An Increase in Academic Ebook Preferences: A Decade Comparison of Ebook Use versus Non-Use

A Review of: Owens, E., Hwang, S., Kim, D., Manolovitz, T., & Shen, L. (2023). Do you love them now? Use and non-use of academic ebooks a decade later. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 49(3), 102703-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2023.102703 Objective – To determine the use of library-provided ebooks by faculty and graduate students, the change in use over the last decade, the features, benefits, and challenges of ebook use, and the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on ebook use in this population. Design – Survey. Setting – Medium-sized public university with four campuses: a main campus with a physical library, an online campus, and two satellite campuses. Subjects – Faculty and graduate students. Methods – The authors of this study used a Qualtrics survey similar to their previous 2011 survey, which tailored questions based on ebook users versus non-users (Cassidy et al., 2012). They added questions to their survey to assess the impact of COVID-19 on library-provided ebook use. The authors included language that directed respondents to focus on “ebooks that are being studied closely for class purposes.” Invitations to the survey were emailed to all faculty and graduate students and were posted in campus e-newsletters. The survey was open from September 2021 to October 2021 and included a small incentive to participate. Responses were anonymous. Main Results – The initial list of survey recipients included 3377 graduate students and 1126 faculty members, a total of 4480 after 23 duplicate email addresses were removed. A total of 508, or 11.3 %, were included in the analysis: 53.2% were master's students, 16.1% were doctoral students, and 30.7% were faculty members. At this university, the College of Education and Humanities and Social Sciences had the most master’s and doctoral students and represented most of the responses: 26% and 22.8%, respectively. The remaining responses were represented by the colleges of Criminal Justice, 16.1%, Science & Engineering Technology, 11.4%, and less than 8% Colleges of Business Administration, Health Sciences, Osteopathic Medicine, and Arts and Media. Most respondents were female, 72.8%, and aged 20-29, 36%, or 30-39, 26.4%. The authors noted there was no statistical difference in gender identity nor the average age of ebook users versus non-users. Most respondents were ebook users, 64.4%, compared to non-users, 35.6%, which did not vary significantly when comparing campuses. When comparing the same results to those from 2011, however, only 38% of respondents were ebook users. For ebook users, 22.3% reported that they would rather use a print book, 15.3% felt the same about ebooks and print, 29.4% reported that they liked some ebooks but disliked others, and 26.3% reported that they would rather use an ebook. The authors stated that the results were surprisingly similar to their 2011 survey. Of the non-users, 24.5% reported that they would rather use a print book, 28.8 % indicated that they did not necessarily dislike library ebooks but had no opportunity to use them, and 7.5 % reported that they specifically disliked the library ebooks. In 2011, slightly more respondents preferred print books, 30.9%, more reported that they did not have the opportunity to use them, 46.4%, and a similar proportion, 7.2%, reported that they specifically disliked the library ebooks. Of the non-users, 38.7% reported that they may or may not use ebooks in the future, 16.6% and 29.3% reported that they definitely or probably will use ebooks in the future, 13.8% and 1.7% probably or definitely will not. Physical complaints were among the most common reasons for disliking library ebooks related to focus and retention, sensory experience of not holding or handling a print book, fatigue, headache, and eye strain. Other complaints were related to their functionality and usability, such as lag time, clunky interface, accessibility, and challenges with annotation and note-taking. Also mentioned was the additional screen time required. Ebook features reported to be important were searching within the text, 91% of respondents, seeing the search terms highlighted, 78%, downloading the book to read offline, 75.2%, copying and pasting from the ebook, 70.5%, printing pages, 62%, or chapters, 60%. In 2011, features of the highest importance were searching within the text, 63.3%, printing individual pages, 49.0%, copying and pasting from the ebook, 47.7 %, and taking and saving notes, 39.4 %. The authors also collected open-ended comments, and respondents indicated ebook features such as annotation, formatting and compatibility, no print limit, no time limit, navigation, and text-to-speech were important. A little over 72% of respondents used an electronic device, such as a tablet, smartphone, or e-reader, for reading, whereas only 51.2% reported the use of an electronic device for reading in 2011. Of the respondents who attended the university before the COVID-19 pandemic, 71.4% reported their use of ebooks remained the same during the pandemic, which, according to the authors was not as significant as expected. The authors wrapped up the survey by including questions for graduate students regarding the future use of ebooks: 75.9% of respondents wanted the library to purchase more ebooks to support their classes, 59.9% responded that their use of ebooks would likely increase with a recommendation by the professor, and 90.1% would rather use an ebook than wait for a print copy to be returned to the library. Conclusion – The authors report that library ebook users compared to non-users have significantly increased since their 2011 survey, yet the feelings about ebooks remain consistent, and the use of ebooks before and after the COVID-19 pandemic remained the same for most respondents. They acknowledged that many frustrations with library ebook use are related to copyright restrictions and device compatibility and suggested that publishers could improve compatibility and increase usability by loosening restrictions. They suggested that libraries communicate with their local users before making major changes in their print versus ebook collection. Electronic availability alone may not be enough, and users are looking for accessibility, ease of use, and device compatibility with fewer restrictions. The authors suggest more research into strategies for promoting ebooks to teaching faculty and advocating for publisher improvements.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.