Dear Colin,
A couple of things that spring to my mind would be:
1 Were people actually using the print for it to have had much of
an impact in dropping it?
2 I seem to remember that Science Direct usage reporting systems
did go through periods of change over the last year or so, although I'm
not sure exactly when this happened. That might also have had an effect
on the ability to confidently compare figures year on year. Our figures
also showed a drop between 03/04 and 04/05.
Best wishes
Claire Grace
Electronic Resources, Periodicals and Acquisitions Manager
The Open University Library
Walton Hall
Milton Keynes
MK7 6AA
England
Tel: 01908 653291
Fax: 01908 653571
-----Original Message-----
From: An informal open list set up by the UK Serials Group
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Colin Gerrard
Sent: 27 April 2005 10:04
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Nesli2 analysis of usage statistics
Angela,
Thank you for this. I am currently examining our usage figures for
ScienceDirect, which show a baffling trend. From 2005 we gave up our
print Elsevier subscriptions to go for electronic access only. My
expectation was that the usage figures would rise dramatically as users
are now deprived of
access to the print version. So does your research enable you to have
a
theory as to why the reverse has happened as the figures for the number
of downloaded full-text articles show in first three months of 2004 and
2005?
Jan Feb March Total
2004 5,466 5,755 7,810 19,031
2005 4,282 5,478 5,618 15,378
Any comments would be welcome.
Colin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Angela Conyers" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 11:41 AM
Subject: Nesli2 analysis of usage statistics
>
>
>
>
> Evidence base has recently reported to JISC on the NESLi2 analysis of
usage statistics study. This study involved 17 higher education
libraries and 4 NESLi2 publishers and provided an analysis of e-journals
usage for the period January 2003 to June 2004. The findings and
recommendations are currently under discussion by the JISC Journals
Working Group (JWG). Although the detailed findings remain confidential
to respect agreements made with publishers and libraries taking part in
the study, a summary report is now available on the evidence base
web-site at http://www.ebase.uce.ac.uk/docs/jiscnesli2summaryeb.pdf
<http://www.ebase.uce.ac.uk/docs/jiscnesli2summaryeb.pdf> . and on the
NESLi web-site at http://www.nesli.ac.uk/jiscnesli2summaryeb.doc. This
describes the approach taken to the study and gives the main conclusions
and recommendations.
>
>
>
> For further information about the study, or the work of evidence base
> in
the analysis of usage statistics, please contact Angela Conyers
([log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> ) or Pete
Dalton ([log in to unmask]).
>
>
>
> evidence base
>
> research & evaluation
>
> UCE Library Services
>
> University of Central England
>
> Perry Barr
>
> Birmingham
>
> B42 2SU
>
>
>
> www.ebase.uce.ac.uk
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|