Dissatisfaction in Chat Reference Users: A Transcript Analysis Study

Logan, Judith; Barrett, Kathryn; Pagotto, Sabina

doi:10.5860/crl.80.7.925

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most of the inquiries in our material were simple and seemingly straightforward questions. Radford (2011) and colleagues recommend asking clarifying questions in such inquiries, and Logan et al (2019) recommend identifying users' information needs to avoid dissatisfaction. However, we observed very few examples of such techniques in practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the reference desk used for reference interviews

Bøyum

Byström

Pharo

2021

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study is to investigate why users turn to the university library’s reference desk and whether librarians make use of the opportunity to conduct reference interviews to disclose any unexpressed information needs. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents the results from a qualitative exploration study where interactions between librarians and users were observed in authentic situations at the reference desk and analyzed using a modified version of Radford and Connaway’s (2013) categorization of inquiries. Findings Most inquiries were seemingly easy to answer and pertained to collections and procedures in the library. Lending out desk supplies accounted for a high proportion of the activity. Only a small number of requests were subject-oriented and reference interview techniques were only used in 5% of the recorded inquiries. This means that the users’ information needs were not probed in the vast majority of the interactions. Research limitations/implications The study is exploratory and mirrors the activity that takes place in one specific library. The low number of reference interview techniques used may indicate a lack of interest in users’ information needs, which signifies a risk of the reference desk being reduced to an arena for instrumental and superficial interaction between librarians and users. Originality/value This study illustrates current developments in work at a physical library desk. Few recent studies address face-to-face interactions between librarians and users.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the reference desk used for reference interviews

Bøyum

Byström

Pharo

2021

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, a previous study of UIC Library reference questions found that three times as many subject research questions were received in chat reference than at the reference desk for the period studied (Dempsey, 2017). Judith Logan, Kathryn Barrett and Sabina Pagotto found that referrals correlated with lower user satisfaction in an academic chat reference consortium (Logan et al, 2019). David Ward and JoAnn Jacoby coined the term "referral gap" to indicate a situation in which a chat provider should have offered a referral to a specialist and found the gap was highest "in patron knowledge of subject resources and research methods.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 92%

Referring academic library chat reference patrons: how subject librarians decide

Dempsey

2021

RSR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this study is to learn what factors liaison librarians in academic research libraries consider in determining whether to refer chat reference patrons to subject specialists. Design/methodology/approach Subject specialists were asked what policies guided their decisions to refer to a specialist and then assessed unreferred chat session transcripts both within and outside their specializations to determine need for a referral. Findings Few respondents were guided by formal policies. Contrary to an initial hypothesis, subject area was not a key factor in referring chat. A broader set of criteria included reference interviewing, provision of relevant resources and information literacy instruction. Respondents valued both the depth that subject specialists can provide to reference interactions and the ability of a skilled generalist to support information literacy. Research limitations/implications Findings are most applicable to large, public doctoral universities with liaison librarian programs. Assignment of respondents to subject specialist categories was complicated by their broad range of background and expertise. Practical implications The study contributes new understanding of referrals to subject specialists who have potential to guide development of formal referral policies in academic library virtual reference services. Originality/value The study is the first empirical examination of chat reference referral decisions.

show abstract

“…In 2017, a joint research team at Scholars Portal and University of Toronto Libraries began a major research project assessing the Ask a Librarian service. This major transcript analysis project covered a wide range of questions, including factors that are associated with dissatisfaction in chat interactions (Logan, Barrett, & Pagotto, 2019), the appropriateness of Ask a Librarian's policies and service model , and the relationship between teaching behaviours and satisfaction (Barrett, Logan, Pagotto, & Greenberg, 2020). During the course of this research, the authors were intrigued by the finding that users were not more likely to be dissatisfied when served by chat operators from another library-unless they were made aware of this institutional mismatch.…”

Section: Context/backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pay (No) Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain: The Effects of Revealing Institutional Affiliation in a Consortial Chat Service

Barrett

Pagotto

2022

Partnership

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to understand how users within a library consortium perceive chat service provided by staff members who are unaffiliated with the user’s home library. The researchers examined 293 chat interactions from Ask a Librarian, a consortial virtual reference service provided to university libraries across Ontario, Canada. Chi-square tests of independence were performed to explore the relationship between user dissatisfaction and instances where the chat operator revealed a mismatch in institutional affiliation between the operator and the user. Moderating variables in the relationship were investigated, including user type, question type, and operator behaviors like transferring the chat, making a referral, revealing a lack of expertise, and saying no to the patron. The researchers found that when an operator revealed that they work at a different institution than the user, patrons are more likely to be dissatisfied if they are graduate students, if their question is research-related, if the operator does not offer to transfer the chat, and if the operator does not state that they lack expertise on the chat topic. These findings suggest that chat operators should be mindful of context and relationships when revealing information about their affiliation. Users may perceive operators from other institutions as lacking knowledge about their local library, or they may be confused or alienated when receiving “behind the scenes” information about staffing that they perceive as unnecessary. The researchers recommend emphasizing and strengthening the user’s relationship with their home library and local library staff.

show abstract

Dissatisfaction in Chat Reference Users: A Transcript Analysis Study

Cited by 17 publications

References 14 publications

Is the reference desk used for reference interviews

Is the reference desk used for reference interviews

Referring academic library chat reference patrons: how subject librarians decide

Pay (No) Attention to the Man Behind the Curtain: The Effects of Revealing Institutional Affiliation in a Consortial Chat Service

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About