identical titles in the e-Duke Scholarly Collection (e-DSC) from 2011 to 2013 to determine format preference for a discrete collection of titles in humanities and social sciences.

Use statistics for the e-DSC were downloaded from the e-book platform by title and call number to determine use by title and subject. Circulation statistics were culled from the library’s integrated library system for the same titles to compare e-book use to that of the same print title.

Although e-books had a high number of titles with use as a per cent of the collection, examination of substantive use shows a slight preference for print. While 73 per cent of the e-books garnered enough interest to click on them, only 12 per cent had substantive use.

The e-DSC changed platforms in December 2013. The new platform does not require users to create an account to download e-book sections and digital rights management limitations have been removed. The same examination of collection use in 2.5 years on the new platform will provide an interesting comparison on the function of platform on e-book use.

The comparison of identical print and e-titles is less studied and includes the examination of “substantive use” in comparing print to e-book use.

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether a sufficient number of e‐books is available in science streams from different publishers to satisfy the need of an academic library to develop an e‐book collection based on its collection development policy. This study aims to identify e‐book equivalents for print books acquired by Central Science Library, University of Delhi.

This study provides the in‐depth quantitative analysis according to title‐by‐title selection of e‐books from various international publishers compared to the recommended books for different science courses of the University of Delhi. The study was conducted following that of Price and McDonald which shows that around 30 per cent of print books have e‐book equivalents. The data collected were analyzed by using a simple method of calculation and percentages were calculated to interpret the results of the study.

The results show that only about 17per cent of print books have e‐book equivalents available from different publishers, fulfilling only 9‐15 per cent of the requirements of most of the courses – something that does not match the library's collection development policy.

The present study is based on the books recommended in the curriculum of different science courses of the University of Delhi for the academic year 2009‐2010. According to subject‐wise distribution of e‐books variation of about 2 per cent in the findings occurred, as some books are mentioned in the curriculum of more than one course. This study provides some constructive suggestions which may help librarians to explore ways to spend the budget for collection development of e‐books in a more appropriate way.

As this paper is based on in‐depth quantitative analysis of availability of e‐books according to need of a particular academic library, generalization about availability of e‐books cannot be made. However, it contributes to trace the growth of e‐books and suggests some alternatives to develop e‐book collection. Further studies can be done for different library settings to find out their need for and availability of e‐books.

For most college and university libraries, deselection of monographs should be an essential component of collection development. Few of these libraries have unlimited space for book stack expansion. This research study aims to cover the reasons why this should be undertaken and how it can be accomplished in the humanities and social sciences. At the main campus of Adelphi University Libraries, a conservative approach was used to identify and carefully review monograph titles that were published more than 50 years ago, and, in most cases, this resulted in their deselection without significantly affecting the collection. For some of these titles, the author determined that they might be worth replacing with available e-books and the author did so.

A brief overview is provided to delineate why deselection is important, and how it can be accomplished. A literature review was prepared. It included a review of deselection at small-, medium- and large-sized college and university libraries. The pros and cons of print versus e-books for collection development were reviewed, including four case studies. The feasibility of replacing print reference titles with e-books was also covered. A review of the monograph weeding project at the Adelphi University Library in the humanities and social sciences is provided. Conclusions and a projection of next steps are also included.

An overwhelming majority of the monograph titles reviewed were deselected without adversely affecting the overall quality of the collection. A small number of available e-book editions were selected to replace some of these deselected titles.

All of the titles deselected were published more than 50 years ago. All of these titles were in the social sciences and humanities. The deselection review was limited to philosophy, religion, history, political science, sociology, education and psychology. There were limitations on the amount of time available to review titles in most of these fields, and as a result, only a small percentage of the titles in our collection could be reviewed.

The library has very serious space constraints, which has made it difficult to provide the needed study space for members of the Adelphi University community. Some sections of the book collection are jam packed, with no room for expansion. Deselecting older less used titles and eliminating some sections of book shelves help address both of these problems. Replacing some of these print titles with e-books contributes as well. This deselection project has reduced the holdings of monograph print titles significantly. In the future, the author hopes to rely less on print titles and more on e-books for collection development.

In most fields, college and university students would be better served for their research by more recently published titles. Older, less used titles, as well as those not used at all, should be deselected to make room for more useful and up-to-date titles. As more and more titles become readily available as e-books, the collections of print titles can be reduced. Being able to use e-books even when the library is closed is a great advantage. It should also be noted that these titles can be used by more than one user simultaneously.

In conducting the literature search, the author discovered that there were a large number of titles on deselecting print titles. There was also considerable research on e-book collection development. However, there were few that linked these two important topics. In this research article and case study, the author hopes to have made a significant contribution to linking them together.

This paper aims to share the successful experiences and suggestions from the 2007 Chinese e‐books consortium.

A survey of the participant libraries of the 2007 Chinese e‐books consortium was conducted. Survey results were analyzed.

The consortium improved the Chinese collections with perpetual ownership, and demonstrated the bargaining power that exists through a consortium. Most participants would consider joining the consortium in the future.

Since the 2007 Chinese e‐books consortium has only just been completed, the usage statistics have not been compiled. It will be interesting to see how readers adapt to the Chinese e‐books in the future.

The results have practical implications for the operation of library consortia.

This study provides the latest opinions and suggestions from the consortium participants, which can be valuable to those who are interested in initiating new library consortia. The study results can also be of value to librarians who are considering joining any library consortia.

The purpose of this paper is to present the results from a quantitative analysis comparing usage between collections of individually purchased e‐books and collections of e‐books purchased as part of large consortially negotiated bundles. The aim of this study is to determine if individually purchased e‐books have recorded a greater level of usage than e‐books purchased in large packages and, consequently, which of the two acquisition models is best suited for the library.

Usage rates of e‐books purchased individually from NetLibrary and MyiLibrary were compared to usage rates of e‐books purchased in large bundles from the same aggregators. Usage of e‐books purchased in large bundles directly from SpringerLink was compared to usage of e‐books on NetLibrary and MyiLibrary. The number of e‐books was obtained by simple count. Additional statistics tracked include the number of viewings.

Initial results indicate that individually purchased titles from both NetLibrary and MyiLibrary have consistently recorded a greater level of usage than the bundled titles on their respective platforms. A second quantitative analysis comparing two aggregated collections of individually selected titles to a very large bundled collection acquired directly from SpringerLink yielded somewhat different results. For the most part, SpringerLink bundled e‐books have recorded a greater level of usage when compared to bundled titles on NetLibrary and MyiLibrary.

This research is one of very few studies systematically and quantitatively comparing usage levels between e‐monographs individually selected and acquired as large bundles by a Canadian academic library.

This article describes the e‐book program of the University of Texas, surveys the state of the e‐book market and e‐book technology, provides e‐book usage statistics for three different consortia, and offers guidelines for e‐book acquisitions, as well as e‐book issues to be considered. Relevant specification, standards, and working groups are explained, as are the future e‐book plans of The University of Texas. The author concludes that e‐books are to printed books, as television is to radio and movies: another format with its own strengths and weaknesses.

To provide some insight into the phenomenon of e‐books and their potential application in general, and to describe how the ETH‐Bibliothek, an academic library, has integrated web‐based e‐books into its collection.

The concept of e‐books was examined and the success (or failure) of their integration into library collections evaluated. How web‐based e‐books have been integrated into the ETH‐Bibliothek's collection was evaluated, as there were different formats and pricing models for e‐books. Other important issues relevant to e‐books were considered, such as usage statistics, how to discover new e‐books for integration into a collection, and whether web‐based e‐books are likely to be applied successfully in academic libraries.

The implementation of e‐books at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule) in Zurich is described, and information is provided on publishers or aggregators through which the ETH has subscribed to e‐books, different formats and pricing models for e‐books and usage statistics. How the number of e‐books to which an institution subscribes can be increased, is described, together with the benefits of e‐books in the academic environment, which will in all likelihood ensure the ongoing future of web‐based e‐books.

The paper provides introductory information on e‐books in general and on their suitability to an academic library in particular.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the results of a 2006 survey of UK Higher Education OPACs in order to provide a snapshot of cataloguing practices for e‐books.

The OPACs of 30 UK HE libraries were examined in July/August 2006 to determine which e‐books were catalogued, and the level of cataloguing treatment e‐books received. Interviews were conducted by e‐mail with representatives of eight of these libraries.

A total of 28 universities surveyed provided some OPAC records for e‐books; most of these were for subscription collections from suppliers such as ebrary and netLibrary. Five universities included records in their OPACs for individual e‐book titles from collections such as Eighteenth Century Collections Online (ECCO); four OPACs included records for free e‐books. There are wide variations between institutions in terms of which e‐books are selected for cataloguing.

The survey was undertaken at a particular point in time (summer 2006) and was not exhaustive of all UK HE OPACs.

This research suggests that it should be made easier for users to search OPACs for e‐books, and that libraries should provide more information on their websites about which e‐books are catalogued.

This paper addresses a gap in the UK literature on cataloguing e‐books.

The purpose of this paper is to determine whether aggregator packages might be appropriate to replace or supplement print collections in business and nursing, it aims to identify e‐book equivalents for print books acquired for an academic library's collections.

This paper provides a list of the library's acquisitions in two disciplines checked against e‐book aggregators' holdings. The comparison is analyzed and discussed.

The results confirm findings of a previous study showing that less than one‐third of print books acquired for this library's nursing and business collections have e‐book equivalents available from aggregators, so the aggregators' holdings do not strongly match the library's collecting profile.

The present study applies previous research to a different type of collection, and tests previous conclusions.

This paper contributes to assessment of the value of e‐book collections for academic libraries.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the collection development practices regarding e-books among librarians who manage French, Italian, Portuguese and Spanish (Romance) materials. The authors aim to describe factors that influence acquisition of e-books for Romance language collections to confirm librarians’ perception that humanities researchers prefer print and library administrators’ attitudes toward e-books.

This study collected data using a mixed-method approach of a survey and focus groups.

This study confirms that user preference is the primary consideration of Romance librarians in selecting e-books. Contrary to librarians’ perceptions, this study found that humanities faculty and students are not averse to using e-books for specific purposes such as searching, targeted reading and course materials. While restrictions on lending e-books are a concern, Romance librarians are focused primarily on serving the needs of their core constituencies.

The practice of adding call numbers to individual e-books varies among institutions. Individual e-book titles in large packages do not necessarily get added to the catalog, thus making it very difficult to compare e-book collections between institutions.

This study endeavors to unify the anecdotal narratives and factors that influence the acquisition of e-books by Romance librarians.