Search results

This study seeks to investigate users' virtual reference queries in concert with their search histories to better understand user needs and motivations.

The paper initially examines one semester of data, including both search histories and user questions, from a database platform virtual reference service. These data were used to develop categories of frequently occurring search problems. One year of further data (n=90) is then coded and analyzed with these categories for problems exhibited in search histories and user questions.

It was found that one‐third of users display a misunderstanding of what content they could expect to find in library databases. Users treated the databases examined as a one‐stop shop for their daily information needs. There was a positive correlation between number of databases simultaneously searched and number of searches users performed before seeking help. Additionally, it was found that users recognize when they have problems with search strategy, but they are disproportionally concerned with term selection as the cause of their trouble rather than other problems with search mechanics (i.e. Boolean operators.)

The results of this study illustrate commonalities in users' expectations of what they may search for, find, or do in a database. It shows what tends to lead users to seek help with their searching, exposes how the systems can lead users astray, and illustrates basic misunderstandings of what content can be found in library databases.

This study is the first virtual reference study that examines users' search histories in concert with their reference queries.

This paper seeks to create an empirical framework for SMS reference services so that libraries may develop a greater understanding of how this service operates and how it may be improved.

The paper conducted a quantitative analysis of 577 SMS transactions, representing 628 reference questions, received during the 2008‐2009 academic year. Each transaction was coded by type of question, transaction length in messages or “events,” and transaction duration in time.

SMS transactions exhibit a higher than expected degree of variability in total number of events, duration and content. Overall, duration of transaction averaged 4.34 hours, and number of events per transaction averaged 3.79. Calculating separately for those transactions that contained a reference query – which comprises 40 percent of the total questions received – noticeably altered the results. The duration of reference queries averaged 4.85 hours, while the number of events averaged 4.65. Where reference queries occurred there was a high incidence of user expressions of gratitude, regardless of duration or number of events exchanged. These results support the conclusion that users do not expect a purely synchronous service, though faster response time and thoroughness of answer do show a relationship with higher user satisfaction.

Many of the findings of the study challenge currently held assumptions and impressions regarding the nature and potential of SMS reference services in academic libraries.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the impact of a mental health carers’ research reference group on mental health research in the Heart of England region.

The methodology was a co-produced participatory evaluation, and the research was co-produced by the group. The design involved a literature review of carers’ involvement in UK mental health research, and collection of secondary data (group records) and primary data from researchers, group members, and facilitators. Analysis was initially thematic, then synthesised.

The group’s work had a positive impact on researchers and group members, and to some extent on mental health research and networks more widely. No negative impact was identified.

The researchers were not able to contact or include everyone who had been involved with the group. Some of those who did not give input may have felt less positive about the group than those who did respond. Co-production does not signify equality. Evaluation inevitably involves bias.

The conclusion is that mental health carers have a unique and positive contribution to make to mental health research, and have the right to be involved in such research in a non-tokenistic way. This has practical implications for mental health and mental health research services.

This is the first mental health carer-controlled evaluation of a mental health carer research reference group. Mental health carers conducted the research and wrote this paper, giving a perspective rarely found in the literature. This has value for people working in, studying, and researching mental health, and for other mental health carers.