1532-2890/asset/olbannerleft.gif?v=1&s=d833098325c9f1060bcbee51adf276c155608167)
1532-2890/asset/olbannercenter.gif?v=1&s=661179918edb4fa732edfd3408eb050a6ce87809)
1532-2890/asset/olbannerright.gif?v=1&s=1ef8a363944134c502cbffa1937878a71b4cc635)
Research Article
eJournal interface can influence usage statistics: Implications for libraries, publishers, and Project COUNTER
Article first published online: 11 MAY 2006
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20405
Copyright © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company
Issue
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
Volume 57, Issue 9, pages 1243–1248, July 2006
Additional Information
How to Cite
Davis, P. M. and Price, J. S. (2006), eJournal interface can influence usage statistics: Implications for libraries, publishers, and Project COUNTER. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57: 1243–1248. doi: 10.1002/asi.20405
Publication History
- Issue published online: 9 JUN 2006
- Article first published online: 11 MAY 2006
- Manuscript Accepted: 27 JUL 2005
- Manuscript Revised: 25 MAY 2005
- Manuscript Received: 20 MAY 2005
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Abstract
The design of a publisher's electronic interface can have a measurable effect on electronic journal usage statistics. A study of journal usage from six COUNTER-compliant publishers at 32 research institutions in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Sweden indicates that the ratio of PDF to HTML views is not consistent across publisher interfaces, even after controlling for differences in publisher content. The number of full-text downloads may be artificially inflated when publishers require users to view HTML versions before accessing PDF versions or when linking mechanisms, such as CrossRef, direct users to the full text rather than the abstract of each article. These results suggest that usage reports from COUNTER-compliant publishers are not directly comparable in their current form. One solution may be to modify publisher numbers with “adjustment factors” deemed to be representative of the benefit or disadvantage due to its interface. Standardization of some interface and linking protocols may obviate these differences and allow for more accurate cross-publisher comparisons.