LJ Talks to Marie L. Radford

-- Library Journal, 11/8/2005

Recently, Rutgers School of Communication, Information and Library Services (SCILS) and OCLC were awarded a $684,996 IMLS Leadership Grant for the research and evaluation of virtual reference systems (VRS). According to co-principal investigators Marie L. Radford, SCILS, associate professor at Rutgers University, and Lynn Silipigni Connaway, OCLC, Research, consulting research scientist, the project, entitled "Seeking Synchronicity: Evaluating Virtual Reference Services from User, Non-User, and Librarian Perspectives," will ultimately yield a theoretical model for VRS that incorporates interpersonal and content issues. The study will also offer research-based recommendations for library staff to increase user satisfaction, as well as lure nonusers, make recommendations for VRS software development and interface design, and produce a research agenda for user-centered VRS. LJ's Lynn Blumenstein caught up with Marie Radford to learn more about the study.

LJ: How do you propose to go about getting the data for a VRS model?

MR: First, we are asking the study's participants to describe what they like and don't like about VRS and to identify factors critical to their perceptions of a successful service. Based on their input and the detailed analysis of 1000 VRS transcripts, we will look to construct a model that takes all these critical factors into account. This study continues a research program that I have been working on for nearly 20 years and that builds on what we know about what determines success in traditional, face-to-face reference interactions and incorporates theoretical frameworks from interpersonal communication scholars.

How will your efforts tackle the habits of NextGen students, who are accustomed to accessing services and resources at all times and in all locations?

We are extremely interested in the habits and preferences of NextGen students, particularly those who are in high school and college at present. Our study will collect information from this cohort through focus groups interviews with teenagers and college students, and through a large number of telephone interviews and online surveys that will reach library users and non-users of all ages. There will be specific questions designed to find out what the NextGen's information seeking behaviors involve and how libraries can deliver services that both appeal and deliver! This generation is very computer savvy and is expected to be prime customers for virtual reference of all types: chat, email, instant messaging and text messaging services.

Many students begin their research with Google. Is that still perceived as a problem?

Not necessarily…. According to the focus group interviews completed in Phase III of the IMLS-funded project with Ohio State University and OCLC*, faculty and librarians also often begin their research with Google. It provides a means to acquaint one with the subject before progressing to other sources. The responses of the participants of that study did indicate that authoritative electronic sources were preferred for certain situations and that they were aware of VRS services. Since this new research project includes both users and nonusers of VRS, we hope to identify the methods of showcasing or marketing VRS to make people aware of the service and ultimately to use it.

Can you differentiate your VRS research from Library of Congress/OCLC's QuestionPoint and RLG's RedLightGreen efforts?

Our VRS research is an evaluation of QuestionPoint chat reference, integrating focus group interviews, online surveys, and individual interviews with librarians who provide VRS and with users and nonusers of VRS. QuestionPoint is a librarian-user reference answer service that provides source data for our study, but it does not, in itself, analyze why patrons use or don't use the service, nor does it attempt to analyze levels of user satisfaction. RLG's RedLightGreen is a service designed to meet the needs of undergraduate students. It offers an interface that enables users to input keywords, as well as the Library of Congress Subject Headings and to check their local library for holdings and availability. It is our understanding that RedLightGreen is not a true VRS since it does not include an exchange between a user and the librarian.

Do you plan to address combining VRS with in-person reference efforts, i.e. appointment follow-ups with librarians?

Our study will probe viewpoints on this question and also provide a snapshot in time of user, nonuser, and librarian perceptions of the reality as well as the future of VRS. During the two year period of the grant, one of the interesting areas of inquiry is this question of how VRS fits in to the overall reference service array. It is important to note that when phone reference first appeared, there were fears that it would be an inferior reference service and would detract from the quality of face-to-face reference. Phone reference has, of course, been integrated into the contemporary suite of reference services, but it did take some time to become an acceptable alternative to the in-person encounter.

** "Sense-Making the Information Confluence: The Whys and Hows of College and University User Satisficing of Information Needs." Funded by IMLS, Ohio State University (OSU), and OCLC, the project is being implemented by Brenda Dervin (professor of communication and Joan N. Huber Fellow of Social & Behavioral Science, OSU) as principal investigator; and Lynn Silipigni Connaway (OCLC consulting research scientist III) and Chandra Prahba (OCLC senior research scientist), as co-investigators.