Library and information resources and users of digital resources in the humanities

Purpose – The purpose of this article is to discuss the results of the Log Analysis of Internet Resources in the Arts and Humanities (LAIRAH) study. It aims to concentrate upon the use and importance of information resources, physical research centres and digital finding aids in scholarly research. Design/methodology/approach – Results are presented of web server log analysis of portals for humanities scholars: the arts and humanities data service (AHDS) website and Humbul Humanities Hub. These are used to determine which resources were accessed most often, or seldom. Questionnaire data about perceptions of digital resource use were also gathered. Findings – Information resources such as libraries, archives museums and research centres, and the web pages that provide information about them are vital for humanities scholars. The university library website was considered to be the most important resource, even compared to Google. Secondary finding aids and reference resources are considered more important than primary research resources, especially those produced by other scholars, whose output is less trusted than publications produced by commercial organisations, libraries, archives and museums. Practical implications – Digital resources have not replaced physical information resources and the people who staff them, thus both types of information continue to require funding. Scholars trust the judgment of information professionals, who therefore need to be trained to evaluate and recommend specialist digital research resources. Originality/value – LAIRAH was the first research project to use quantitative data to investigate resource use. Findings about the type of resources used are based on evidence rather than opinions alone. This gives a clearer picture of usage that may be used to plan future information services.

[1]  C. Chu.  Literary Critics at Work and their Information Needs: A Research-Phases Model. , 1999 .

[2]  Ethelene Whitmire,et al.  Disciplinary differences and undergraduates' information-seeking behavior , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[3]  Stephen E. Wiberley,et al.  Time and Technology: A Decade-Long Look at Humanists' Use of Electronic Information Technology , 2000 .

[4]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  The Getty End-User Online Searching Project in the Humanities: Report No. 6: Overview and Conclusions , 1996 .

[5]  Mark Greengrass,et al.  RePAH: A user requirements analysis for portals in the Arts and Humanities : final report , 2006 .

[6]  Gordon Reid.  The digitisation of heritage material: arguing for an interpretative approach based on the experience of the Powys Digital History Project , 2000 .

[7]  Blaise Cronin,et al.  Information Professionals in the Digital Age. , 1998 .

[8]  Rebecca Green,et al.  Locating Sources in Humanities Scholarship: The Efficacy of following Bibliographic References , 2000, The Library Quarterly.

[9]  George Buchanan,et al.  User Requirements for Humanities Digital Libraries. , 2006 .

[10]  Stephen E. Wiberley.  Names in Space and Time: The Indexing Vocabulary of the Humanities , 1988, The Library Quarterly.

[11]  Ina Fourie,et al.  Should we take disintermediation seriously? , 1999, Electron. Libr..

[12]  Peter Williams,et al.  Characterising the Health Information Consumer: An Examination of Digital Television Users , 2002 .

[13]  A. Barrett.  The information-seeking habits of graduate student researchers in the Humanities , 2005 .

[14]  Melissa Terras,et al.  If You Build It Will They Come? The LAIRAH Study: Quantifying the Use of Online Resources in the Arts and Humanities through Statistical Analysis of User Log Data , 2006, Lit. Linguistic Comput..

[15]  Benjamin B. M. Shao,et al.  The business value of information technology and inputs substitution: The productivity paradox revisited , 2006, Decis. Support Syst..

[16]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  The cascade of interactions in the digital library interface , 2002, Inf. Process. Manag..

[17]  Paul F. Marty,et al.  The digital museum in the life of the user , 2005, ASIST.

[18]  Robert Shoemaker.  Digital London: Creating a searchable web of interlinked sources on eighteenth century London , 2005, Program.

[19]  Paul Albitz,et al.  DNS and BIND , 1994 .

[20]  Melissa Terras,et al.  The (In)Visibility of Digital Humanites Resources in Academic Contexts , 2006 .

[21]  Robert Gellman,et al.  Disintermediation and the internet , 1996 .

[22]  Sanna Talja,et al.  Reasons for the use and non-use of electronic journals and databases: A domain analytic study in four scholarly disciplines , 2003, J. Documentation.

[23]  Sue Stone,et al.  Humanities scholars: Information Needs and Uses , 1982, J. Documentation.

[24]  Lesly Huxley,et al.  Gathering Evidence: Current ICT Use and Future Needs for Arts and Humanities Research , 2006 .

[25]  J. Cherry,et al.  Historians’ Use of Archival Sources: Promises and Pitfalls of the Digital Age , 2004 .

[26]  Stephen Lehmann,et al.  Humanists and Electronic Information Services: Acceptance and Resistance. , 1991 .

[27]  Joan M. Cherry,et al.  Use of historical documents in a digital world: comparisons with original materials and microfiche , 2000, Inf. Res..

[28]  Stephen E. Wiberley.  Subject Access in the Humanities and the Precision of the Humanist's Vocabulary , 1983, The Library Quarterly.

[29]  Ian Anderson,et al.  Are You Being Served? Historians and the Search for Primary Sources , 2004 .

[30]  M. Dalton,et al.  Historians and Their Information Sources , 2004 .

[31]  Rebecca Watson-Boone.  The Information Needs and Habits of Humanities Scholars. , 1994 .

[32]  Dag Petersson,et al.  Time and Technology , 2005 .

[33]  David G. Stork,et al.  Is paperless really more? , 2000, CACM.

[34]  David Ellis,et al.  The English literature researcher in the age of the Internet , 2005, J. Inf. Sci..

[35]  Diane Harley,et al.  Toward an Effective Understanding of Website Users: Advantages and Pitfalls of Linking Transaction Log Analyses and Online Surveys , 2007, D Lib Mag..

[36]  Gregory R. Crane,et al.  What Do You Do with a Million Books? , 2006, D Lib Mag..

[37]  M. Angela Sasse,et al.  Users are not the enemy , 1999, CACM.

[38]  Eti Herman.  End‐users in academia: meeting the information needs of university researchers in an electronic age: Part 2 Innovative information‐accessing opportunities and the researcher: user acceptance of IT‐based information resources in academia , 2001 .