**6.2 Quantitative research method**

Every action that a user does is recorded and represents the way he or she uses the discovery tool. The study uses data mining from Google Analytics platform, monitoring all the involved libraries. We implemented an automatically generated tracking code to record every EDS page generated, on basic and advanced search screens and search result pages. The study reviewed reports regarding information behavior and technology metrics. Reports were generated in Google Analytics and exported as Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. The Excel spreadsheets provided the ability to sort searches for more detailed data analysis.

#### *Digital Imaging*

The data was collected during the first semester of the 2018–2019 academic year, from December to January.

Terragni and Hassani [37] found that there are some limitations in Google analytics data analyses:


However, we chose this platform in order to gain an overall idea of how the library patrons behave, to compare this behavior with what library professionals expected, and to make the user experience more efficient and successful.

#### *6.2.1 Usage patterns*

On average, a single user preforms two sessions. Session duration is 11 min, and every user uses eight pages per session. The average session duration is impressively high, since we find that studies report on session search duration of 5 min [38] or even shorter duration of 3.46 min [17]. We may assume that this is because Israeli students are mostly native Hebrew speakers and use English mostly for academic and spoken language. Because of this, they might require extra time to linguistically decode the research items they find [20].

### *6.2.2 Devices*

Most patrons (93%) use EDS from their desktop computers, 4.14% are mobile users, and less than 1% use tablets. The data resembles the Cohen and Thorpe study [39] on EDS usage statistics in two Indiana University campuses. They found that 98% of the discovery tool visitors were desktop users (PC and laptops). This indicates that EDS visitors mainly use desktops for their information searches. In their work, Chang and Liu [40]) discuss how mobile use of the Internet is gradually changing people's information behavior. They studied mobile application reading sessions and suggest four stages model for mobile user interaction: (i) accessing the applications, (ii) searching for the content, (iii) reading, and (iv) interacting. It would be interesting to further study, check, and characterize mobile usage of discovery tools and determine why it is relatively low according to our research data. This study clearly demonstrates that EDS is not one of the patron's preferred mobile applications. Therefore, libraries must assess and improve the EDS mobile user experience.

#### *6.2.3 Users' information behavior*

On average, 65.48% of the total users turn to the basic search box as their starting point of access (first interaction data (see **Figure 1**)). In all six libraries, the default page on EDS is the basic search page. Users must intentionally navigate to the advanced search page, so most of them will use the default and basic search box. When students use the discovery service, they type a few relevant keywords, which enable them to find rich, fast, and ranked search results [36]. Asher et al. [4] also found that students usually trust the search engine's algorithms. They trust

**83**

*EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) Usage in Israeli Academic Libraries*

its relevancy ranking and are satisfied with its results. Calvert [17] suggests that if users find something sufficient for their information needs, they will use that

*First interaction behavior flow (Participants that dropped out were not included in the analysis).*

On average, 14.42% of the total users turn to the advanced search box as their starting point of access (first interaction data (see **Figure 1**)). In their work on discovery services usage at Indiana University, Meg Galasso and her colleagues [36] found that although librarians assumed discovery tools were intuitive and easy to use, many users are not using it effectively. This small percentage of users indicates that they find the basic search interface inadequate for their needs. It can also indicate that users act according to the principle of least effort and ease of use [29]. In her work *Millennial Students' Mental Models of Search*, Holman [41] found that most students prefer simple searches even if they retrieve a larger quantity of results. Studies also found that unlike undergraduates, more experienced students are already familiar with focusing their search and make use of the advanced search features of the discovery tool. Navigation to this option suggests a deeper level of understanding and a more sophisticated research processes [42]. In their work *Discovering User Behavior*, Cohen and Thorpe [39] suggest to characterize discovery service users as either light users or heavy users. The heavy users should be taught advanced searching techniques for their information needs. While this study observed users search behavior, it would prove useful for further study of different types of user's information behavior (undergraduates, graduates, doctoral students,

On average, 49.28% of the total users entered the details of their bibliographic records as their second interaction with EDS (see **Figure 2**). We can assume that these patrons find the search results adequate for their information needs. We can also assume that clicking on the full-record option enables patrons to check if the item matches or exceeds their expectation. In her work, Calvert [17] found that academic users read the abstracts in order to judge the relevancy of the specific information source, prior to accessing the full text. She also found that patrons avoid additional result pages; they are likely to access only six detailed records in a result list before leaving the search service or modifying the search. Cassidy and her

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89453*

resource instead of seeking a better one.

**Figure 1.**

and faculty) while conducting their research assignments.

*EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) Usage in Israeli Academic Libraries DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89453*

#### **Figure 1.**

*Digital Imaging*

from December to January.

analytics data analyses:

*6.2.1 Usage patterns*

*6.2.2 Devices*

user experience.

*6.2.3 Users' information behavior*

decode the research items they find [20].

The data was collected during the first semester of the 2018–2019 academic year,

Terragni and Hassani [37] found that there are some limitations in Google

2.The system cannot provide end-to-end process maps that can show and

3.There is no analysis of the processes from different perspectives (e.g., time

However, we chose this platform in order to gain an overall idea of how the library patrons behave, to compare this behavior with what library professionals

On average, a single user preforms two sessions. Session duration is 11 min, and every user uses eight pages per session. The average session duration is impressively high, since we find that studies report on session search duration of 5 min [38] or even shorter duration of 3.46 min [17]. We may assume that this is because Israeli students are mostly native Hebrew speakers and use English mostly for academic and spoken language. Because of this, they might require extra time to linguistically

Most patrons (93%) use EDS from their desktop computers, 4.14% are mobile users, and less than 1% use tablets. The data resembles the Cohen and Thorpe study [39] on EDS usage statistics in two Indiana University campuses. They found that 98% of the discovery tool visitors were desktop users (PC and laptops). This indicates that EDS visitors mainly use desktops for their information searches. In their work, Chang and Liu [40]) discuss how mobile use of the Internet is gradually changing people's information behavior. They studied mobile application reading sessions and suggest four stages model for mobile user interaction: (i) accessing the applications, (ii) searching for the content, (iii) reading, and (iv) interacting. It would be interesting to further study, check, and characterize mobile usage of discovery tools and determine why it is relatively low according to our research data. This study clearly demonstrates that EDS is not one of the patron's preferred mobile applications. Therefore, libraries must assess and improve the EDS mobile

On average, 65.48% of the total users turn to the basic search box as their starting point of access (first interaction data (see **Figure 1**)). In all six libraries, the default page on EDS is the basic search page. Users must intentionally navigate to the advanced search page, so most of them will use the default and basic search box. When students use the discovery service, they type a few relevant keywords, which enable them to find rich, fast, and ranked search results [36]. Asher et al. [4] also found that students usually trust the search engine's algorithms. They trust

1.No indication about which user made a particular choice.

constraints, bottlenecks, or relations between resources).

expected, and to make the user experience more efficient and successful.

explain choices and loops between activities.

**82**

*First interaction behavior flow (Participants that dropped out were not included in the analysis).*

its relevancy ranking and are satisfied with its results. Calvert [17] suggests that if users find something sufficient for their information needs, they will use that resource instead of seeking a better one.

On average, 14.42% of the total users turn to the advanced search box as their starting point of access (first interaction data (see **Figure 1**)). In their work on discovery services usage at Indiana University, Meg Galasso and her colleagues [36] found that although librarians assumed discovery tools were intuitive and easy to use, many users are not using it effectively. This small percentage of users indicates that they find the basic search interface inadequate for their needs. It can also indicate that users act according to the principle of least effort and ease of use [29]. In her work *Millennial Students' Mental Models of Search*, Holman [41] found that most students prefer simple searches even if they retrieve a larger quantity of results. Studies also found that unlike undergraduates, more experienced students are already familiar with focusing their search and make use of the advanced search features of the discovery tool. Navigation to this option suggests a deeper level of understanding and a more sophisticated research processes [42]. In their work *Discovering User Behavior*, Cohen and Thorpe [39] suggest to characterize discovery service users as either light users or heavy users. The heavy users should be taught advanced searching techniques for their information needs. While this study observed users search behavior, it would prove useful for further study of different types of user's information behavior (undergraduates, graduates, doctoral students, and faculty) while conducting their research assignments.

On average, 49.28% of the total users entered the details of their bibliographic records as their second interaction with EDS (see **Figure 2**). We can assume that these patrons find the search results adequate for their information needs. We can also assume that clicking on the full-record option enables patrons to check if the item matches or exceeds their expectation. In her work, Calvert [17] found that academic users read the abstracts in order to judge the relevancy of the specific information source, prior to accessing the full text. She also found that patrons avoid additional result pages; they are likely to access only six detailed records in a result list before leaving the search service or modifying the search. Cassidy and her

#### **Figure 2.**

*Second interaction behavior flow (Participants that dropped out were not included in the analysis).*

colleagues [34] found that the majority of students would not click on additional result pages. They expect the discovery tool to retrieve the most relevant information items on the first page and therefore checking the detailed relevant records and accordingly accessing the full text.

On average, 17.67% of the total users decided to preform another search using the basic search dialog box as their second interaction with EDS (see **Figure 2**). This small percentage of users was seemingly not satisfied by their initial search results. From this study data analysis, we cannot ascertain the exact reason these users choose to leave the current search and preform an alternate one. It is important to specify that these users did not choose an advanced search box to modify their preliminary search; they simply restarted their search on the basic search box. The reason for this might be a poor choice of keywords, misspelling, looking for a specific item, or inadequate search results. Cassidy and her colleagues [34] also suggest that students are more likely to modify a search than to proceed through a number of result pages.

On average, 7% of the total users decided to continue and refine their search strategy through the advanced search dialog box as their second interaction (see **Figure 2**). As mentioned in the literature review, patrons tend to adopt a simple search string and consider themselves both successful and satisfied with the results. Therefore, what is found most quickly and easily is often most likely to be used [34, 41]. In this study, 7% of the users choose differently; thus, we assume they found that the results did not meet their expectations. This may be due to an information overload or too many results in their first interaction, which caused them to narrow down the search, via advanced search. In his work on discovery tools and information overload, Shapiro [35] claims that libraries expect their discovery services to simplify the search process for their clients. In practice, it did not simplify the task of conducting research nor did it ease the patrons' information overload. Calvert [17] summarizes that library patrons use the discovery service as they would use Google. This may result in an unproductive search, which in our study lead experienced patrons to reuse the discovery service in a more efficient matter, through the advanced search option.

### **7. Summary and conclusion**

This study sought to bring a broad overview of EDS discovery service use in Israeli academic libraries by analyzing librarian's interviews and Google Analytics

**85**

*EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) Usage in Israeli Academic Libraries*

usage data. Here are the main focal points of the research: the main reasons for choosing EDS platform by the Israeli libraries were high relevancy, quality of metadata, and ease of use. According to the librarians, Google Scholar is the first choice of library users. In all participating libraries, EDS is the default search tab for non-Hebrew articles. All the libraries in the study used the basic search box as the default interface. The librarians thought that only a minority of users would use the advanced search box options. According to Google Analytics data, each user performs on average two sessions, with an average duration of 11 minutes. The vast majority (93%) of patrons use EDS service from their desktop. Most patrons (65.48%) use the basic search box as their starting point, while 14.42% of total users

In their second interaction, most patrons (49.28%) entered the details of the bibliographic records. Some (17.67%) decided to preform another search using the basic search box. Only 7% of the total users decided to continue and refine their

The study findings reveal user behavior trends, which may be implemented for a better understanding of the usage of EDS and may encourage libraries to develop strategies to improve instruction techniques, as well as discovery service interface enhancements. Further studies need to investigate specific information behavior of different user populations (undergraduate, faculty, and advanced users). It is important to study further the pros and cons of the service in light of usability

The author wishes to thank EBSCO for supporting this research.

The author also wishes to thank the institutions' library directors, for their cooperation and willingness to share their thoughts and data with the author.

Library administrators' interview questionnaire regarding EDS (EBSCO

Name of University/College \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.

Name of library\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_. Job Title\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89453*

first use the advanced search.

**8. Recommendations**

**Acknowledgements**

testing.

**Appendix**

Discovery Services).

Demographic details:

Interview Questions:

1.Reasons for choosing EDS

2.Students' first choice of search tool

× Governmental. × Private.

search through the advanced search dialog box.

*EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) Usage in Israeli Academic Libraries DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.89453*

usage data. Here are the main focal points of the research: the main reasons for choosing EDS platform by the Israeli libraries were high relevancy, quality of metadata, and ease of use. According to the librarians, Google Scholar is the first choice of library users. In all participating libraries, EDS is the default search tab for non-Hebrew articles. All the libraries in the study used the basic search box as the default interface. The librarians thought that only a minority of users would use the advanced search box options. According to Google Analytics data, each user performs on average two sessions, with an average duration of 11 minutes. The vast majority (93%) of patrons use EDS service from their desktop. Most patrons (65.48%) use the basic search box as their starting point, while 14.42% of total users first use the advanced search.

In their second interaction, most patrons (49.28%) entered the details of the bibliographic records. Some (17.67%) decided to preform another search using the basic search box. Only 7% of the total users decided to continue and refine their search through the advanced search dialog box.
