Demand-Driven Acquisition E-books Have Equal Cost Per Use as Print, but DDA Has Much More Active Use Overall
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A Review of:
 Downey, K., Zhang, Y., Urbano, C., & Klinger, T. (2014). A comparative study of print book and DDA e-book acquisition and use. Technical Services Quarterly, 31 (2), 139-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2014.875379
 
 Abstract
 
 Objective – To compare usage of demand-driven acquisition (DDA) e-books with print books to help determine if one acquisition model better serves the needs of library users and return on investment.
 
 Design – Case study.
 
 Setting – Library system of a large American public university. 
 
 Subjects – 22,018 DDA e-book discovery records, 456 purchased e-book records, and 20,030 print item records were examined.
 
 Method – The researchers examined usage statistics, circulation statistics, and cost measures of DDA e-books and print books. E-books were purchased in 2012 and print books were purchased by the start of the DDA project (January 2012).
 
 Main Results – All but one of the 456 DDA-triggered e-books had repeated use within the first year, totalling 2,484 user sessions. 90% of the triggered e-books had 2-9 user sessions, and over half had at least 4 user sessions. E-books were most used in classes N (fine arts), P (Language and Literature), and R (Medicine). E-books in T (Technology) had a lower percentage of user sessions compared to other subject areas. 712 (3.2%) of the e-books in the discovery pool were used without triggering a purchase. Usage of e-books in the discovery pool (those used but not triggering a purchase) showed a consistent use of e-books by subject. E-books in Class B (Philosophy, Psychology, Religion) were used more in the discovery pool without actually being purchased, suggesting a light use of a wide range of books in this subject area. In contrast, Class R (Medicine) saw less use in the discovery pool than what was actually purchased, suggesting heavier and more focused use of triggered e-books in this area. Only 62.5% of the 20,030 purchased print books included in the study were used in the first 1 to 2.5 years they were added to the collection (i.e., 37.5% were not used in that time period). Half of the print books were used no more than once (once or no use), and more than 90% were used fewer than 10 times. Print books in Class Q (Science) contributed to only 7.5% of the total circulations, suggesting print books are underused in this subject area. 10.2% of total circulation of print books in Class R (Medicine) suggests print books are better used in this area. Print acquisition and use occur more often in classes N (Fine Arts) and P (Language and Literature). The average cost for DDA e-books was of $98.52 per book. The average price per print book was $59.53. The unit cost per print book was $17.73 per use. Depending on various measures, cost per use for e-books ranged from $17.73 to $29.15 per use. (If the measurement included the free use of non-triggered DDA books, the cost per use was $18.07, essentially the same as the print cost).
 
 Conclusion – Both print books and DDA e-books are proportionately distributed across most subject areas. Although DDA and print cost per use are equal, DDA leads to much more active use overall.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,564 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle