Discovery layer decisions, configurations and strategies
https://doi.org/10.20913/1815-3186-2020-2-83-95
Abstract
The problem that patrons frequently encounter with searching via a discovery layer linked to a knowledgebase is the overwhelming number of hits. Few if any research or discussion compares how libraries resolve this difficulty. To begin a discussion, the author disseminated an open invitation for academic libraries to participate on three panels from October 2018 to June 2019 to discuss their implementation processes and decisions. Five academic libraries accepted the invitation. This paper reviews the approaches of the five American academic library systems with the intent to encourage further examination of the issues of design, implementation, and maintenance of discovery layers. The conclusions reached point to the evolving nature of discovery layer interfaces and the struggle for libraries to adapt their needs to this still changing product type. Within this group, the larger institutions with more financial and staff resources have designed a ‘’bento box’’ interface with open source software, while the other institutions with lesser means have chosen to create different instances of their subscribed proprietary discovery layers to meet their specific institutional demands and the specific needs of their patrons. A statistically relevant examination with rigorous comparison of usability testing would have to be done to see how these and other factors play out in the wider field.
About the Author
R. Schwartz
William Paterson University
United States
United States
Raymond Schwartz, Masters of Library Science, Associate Professor, Head of Library Information Systems
New Jersey, Wayne
References
1. Aharony N and Prebor G (2015) Librarians’ and information professionals’ perspectives towards discovery tools – an exploratory study. Journal of Academic Librarianship 41(4): 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.05.003.
2. Bonner S and Williams G (2016) A small academic library and the power of EBSCO discovery service. Serials Review 42(3): 187–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2016.1205428.
3. Boyer G, Bacon V and Hill K (2014) Creating a cohesive discovery service. Serials Review 40(3): 200–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2014.949549.
4. DeMars JM (2017) Discovering our users: a multicampus usability study of primo. IFLA WLIC2017, Wroclaw. URL: http://library.ifla.org/1810/1/S10-2017-demars-en.pdf (accessed 12.04.2019).
5. Dempsey M and Valenti AM (2016) Student use of keywords and limiters in web-scale discovery searching. Journal of Academic Librarianship 42(3): 200–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2016.03.002.
6. Doğan G and Doğan SC (2013) Evaluation of web discovery services: reflections from Turkey. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 73: 444–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.02.074.
7. Foster AK (2018) Determining librarian research preferences: a comparison survey of web-scale discovery systems and subject databases. Journal of Academic Librarianship 44(3): 330–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.04.001.
8. Hanneke R and O’Brien KK (2016) Comparison of three web-scale discovery services for health sciences research. Journal of Medical Library Association 104(2): 109–117. https://doi.org/10.5195/JMLA.2016.52.
9. Johnston L and Brown C (2017) It takes two to tango… Public services and information technology staff collaborate to launch a new discovery system. IFLA WLIC-2017, Wroclaw. URL: http://library.ifla.org/1793/ (accessed 12.04.2019).
10. Kumar V (2018) Selecting an appropriate web-scale discovery service: a study of the big 4’s. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 38(6): 396–402. https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.38.6.12860.
11. Lee B and Chung E (2016) An analysis of web-scale discovery services from the perspective of user’s relevance judgment. Journal of Academic Librarianship 42(5): 529–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2016.06.016.
12. Marvin S (2017) Voyager to ALMA – space to soul process for discovery systems adaptation to changing search environments. IFLA WLIC-2017, Wroclaw. URL: http://library.ifla.org/1733/ (accessed 12.04.2019).
13. Minkin RM and Tobias C (2017) Bridging the (unit) divide: applying user experience to a discovery layer. IFLA WLIC-2017, Wroclaw. URL: http://library.ifla.org/1817/ (accessed 12.04.2019).
14. Narayanan N and Byers DF (2017) Improving web scale discovery services. Social Science Research Network pap. ID 3139357. URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3139357 (accessed 12.04.2019).
15. O’Connell R (2019) Beyond the bento: a new discovery experience at smith college. Information Today. URL: http://www.infotoday.com/cilmag/mar19/OConnell-Beyond-the-Bento-A-New-DiscoveryExperience-at-Smith-College.shtml (accessed 26.10.2019).
16. Rochkind J (2012) Article search improvement strategy. Bibliographic Wilderness. URL: https://bibwild.wordpress.com/2012/10/02/article-searchimprovement-strategy/ (accessed 26.10.2019).
17. Rodríguez- Bravo B and Frías J-A (2017) Resource discovery services versus OPACs in information searching. IFLA WLIC-21017, Wroclaw. URL http://library.ifla.org/1816/ (accessed 26.10.2019).
18. Shapiro S (2018) Academic librarians, information overload, and the Tao of discovery. Journal of Academic Librarianship 44(5): 671–673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.07.004.
19. Spezi V, Creaser C and Conyers A (2015) The impact of RDS on usage of electronic content in UK academic libraries: selected results from a UKSG-funded project. Serials Review 41(2): 85–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2015.1035991.
20. Varnum K (2017) Unifying the library discovery experience. University of Michigan Library blogs. URL: https://www.lib.umich.edu/blogs/library-tech-talk/unifyinglibrary-discovery-experience (accessed 26.10.2019).
21. Wang X, Cui Y and Xu S (2018) Evaluating the impact of web-scale discovery services on scholarly content seeking. Journal of Academic Librarianship 44(5): 545–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.05.010.
22. Welborn A (2014). Bento searching is here! Duke University Libraries blogs. URL: https://blogs.library.duke.edu/blog/2014/08/21/bento-searching/ (accessed 26.10.2019).
23. Wells D (2016) Library discovery systems and their users: a case study from Curtin University Library. Australian Academic & Research Libraries 47(2): 92–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048623.2016.1187249.
24. Žabička P (2017) Knihovny.cz – building a discovery portal for Czech libraries. IFLA WLIC-2017, Wroclaw. URL: http://library.ifla.org/1814/ (accessed 26.10.2019).
Review
For citations:
Schwartz R. Discovery layer decisions, configurations and strategies. Bibliosphere. 2020;(2):83-95. https://doi.org/10.20913/1815-3186-2020-2-83-95
Views:
961
Email this article 