CHANGING USE PATTERNS OF DIGITIZED LIBRARY AND ARCHIVE MATERIALS. Dan Paterson. Introduction

Transcription

1 Changing Use Patterns 1 CHANGING USE PATTERNS OF DIGITIZED LIBRARY AND ARCHIVE MATERIALS Dan Paterson Introduction The advent of digital library collections has created a new energy in the field of library and information science. The seemingly endless possibilities of using technology to capture digital images as well as the increasing number of born digital documents have made digital library services an integral part of the library. The prevalence of digital collections and the growing number of libraries, archives, and museums devoting substantial portions of their budget toward the development or continued growth of their digital collection are evidence of this trend. In conjunction with this trend there has also been an initiative to address the issues of preservation of digital documents to anticipate preserving these items for future use. Unfortunately, one aspect the growth of digital collections has not addressed are the future and use of original documents that have been used to create surrogates. At first, the question of use patterns for original items may seem irrelevant. Digital versions of analogue materials allow for greater access and have given scholars the ability to view documents in new ways (Kiernan) without physical stress placed on the actual item. The intuitive reaction to these facts is that use of source materials will decline. Surprisingly though there is anecdotal evidence that suggests the opposite is sometimes true (Smith, 32). This assertion raises many important issues. First, is there more concrete evidence to support the anecdotal claims? If physical items are being used more, what implications

2 Changing Use Patterns 2 does this create for their longevity and conservation? Is it possible to quantify the way items are being used as a result of digitization? Has digitization fundamentally altered the way bibliographic scholars and the general public use physical items? The investigation of these questions is the focus of this paper. Methodology These are extremely complicated issues with many possible combinations of answers. As such they were investigated using different methods. An extensive literature search was conducted to locate research regarding the use of original materials after digitization. The primary objective of the search was to determine if any institutions with digital collections have reported changes in use of their digitized originals. A secondary objective was to find studies detailing how and why patrons use digital collections. Information of this nature might yield plausible explanations for changing uses of original materials. The second method for investigating use patterns required the creation of survey instruments to contact library professionals for their opinions and observations. A number of preservation librarians and curators from institutions with large digital collections were contacted to address the question of whether digitization correlates to an increased use of the original item. These individuals were asked to complete the survey attached as appendix A. The hope was that responses to this questionnaire would clearly indicate if library staff has noticed an increase in the use of items post-digitization. If so, do their institutions keep any statistical records that reflect this change?

3 Changing Use Patterns 3 A second set of surveys was sent to conservation staff at institutions with digital libraries. These surveys were designed to show the extent to which digitization projects have impacted the conservation staff. The goal of learning about the impact was to understand better the correlation between digitization of originals and an increase or decrease in the conservation workload. If there was evidence of a change, one possible explanation is that growing digital collections are either increasing or decreasing the use of originals and subsequently increasing or decreasing the amount of conservation treatment required on physical items. All of the surveys were delivered via to the recipients. I chose to send questionnaires in this format because written responses create a verbatim answer and a record. Telephone interviews may introduce paraphrasing of the respondent s answers. Each questionnaire was prefaced by a brief introduction stating my name and the nature of the project. I also stated that the results of the survey were likely to be placed on a website and therefore assured respondent s their answers would be anonymous and the names of the institutions with which they are affiliated would not be used. It should be noted that this research investigation is not designed to produce statistical evidence indicating that digital surrogates increase or decrease the use of original materials. Research that would provide a definitive answer to this question would, I believe, go beyond the scope and time frame available for this project. Rather, it is my hope that by interviewing these groups most closely associated with library collections, general trends about the way items are used after digitization will emerge. Combined

4 Changing Use Patterns 4 with the search of the related literature, the survey results will provide better insight into the influence digitization is having on library collections. Results of the Investigation: Related Literature The related literature on the subject indicates that scholars of all different classes still consult physical items even after a digital surrogate is available. One indication of this comes from a publication written by Nicloe Bouche of Yale University. In 1995 Yale began a project to digitize the James Boswell papers. The project was extremely successful for many reasons. One primary reason for the success was it allowed for the editing of unpublished Boswell manuscripts to be done remotely by scholars not on the Yale campus. In addition, some leaves of the original manuscripts that are now missing had left trace images on adjacent pages as a result of iron gall ink corrosion. Through manipulation of the scanned images the lost text could be enhanced and become legible again. (Bouche, 10, 11) Despite these benefits, Bouche contends that the Boswell project demonstrated that digital surrogates do not offer, in most scenarios, any real advantage over other forms of surrogates or obviate the use of the physical textual item. She states that Apart from the esthetic advantages of a digital image, especially a color one, over microfilm or a photocopy, the library sees little scholarly benefit to be gained from comprehensive or even partial scanning of the most heavily used archival collections, which tend to be twentieth-century literary archives. In the vast majority of cases, there is little to be revealed by viewing a digital image that is not already readily apparent from a photocopy or microfilm or routine inspection

5 Changing Use Patterns 5 of the original. Serious scholarly research still requires consultation of the originals,.(bouche, 13) In response to these findings, the Yale libraries are not making digital images of manuscript collections unless there is a close link to an established scholarly need, such as a class project or to support the work of an academic department. A project conducted by the New York State Program for the Conservation and Preservation of Library materials also produced similar results. In this project, Cornell University coordinated an investigation with eleven other research libraries in New York. Each institution participated by contributing a large variety of materials to be digitized and then reviewed and compared them to other forms of surrogates. The materials included archival material, photographs, prints, and brittle books. Curators, preservation administrators, archivists, librarians, and conservators from the participating institutions performed the evaluations of the surrogates. The results of the investigation suggest that digital images compare positively with other forms of surrogates. On the whole, scanning compared favorably with the photocopy versions of the same item. 65% of the time the digital image was the preferred form of surrogate (Kenney, Friedman, Poucher, 16). Perhaps the most telling finding of the study, however, was that most of the participants did not find either the digital surrogate or the photocopy an acceptable replacement for the original material. Kenney et al. state

6 Changing Use Patterns 6 The most striking conclusion to come out of this data may well be that the majority of reviewers do not consider either photocopies or scanned versions as adequate replacements for original source material. This assessment is in marked contrast to published material, where preservation photocopy has become an accepted means for preserving the information content of brittle books. The lower acceptance rate by reviewers may be in part to the material chosen for this project which represented considerable challenges for any copying process.the lower acceptance rate may also be in part due to the reviewers inability to disregard the artifactual or intrinsic value of the original material, which could tend them toward a rejection of any form of replacement. (18). The Survey Process From these two studies, there is evidence that the original source material is still the most comfortable format for most scholars and researchers. Based on this premise, it is possible that the creation of digital surrogates has served to increase the use of original items. As outlined in the Methodology section, I solicited the opinions of library professionals to learn if they had observed greater use of their physical collections or workload that might indicate such an increase was taking place. In total, twenty-one surveys were sent and eight were returned. One survey, however, was circulated electronically among several people so there were three sets of responses on the form. The questions were open-ended allowing the participants to answer as fully and completely as needed.

7 Changing Use Patterns 7 Results of the Surveys: Curators, Archivists, and Librarians The most completed survey forms were received from curators, archivists, and librarians. Question number one of the survey asks Since the advent of your institution s digital collection, do you feel there has been an increase, decrease, or no real change in the amount of use physical items receive after digitization? In response, nearly all respondents felt there had been; however, none of them had statistical records that would support or counter this opinion. In addition, several respondents made distinctions between different types of materials. In the case of special collections items, most respondents indicated that there had been an increase. The two notable exceptions to this trend were the use of serials available online, and a university s annual report. One participant reported that online versions of printed 19 th and 20 th century journals had decreased the use of originals to the point that fewer were going to the Preservation Department for repair. In the case of the annual report, the respondent felt some patrons still preferred using the physical copy but that version was eventually removed from the library. In reply to the second question, If there have been changes, can you give a specific example or examples? there were varied responses. One respondent reported that wear and tear on items as a result of increased use was noticeable. Another reported that there facility was busier than ever and our holdings are subject to increased handling. A third reported that remote researchers had come to the repository to view an item after they had first seen the online version. Despite the disparate nature of these observations, the respondents clearly felt there was some noticeable indication of change.

8 Changing Use Patterns 8 The most universal response came to the question If there have been changes, what do you attribute them to? Virtually all participants who felt that there was some increase cited a cataloging effect. In essence, the digital image serves not only as a surrogate, but also as a bibliographic tool. One respondent stated simply The more people know about the material, the more interest they have in seeing it. Furthermore, digital collections seem to act as a conduit to other materials and enable researchers to discover something that they previously did not know existed. From the repository that had its annual report online, a respondent noted that researchers are using the online version to begin their research in advance of visiting the Archives, to supplement and confirm on-site research at the Archives, and to find other paths of inquiry to pursue in the Archives. Another respondent from the same institution surmised I think the digitized Annual Reports have led to an increase in the use of certain faculty papers, departmental records, student records, etc., which may not have been considered in the past. Another respondent stated There is increased access and knowledge of the collection both by the staff of Historical Collections and the world wide web community and as a result, usage of both the virtual collection and the print collection have increased. Despite a lack of statistical evidence, most of respondents report a change in the way their institution s physical collections are being used as a result of digitization. In the majority of these cases, the change has been in increase in use. The perception is that digital surrogates make items better known to scholars and patrons. In addition,

9 Changing Use Patterns 9 surrogates act as a conduit to similar materials or collections that subsequently receive more use. Results of the Surveys: Conservators The responses from conservators were more reserved as to whether or not an item has received increased use as a result of digitization. In reply to the first question Since the advent of your institution s digital collection, do you feel there has been an increase, decrease, or no real change in the amount of use physical items receive after digitization? all respondents were uncertain if there had been a change in use. This response was not a surprise considering that many conservators are not closely involved in how materials are used by patrons on a day to day basis. The follow up question Has the digitization of items required treatment to the item either before or after the digitization process? was intended to see if there was evidence of increased workload as a result of digitization projects. In this case, the responses were nearly universal in the affirmative. One participant cited specific projects that required work done to items both before and after the project. Additionally, one participant had to hire additional staff to help handle the workload. In response to the question Do you anticipate the growth of your institution s digital collection to impact your department? there were similar answers. All participants anticipated needing additional staff as digital projects continue to proceed and digital collections grow.

10 Changing Use Patterns 10 The increase in the workload indicates that digitization is having an effect on conservators. There are several possible reasons for this trend. For example, the process of digitization involves many similar steps to the preparation of materials for an exhibit (Cunningham-Kruppa, Metzger, 40). In this case, items are stabilized prior to being digitized. The digitization process can also be similar to traditional methods of reformatting, such as microfilming, and require an item to be disbound. Since both of these responsibilities are part of the normal work-flow within a conservation lab it seems unlikely that they are the only reasons for the increase. It is also possible that part of the higher workload is due to the increased use of items after digitization and the physical toll that results, as pointed out by one respondent. Conclusions Despite the fact that there is no statistical evidence that demonstrates an item is used more after digitization, it seems clear that there is a perceived increase in the amount of use many materials receive as a result of digitization. The studies conducted at Yale and Cornell, the opinions of the respondents, and the increased workloads in conservation facilities all suggest that digitization is affecting libraries by making their collections more visible and more utilized. In some cases this use is attributed to a preference for the original item no matter how appealing or useful the surrogate may be. Until a long-term study is conducted that follows the use of items both before and after digitization it is unlikely that there will be any evidence other than anecdotal regarding this question. It is clear, however, that the development of digital collections is expanding our traditional libraries in new and unexpected ways.

11 Changing Use Patterns 11 Bibliography Bouche, Nicole. (1999). Digitization for Scholarly Use: The Boswell Papers Project at thebeinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Washington D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources. Cunningham-Kruppa, Ellen, and Metzger, Consuela. Conservation Considerations Before, During, and After Digitization Projects: The Physical Reality. Unpublished Abstract. Hawkins, Brian L. and Battin, Patricia (eds). (1998). The Mirage of Continuity: Recongiguring Academic Information Resources for the 21 st Century. Washington D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources. Hurley, Bernard, Price-Wilkin, John, Proffitt, Merrilee, Besser, Howard. (1999). Making of America II Testbed Project: A Digital Library Service Model. Washington D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources. Kellerman, Suzanne. Out-of Print Digital Scanning: An Acquisitions and Preservation Alternative. LRTS 46(1) Kenney, Anne R., Friedman, Michael A., and Poucher, Sue. (1993). Preserving Archival Material Through Digital Technology. Ithaca.: Cornell University. Kiernan, Michael (ed.). Electronic Beowulf. Sitts, Maxine. (ed.). (2000). Handbook for Digital Projects: A Management Tool for Preservation and Access. Andover: Northeast Document Conservation Center. Smith, Abby. (2001). Strategies for Building Digitized Collections. Washington D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources.

12 Changing Use Patterns 12 Appendix A Questions for Librarians, Curators, and Archivists Please state your job title: Since the advent of your institution s digital collection, do you feel there has been an increase, decrease, or no real change in the amount of use physical items receive after digitization? If there have been changes, can you give a specific example or examples? Does your department keep statistics that reflect a change? If there have been changes, have they had an impact on your staff and the amount or type of tasks they perform? If there have been changes, what do you attribute them to? If you have any additional comments to make on the subject, please feel free to add them.

13 Changing Use Patterns 13 Appendix B Questions for Conservators Please state your job title: Since the advent of your institution s digital collection, do you feel there has been an increase, decrease, or no real change in the amount of use physical items receive after digitization? If yes, do you have any examples? Has the digitization of items required treatment to the item either before or after the digitization process? Would the item(s) have been a likely candidate for treatment otherwise? Has the advent of digitized collections affected the conservation staff in other ways? If so, how would you characterize these changes? Do you anticipate the growth of your institution s digital collection to impact your department? If so, what sort of impact do you foresee? If you have any additional comments to make on the subject, please feel free to add them.