1. Copyright Donald W. King and Carol H. Montgomery 2003. This work is the intellectual property of the authors. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the author.

2. COMPARISON OF COST AND USE OF UNIVERSITY ELECTRONIC AND PRINT JOURNAL COLLECTIONS Donald W. King Research Professor, U. of Pittsburgh Carol Hansen Montgomery, Ph.D. Dean of Libraries, Drexel University EDUCAUSE, November 7, 2003 Funded in part by a grant from the IMLS, NR-00027

3. Journal Migration

4. Institutional Readiness Administrative support Computer literate users Infrastructure in place Poor current journal collection Major budget increase Distance education programs Large commuter & part-time populations One central library Resource-rich environment

5. Developing and Managing the Electronic Journal Collection Much more complex Many more variables than print Price/Contract negotiation Required more skilled (i.e. higher paid) staff Volatility of collections Higher use

6. Print-Related Savings? Check-in Claiming Binding Shelving Collecting statistics

7. Impact on Staff & Costs Study Funded by IMLS Infrastructure/Systems & Space Administration Technical Services Circulation/Access Reserve Information Services

8. IMLS Research Project Case Study Impact on staff activities Impact on costs: reduced, increased, or re-allocated? Develop a methodology

9. Translate To Research Question Hypothesis: Electronic journals are less expensive than print journals.

10. Definitional Issues What is an Electronic Journal? What costs matter? [i.e. unit of measure] What is a use?

11. Methods - 1 Distinguish Three Services Electronic journals Unbound print journals Bound print journals

12. Methods – 2 Annualize All Capital Costs Space for print journals Actual space Shelving Computing infrastructure for print and electronic journals Servers Software Workstations

13. Methods – 3 Calculate Operational Costs Staff costs via time logs 22 weekly samples over 1.5 years Impacted by transition Other operational costs Supplies, binding, printing, copying, etc.

14. Methods – 4 Add Subscription & Use Data Distinguish three services Annualize all capital costs Calculate operational costs Calculate subscription costs Compile/organize use data

15. Chart 1 Summary Operational Costs

16. Chart 2 Operational Costs per Title

17. Chart 3 Subscription Costs Per Title Number of TitlesCost per Title E-J Individual Subscriptions E-J Publisher PackagesE-J Full-Text E-J AggregatorPrint Journals $500 $135 $60 $6 $100 200 2,500 500 10,000 400

18. Chart 4 E- Journal Cost per Use $6 $3 $2 $1

19. Chart 5 E-J/Print Cost per Use *Bound Print Subscription Costs/Use NA $2 $6 $30

20. Major Differences Operational cost per use of print journals higher than for electronic journals Bound journals have highest cost/use; the major factor is storage space Electronic journals require more reference support

21. Major Issue How do we translate capital cost savings [i.e. not building new library space to store journals] to: operating costs to pay for electronic access

22. Caveats Study is a first step Case study for one academic library only Data “messy” in nature Need for more studies, improved data

23. Faculty Information Seeking & Reading Patterns How much do they read? Where readers obtain articles that are read? What format do readers use? How do readers learn about articles? Trends are revealing

24. How Much Do They Read? Depends on the reader’s field University faculty read more than others

25. Fig 1. - Average Amount of Reading by Medical Faculty, Non-University Medical Professionals, and Scientists

26. Where Do Readers Obtain Articles? Reading per Person %No. Personal subscriptions3878 Library collections4389 From another person714 Author Websites12 Free Web journal612 Preprint25 Other36 100206

27. Age is Important Sample Size: Total = 397, Scientists = 300, Non-Scientists = 97 Source: University of Tennessee (2000), Drexel University (2002), University of Pittsburgh (2003)

28. How Do Readers Learn About Articles? Reading per Person %No. Browse49101 Online Search2449 Citations in publications1123 Someone told reader1327 Other36 100206

29. Format of Reading Source: University of Tennessee (n=96), Drexel University (n=92), University of Pittsburgh (n=209)

30. Format by Source Personal Subscriptions 93% of subscriptions in print 90% of reading in print Library Collections 80% of reading electronic Saves readers about 20 hours per year

31. Trends in Scientists’ Reading Patterns They appear to be reading more They rely on libraries more Reasons for increased library use

32. Fig 2 - Average No. of Articles Read per Scientist Year and Study (National Survey, n=2,350) (National Survey, n=865) (U of TN, n=89)(TN, Drexel & Pittsburgh, n=300)

33. Fig 3 - Source of Additional Readings Scientist Reading per Year

34. Fig 4 - Average Number of Personal Subscriptions per Scientist

35. Fig 5 - Average Number of Articles Identified by Automated Searches Per Scientist Avg. Readings per Scientist

36. Breadth of Reading Increased Drexel as an example Scientists’ Reading Read from about 13 journals in 1977 Over twice that amount now

37. Library Contribution to Usefulness & Value Purpose of use Importance in achieving principal purposes Ways article affected the principal purpose How much do readers “pay” for the article? Achievers read more from library collections Readers are more productive than non-readers Make resources available Help users utilize collections

38. References King, D.W., Tenopir, C., Montgomery, C.H., and Aerni, S.E. “Patterns of Journal Use by Faculty at Three Diverse Universities.” D-Lib Magazine, 9:10, October 2003. World Wide Web: King, D.W. and Montgomery, C.H. “After Migration to an Electronic Journal Collection: Impact on Faculty and Doctoral Students.” D-Lib Magazine, 8:12, December 2002. World Wide Web:

39. Acknowledgements Sara Aerni, Special Projects Librarian, University of Pittsburgh Kathryn Brady, former Electronic Resources Librarian, Drexel University Matt Herbison, Graduate Assistant, University of Pittsburgh Carol Tenopir, Professor, University of Tennessee