**6.1 Qualitative research method**

We contacted 10 academic library directors, according to a given list of Israeli libraries that implemented the EDS service (at least 2 years ago). The contact was made via email, which asked them to participate in the study; six of which accepted. We conducted an hour-long interview by phone or by face-to-face meetings, with each library director (two of which, referred us to the head of the discovery tool services in the library). We discussed three topics: the decision procedure, the essence of EDS discovery tool, and the search behavior of the library patrons. The questions were regarding their professional practice, general philosophies, and opinion.

#### *6.1.1 Reasons for choosing EDS*

Libraries based their choice to implement EDS discovery tool on peers' recommendations, joint committee discussions, and literature reviews. Massive library and information science (LIS) sources deal with issues regarding planning, choosing and implementing discovery tools. Librarians are exposed to information made available through peer-reviewed papers, presentations, and online discussions in various platforms (national and international). In her book *Planning and Implementing Resource Discovery Tools in Academic Libraries*, Mary Pagliero Popp [15] suggests that there is a framework for evaluating discovery tools. This framework discusses involving library staff from various libraries and asking them for their technical and functional experience. There is also a thorough review on selected features and best practice for the evaluation and the selection procedure.

According to the interviewees, the main reasons for choosing EDS were the ease of use and the Google-like interface. Shi and Levy [16] determined that EBSCO Discovery Services is one of the discovery search tools that is highly recommended by librarians. In her work on maximizing academic libraries' collections use, Kristine Calvert [17] declares that EDS presents a simplified search experience through a single search box, which exposes a far greater number of the library's resources. In their study, Thompson and her colleagues [18] studied the results of George Washington university library staff's focus group. The study was conducted to assess user satisfaction with EDS service, and it found that librarians like the familiar EBSCO host-type interface as their discovery tool search box.

The quality of metadata was another reason mentioned in the interviews and the fact that EBSCO is also the vendor of their most popular databases. Therefore, the librarians believed the service would reflect the same professional advantages. As mentioned in the literature, EBSCO has a solid reputation for their comprehensive collection of content, sophisticated search options, and responsive technical support. Kristine Calvert [17] studied the Western Carolina University library decision to use EDS discovery tool service. In her findings, she suggests that the preference for EBSCO's products was based on two primary reasons. First, West Carolina University library has subscription to a large number of databases on the EBSCOhost platform, therefore wanting to maximize use of those databases, and second, the confidence the library has in the product relevancy rankings.

Two of the librarians in the study did a cross search to compare relevancy of results in three available discovery tools and found EDS to have the highest result relevancy. In the literature there is not a definitive answer on which discovery tool produces the higher relevancy results. In their study, Shi and Levy [16] review EDS advantages in performing a smart search. They found that the service leads users to adequate results as well as offering suggested adjustments by narrowing or limiting the information sources retrieved in search. In a survey named "Librarian Assessment of the Quality and Relevance of Search Results" conducted by librarians at the Cornell University library [19], the responders ranked EDS as better in its interface and in its ease of use. As for the search results, EDS appears to work better only for some disciplines (compared to Summon). Asher, Duke, and Wilson [3] studied the ability of students to locate information resources, which indicated better results for the students using EBSCO Discovery Service.

#### *6.1.2 First choice of search tool*

All the interviewees thought that Google Scholar was and still is the student's first and primary choice. The fact that it is well-known and familiar to most of them makes it the preferable search interface. This fact is well supported by the literature;

**79**

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

prefer Google Scholar to library databases and discovery tools.

when they disclose and share information sources.

guidance in order to find and retrieve information.

both discovery services, in topical searches.

*6.1.3 Coverage, relevance of results, and ease of use*

multiple databases.

by students [3].

Google Scholar receives higher usability and preference ratings from students because it is easy to access, convenient, easy to use, and fast [20–24]. They always

Interviewees mentioned the fact that libraries need to keep cooperating with Google Scholar and enable access to its subscriptions. Patrons of libraries, who have subscriptions to the digital archives of publishers, are the greatest beneficiaries of the Google Scholar services. With a single search, they are led to the full digital text of the requested item [6]. In their research, Dempsey and Malpas [25] studied the future of the academic library in the context of diversity and change. They suggest that library users have lost their track on content supply. There is an increasing overlap between library and Google Scholar in workflow and network identity

Most library directors mentioned Google Scholar and EDS as part of the same instruction meetings for research students. Hanneke and O'Brien [26] found that while librarians always hope for the opportunity to provide instruction on advanced searching, students and faculty could successfully use discovery tools to perform a research process. Therefore, searching instruction is either not available or not desired. Contradicting their results, other studies [27] have found that information search interfaces including Google Scholar and discovery tools very often retrieve a large number of records in response to a simple query, which requires search expertise to manipulate the results to find adequate information. Users need librarian's

Another topic that arose from the study was regarding search results. According to the interviewees, the EDS system provides fewer but better results than Google Scholar. This is supported by the literature; Karen Ciccone and John Vickery from North Carolina State University Libraries [28] found that there was no significant difference in the results between Summon and EDS, for either known item or topical searches. They also found that the higher proficiency of students using EDS leads to higher quality academic resources. However, Google Scholar outperformed

The librarians recommend EDS to their students, and it is referred to as the library's "Google Scholar." Asher, Duke, and Wilson [3] well described it in their work *Paths of Discovery* when they review the advantages of discovery tools:

Providing a uniform search interface and aggregating content behind a single "brand," discovery tools like EDS, Summon, and GS help to diminish the "cognitive load" on students by eliminating the often difficult and confusing step of choosing an appropriate disciplinary database, as well as the need to repeat searches in

Ease of use was the most popular motive in all the interviews. The fact that students do not need to learn how to use new database interfaces makes it much easier on the library clients. Studies of information seeking behavior indicate that users act according to the principle of least effort and ease of use [29]. Students also tend to minimize their effort at the expense of the quality of their results. Information sources that are found quickest and easiest are those that are most likely to be used

All the library's directors mentioned examining usage statistics to ensure that the tool is highly used among the patrons. In the literature, we find that libraries must monitor their service efficiency by aggregating data from all available sources [20]. In his work, *The Future of Library Resource Discovery*, Marshall Breeding [30] discusses the considerable interest of libraries in the ability to measure the performance

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

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

*Digital Imaging*

*6.1.1 Reasons for choosing EDS*

in the product relevancy rankings.

*6.1.2 First choice of search tool*

Libraries based their choice to implement EDS discovery tool on peers' recommendations, joint committee discussions, and literature reviews. Massive library and information science (LIS) sources deal with issues regarding planning, choosing and implementing discovery tools. Librarians are exposed to information made available through peer-reviewed papers, presentations, and online discussions in various platforms (national and international). In her book *Planning and Implementing Resource Discovery Tools in Academic Libraries*, Mary Pagliero Popp [15] suggests that there is a framework for evaluating discovery tools. This framework discusses involving library staff from various libraries and asking them for their technical and functional experience. There is also a thorough review on selected

According to the interviewees, the main reasons for choosing EDS were the ease of use and the Google-like interface. Shi and Levy [16] determined that EBSCO Discovery Services is one of the discovery search tools that is highly recommended by librarians. In her work on maximizing academic libraries' collections use, Kristine Calvert [17] declares that EDS presents a simplified search experience through a single search box, which exposes a far greater number of the library's resources. In their study, Thompson and her colleagues [18] studied the results of George Washington university library staff's focus group. The study was conducted to assess user satisfaction with EDS service, and it found that librarians like the

The quality of metadata was another reason mentioned in the interviews and the fact that EBSCO is also the vendor of their most popular databases. Therefore, the librarians believed the service would reflect the same professional advantages. As mentioned in the literature, EBSCO has a solid reputation for their comprehensive collection of content, sophisticated search options, and responsive technical support. Kristine Calvert [17] studied the Western Carolina University library decision to use EDS discovery tool service. In her findings, she suggests that the preference for EBSCO's products was based on two primary reasons. First, West Carolina University library has subscription to a large number of databases on the EBSCOhost platform, therefore wanting to maximize use of those databases, and second, the confidence the library has

Two of the librarians in the study did a cross search to compare relevancy of results in three available discovery tools and found EDS to have the highest result relevancy. In the literature there is not a definitive answer on which discovery tool produces the higher relevancy results. In their study, Shi and Levy [16] review EDS advantages in performing a smart search. They found that the service leads users to adequate results as well as offering suggested adjustments by narrowing or limiting the information sources retrieved in search. In a survey named "Librarian Assessment of the Quality and Relevance of Search Results" conducted by librarians at the Cornell University library [19], the responders ranked EDS as better in its interface and in its ease of use. As for the search results, EDS appears to work better only for some disciplines (compared to Summon). Asher, Duke, and Wilson [3] studied the ability of students to locate information resources, which indicated

All the interviewees thought that Google Scholar was and still is the student's first and primary choice. The fact that it is well-known and familiar to most of them makes it the preferable search interface. This fact is well supported by the literature;

better results for the students using EBSCO Discovery Service.

features and best practice for the evaluation and the selection procedure.

familiar EBSCO host-type interface as their discovery tool search box.

**78**

Google Scholar receives higher usability and preference ratings from students because it is easy to access, convenient, easy to use, and fast [20–24]. They always prefer Google Scholar to library databases and discovery tools.

Interviewees mentioned the fact that libraries need to keep cooperating with Google Scholar and enable access to its subscriptions. Patrons of libraries, who have subscriptions to the digital archives of publishers, are the greatest beneficiaries of the Google Scholar services. With a single search, they are led to the full digital text of the requested item [6]. In their research, Dempsey and Malpas [25] studied the future of the academic library in the context of diversity and change. They suggest that library users have lost their track on content supply. There is an increasing overlap between library and Google Scholar in workflow and network identity when they disclose and share information sources.

Most library directors mentioned Google Scholar and EDS as part of the same instruction meetings for research students. Hanneke and O'Brien [26] found that while librarians always hope for the opportunity to provide instruction on advanced searching, students and faculty could successfully use discovery tools to perform a research process. Therefore, searching instruction is either not available or not desired. Contradicting their results, other studies [27] have found that information search interfaces including Google Scholar and discovery tools very often retrieve a large number of records in response to a simple query, which requires search expertise to manipulate the results to find adequate information. Users need librarian's guidance in order to find and retrieve information.

Another topic that arose from the study was regarding search results. According to the interviewees, the EDS system provides fewer but better results than Google Scholar. This is supported by the literature; Karen Ciccone and John Vickery from North Carolina State University Libraries [28] found that there was no significant difference in the results between Summon and EDS, for either known item or topical searches. They also found that the higher proficiency of students using EDS leads to higher quality academic resources. However, Google Scholar outperformed both discovery services, in topical searches.

The librarians recommend EDS to their students, and it is referred to as the library's "Google Scholar." Asher, Duke, and Wilson [3] well described it in their work *Paths of Discovery* when they review the advantages of discovery tools:

Providing a uniform search interface and aggregating content behind a single "brand," discovery tools like EDS, Summon, and GS help to diminish the "cognitive load" on students by eliminating the often difficult and confusing step of choosing an appropriate disciplinary database, as well as the need to repeat searches in multiple databases.

### *6.1.3 Coverage, relevance of results, and ease of use*

Ease of use was the most popular motive in all the interviews. The fact that students do not need to learn how to use new database interfaces makes it much easier on the library clients. Studies of information seeking behavior indicate that users act according to the principle of least effort and ease of use [29]. Students also tend to minimize their effort at the expense of the quality of their results. Information sources that are found quickest and easiest are those that are most likely to be used by students [3].

All the library's directors mentioned examining usage statistics to ensure that the tool is highly used among the patrons. In the literature, we find that libraries must monitor their service efficiency by aggregating data from all available sources [20]. In his work, *The Future of Library Resource Discovery*, Marshall Breeding [30] discusses the considerable interest of libraries in the ability to measure the performance of their discovery service. He suggests that patron's information behavior should be recorded and evaluated for the improvement of user experience and service.

Four out of six libraries use EDS solely for publishers' subscriptions. Their intention was to extend usage of the E-journals subscriptions and to enable their patrons to find and retrieve full-text articles. This notion is well supported in the literature. In her work, *Maximizing Academic Library Collections: Measuring Changes in Use Patterns Owing to EBSCO Discovery Service*, Kristin Calvert from the University of North Carolina's library [17] found that EDS discovery tool had a strong positive effect on E-journal use. Additionally, it appears to maximize the value of library subscriptions. Thompson and her collogues [18] support these findings; according to their study, EDS has changed user behavior to better connect users to the library's E-journal collection and increases use of full text and abstracts, especially in the EBSCO host databases.

All the study participants indicated the quality of results, quality of the search algorithm, and quality of metadata as factors that enable high-precision search. Marshall Breeding [30] indicated that discovery tool interfaces include features such as relevancy-based search results, faceted navigation, and presentation of search results listed either in a brief form or in full-record displays. Studies have also proven that discovery systems generally support better relevancy rankings and deliver higher quality resources [1, 3, 18].

All interviewees mentioned the good customer relations they have with EBSCO representatives. The transparency, the flexibility of the system, and the responsiveness of the support team add to their positive user experience. In his report on indexbased discovery services from 2018, Marshall Breeding [31] writes that EBSCO Discovery Service success among libraries is due to its interoperability with strategic systems implemented in libraries, its content coverage, and its interface design.

One of the interviewees referred to EDS as a starting and more general search point, primarily for bachelor's degree students. In her opinion, research students prefer a more accurate search in their native databases. Thompson and her colleagues [18] found that students like the EDS search interface and frequented it, because of prior successful searches. Asher et al. [3] found that student's search strategies use simple keyword searches, as they do in Google. They also feel that they could get access to full-text resources more quickly and easily.

Two university library directors specified that in the fields of social sciences and humanities, the system produces good results but less so in the exact sciences. McCracken and her colleagues at Cornell university library [19] also found that EDS appears to produce better and more accurate search results, only for some disciplines (in comparison to other discovery tools available).

One of the library directors mentioned a specific case in which the university had a few hours of technical difficulties. During which, she received many complaints from faculty and students on the unavailability of the service. This is well supported in studies that indicate the popularity of the discovery tool search interface for library patrons [3, 18].

Three of the interviewees declared that the reference librarians use "native databases" for economic, business, and legal data. In her work on librarian's search preferences, Foster [32] found that when helping patrons, librarians choose webscale discovery systems or subject-specific databases as starting point of the search. When librarians preform an independent search, they prefer only subject-specific databases as their chosen starting point.

#### *6.1.4 Access point*

All libraries use EDS search box in the main menu of the library home page. Two of the interviewees indicated that they choose to include a tab in the search box for

**81**

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

native databases and a separate tab for the EDS service. The other four interviewees used the EDS service as their default search tab for English articles. The libraries' goal is to improve the accessibility and visibility of its online resources while providing user experience shaped through consultation and engagement. In his work on improving access to e-resources for users at the University of Derby, Kay [33] describes the planning and designing of the EDS discovery search box. He reviews the process made up of a few stages: first, student's feedback on what kind of search tab they would prefer, and second, the library presented a selection of potential icon designs and asked them to choose their favorites. The same procedure was made for library staff from different services. The implementation staff also met with EBSCO representatives to become familiar with the best practices at other institutions. As a result, they designed

a bigger search box with a more dynamic look and brighter color scheme.

is presented, libraries can influence their user's information behavior.

encourages them to evaluate the information [35, 36].

from citation records in search results.

experience with its information resources.

ity to sort searches for more detailed data analysis.

**6.2 Quantitative research method**

In our study, all participants indicated concern regarding too many results per search. Some activated only subscripted periodical archives while eliminating open access and other articles. They also commented that keyword search is the most common and popular search among their patrons. The literature indicates [10, 34, 35] that a careful evaluation needs to be made on which settings and customization of the discovery tool will best serve the students. Since these settings will affect their search results and research outcomes, students will use basic search functionality and usually rely on the first page of search results due to their trust in the algorithm relevancy rankings. By structuring and ordering the way information

The librarians believe that students use EDS without any instruction, just click and go. The literature on this points out that librarians need to reevaluate instructions at the reference desk and in the classroom. Instructions can be used to teach patrons basic search skills, allowing more time to focus on research skills and

All the participants declared that EDS is the portal for full-text search. If the patron does not have access to a link to the full article, in their opinion the service does not meet the expectations. Therefore, the link resolver has to be precise and as transparent as possible to the end user. This finding matches Marshall Breeding's work on the future of library resource discovery [30]. He characterizes the discovery tool interface as interoperable with a link resolver, to present links to full text

Libraries have adopted web-scale discovery services as one-stop research shops over the past years. Studies report that users find it easy of use and that it produces better search results with high-quality resources. To complete librarians' interviews and to learn more about the users' point of view, we have to analyze and understand their interactions with EDS. The usage data and log files analyses are extremely useful and valuable for libraries, in order to reveal the user's information behavior. It can also indicate how the library can implement this for a better and successful

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 abil-

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

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

*Digital Imaging*

deliver higher quality resources [1, 3, 18].

of their discovery service. He suggests that patron's information behavior should be recorded and evaluated for the improvement of user experience and service.

Four out of six libraries use EDS solely for publishers' subscriptions. Their intention was to extend usage of the E-journals subscriptions and to enable their patrons to find and retrieve full-text articles. This notion is well supported in the literature. In her work, *Maximizing Academic Library Collections: Measuring Changes in Use Patterns Owing to EBSCO Discovery Service*, Kristin Calvert from the University of North Carolina's library [17] found that EDS discovery tool had a strong positive effect on E-journal use. Additionally, it appears to maximize the value of library subscriptions. Thompson and her collogues [18] support these findings; according to their study, EDS has changed user behavior to better connect users to the library's E-journal collection and increases use of full text and abstracts, especially in the EBSCO host databases. All the study participants indicated the quality of results, quality of the search algorithm, and quality of metadata as factors that enable high-precision search. Marshall Breeding [30] indicated that discovery tool interfaces include features such as relevancy-based search results, faceted navigation, and presentation of search results listed either in a brief form or in full-record displays. Studies have also proven that discovery systems generally support better relevancy rankings and

All interviewees mentioned the good customer relations they have with EBSCO representatives. The transparency, the flexibility of the system, and the responsiveness of the support team add to their positive user experience. In his report on indexbased discovery services from 2018, Marshall Breeding [31] writes that EBSCO Discovery Service success among libraries is due to its interoperability with strategic systems implemented in libraries, its content coverage, and its interface design. One of the interviewees referred to EDS as a starting and more general search point, primarily for bachelor's degree students. In her opinion, research students prefer a more accurate search in their native databases. Thompson and her colleagues [18] found that students like the EDS search interface and frequented it, because of prior successful searches. Asher et al. [3] found that student's search strategies use simple keyword searches, as they do in Google. They also feel that

Two university library directors specified that in the fields of social sciences and humanities, the system produces good results but less so in the exact sciences. McCracken and her colleagues at Cornell university library [19] also found that EDS appears to produce better and more accurate search results, only for some disci-

One of the library directors mentioned a specific case in which the university had a few hours of technical difficulties. During which, she received many complaints from faculty and students on the unavailability of the service. This is well supported in studies that indicate the popularity of the discovery tool search

Three of the interviewees declared that the reference librarians use "native databases" for economic, business, and legal data. In her work on librarian's search preferences, Foster [32] found that when helping patrons, librarians choose webscale discovery systems or subject-specific databases as starting point of the search. When librarians preform an independent search, they prefer only subject-specific

All libraries use EDS search box in the main menu of the library home page. Two of the interviewees indicated that they choose to include a tab in the search box for

they could get access to full-text resources more quickly and easily.

plines (in comparison to other discovery tools available).

interface for library patrons [3, 18].

databases as their chosen starting point.

**80**

*6.1.4 Access point*

native databases and a separate tab for the EDS service. The other four interviewees used the EDS service as their default search tab for English articles. The libraries' goal is to improve the accessibility and visibility of its online resources while providing user experience shaped through consultation and engagement. In his work on improving access to e-resources for users at the University of Derby, Kay [33] describes the planning and designing of the EDS discovery search box. He reviews the process made up of a few stages: first, student's feedback on what kind of search tab they would prefer, and second, the library presented a selection of potential icon designs and asked them to choose their favorites. The same procedure was made for library staff from different services. The implementation staff also met with EBSCO representatives to become familiar with the best practices at other institutions. As a result, they designed a bigger search box with a more dynamic look and brighter color scheme.

In our study, all participants indicated concern regarding too many results per search. Some activated only subscripted periodical archives while eliminating open access and other articles. They also commented that keyword search is the most common and popular search among their patrons. The literature indicates [10, 34, 35] that a careful evaluation needs to be made on which settings and customization of the discovery tool will best serve the students. Since these settings will affect their search results and research outcomes, students will use basic search functionality and usually rely on the first page of search results due to their trust in the algorithm relevancy rankings. By structuring and ordering the way information is presented, libraries can influence their user's information behavior.

The librarians believe that students use EDS without any instruction, just click and go. The literature on this points out that librarians need to reevaluate instructions at the reference desk and in the classroom. Instructions can be used to teach patrons basic search skills, allowing more time to focus on research skills and encourages them to evaluate the information [35, 36].

All the participants declared that EDS is the portal for full-text search. If the patron does not have access to a link to the full article, in their opinion the service does not meet the expectations. Therefore, the link resolver has to be precise and as transparent as possible to the end user. This finding matches Marshall Breeding's work on the future of library resource discovery [30]. He characterizes the discovery tool interface as interoperable with a link resolver, to present links to full text from citation records in search results.

Libraries have adopted web-scale discovery services as one-stop research shops over the past years. Studies report that users find it easy of use and that it produces better search results with high-quality resources. To complete librarians' interviews and to learn more about the users' point of view, we have to analyze and understand their interactions with EDS. The usage data and log files analyses are extremely useful and valuable for libraries, in order to reveal the user's information behavior. It can also indicate how the library can implement this for a better and successful experience with its information resources.
