e-journal access

Sarah Taylor, Electronic Resources Librarian, University of Bolton

19 February 2010

Tools are available to aid the process: resources purchased through CHEST, NESLi2 or JISC Collections outline access for resources on their websites, and the JISC's Academic Database Assessment Tool (ADAT) provides comparative data about resources, including platform features. Having an electronic copy is, in theory, just the thing: available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, serving the needs of students who balance study with work to finance their education as well as distance learners and part-time students. So one renews, or takes out a new subscription to the electronic version. A few weeks later, licences are signed and an up-beat e-mail arrives with information that the title is now available to set up for electronic access. Suddenly, IdPs, IP address ranges, Athens IDs and usernames and passwords are required, link resolvers must be configured, instructions for remote access must be produced and links on OPACs must be altered.

There is an expectation among students, especially those for whom the language of the Internet has been part of their vocabulary from primary school, that everything required by them to complete their studies should be available in an instant at the click of a few keystrokes. And this expectation is understandable: university information is available following a search through the simple interface of Google; a missed television programme is available for free online; contact with friends is quick and easy through social networking sites. So applying the same expectation to the consultation of academic research is, in many ways, a given.

Users want to be able to search, click a button, get taken through to a site where full-text is available and open a PDF of their chosen article. And this they can do, and even better: many universities offer federated search products, with new products such as Serial Solution's Summon which provides self-proclaimed "web-scale discovery", that "goes beyond federated search". It is potentially a very exciting time for those involved with the provision of electronic information. However, enabling any sort of access can be hard to achieve. Leaving aside licensing difficulties and copyright concerns, removals from packages and publisher exclusivity, the most pertinent, and perhaps most obvious, barrier to successful electronic access is just that: access.

Although users and information professionals may have differing views of what constitutes poor holdings, a number of things can serve to frustrate. A number of publishers' sites - some that are major players in academic publishing - lack the functionality to let a user know to what material they have access as part of their institution's subscription. It is not unheard of to get to article level before one finds that one does not have access. Remote access for some electronic material is difficult and unreliable. The changes that occurred to authentication in August 2008 have compounded matters furthers, with users confronted with WAYF pages and inconsistent wording. All resources can be subject to service outage, either planned or unplanned, and access difficulties may not be resolved particularly quickly.

It could be argued that difficulties in gaining electronic access to a journal or database should be at the very bottom of a list of priorities for acquisition and retention: the quality of and the subsequent value of the title to the collection more than compensates for any difficulties. However, there are instances where access to electronic material is nothing short of tortuous, with users having to click on many links and navigate pages to find the information they need. Although one would expect users to ask for help, in many cases they simply do not: they just give up. Not only will they miss out on vital information for their studies and possibly instead use less credible sources such as Wikipedia, they may also be turned off using the library service as a whole.

The notion that users may be completely put off using a resource is largely attributable to anecdotal evidence. However, examination of usage statistics for a 'problem' title may confirm suspicions that access is troublesome. A previously well-used title which has been subject to an upgrade that actually limits functionality and introduces further barriers to access might see its usage statistics plummet. Of course, one cannot determine if such examples of poor usage are due to arduous access procedures or other factors - a change in the curriculum, perhaps - but just as we might discard or replace with an alternative a book that is damaged beyond repair or has outgrown its usefulness in our collections, we might start to apply similar principles of weeding to our electronic collections.

At the end of the acquisitions process is renewal, and in many respects this will be dependent on the priorities of the library as well as the budget. It might be that this priority is to provide electronic access at all costs. It might also be the case that the library must take steps to combat space problems. However, a priority may in fact be to attempt to create an easy to use, reliable collection, even if that means considering retaining print subscriptions. Needs must be balanced with practicalities. An electronic journal titles that is impossible to access may represent zero value at a time when budgets are severely tested. This balancing act might lead us to wonder if it is better to cancel one awkward-to-use journal and purchase an alternative, rather than to provide a link to a journal that many will not use as there is simply too much involved in trying to access it. It is a question that for many, both librarians and users, remains unanswered.

To see the full text of the list discussion on the subject of difficult e-journal access leading to cancellation, access lis-e-resources.