3

The Real Reference Revolution

The Digital Library User

Susan J. Beck 

The World Wide Web profoundly changed how people seek and find information. The reference department as place at the end of the twentieth century changed from a physical destination for information seekers and a storage facility for large collections of reference materials to a space filled with computers for both librarians and library users to access the web through the Internet to find the information they seek. Technological advances in telecommunications and computing as well as changes in media formats, storage capacity, and the development of specialized bibliographic tools have altered the rhythms and nature of reference work. The means of interacting with library users have also changed, but the fundamental premise of reference services has withstood the test of time. At the very core of reference services is the notion that librarians help users find the information they need. The librarian remains the intermediary between users and the information they seek, although today they are often seeking information located on the web, not physically located in the library. Everything changed, yet nothing changed.

This chapter reviews the major technological changes that have contributed to the changing face of reference services today. It explores changes in the provision of reference services, from the physical library to redefinition of the types of services provided, including digital reference. It also examines the impact of digital formats on reference collections, instruction (reflecting the realities of the new information world), and library user behaviors and expectations.

The Enabling Change: Automation in Libraries

An excellent overview of the history of library automation is presented in an article by Robert M. Hayes (2009) in the Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences. Hayes asserted that the need for information in science and technology provided the impetus for the development of automated information management systems. The following time line of innovations in information services is based on time periods defined by Hayes:

 1945–1960

• Creation of Science Citation Index allowed scientists to identify citation networks among related papers.

 1960–1975

• Development of commercial online services (Dialog, Orbit, and BRS) provided access to reference bibliographic databases.

• Trained librarians acted as the intermediaries for information seekers.

• Online public access catalogs (OPACs) were introduced using machine-readable cataloging (MARC) records.

• OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) and the Research Library Group implemented cooperative interlibrary loan lending.

 1975–1990

• Introduction of personal computing occurred with the advent of the PC and Mac.

• OPACs, available in most libraries, allowed access to users worldwide.

• Laser discs, followed by CD-ROMs, introduced the era of end-user searching.

• Widespread use of the Internet and the World Wide Web provided online communication and access to a new world of information.

 1990–2008

• Information seekers used search engines to locate information independently.

• Search engines changed from file name indexing (Archie, Gopher, Veronica, and Jughead) to content indexing (WebCrawler, Lycos, and Google).

• Database services moved to the Internet.

• Online reference desks, such as the Internet Public Library, were developed.

• Library-based, subject-specific research guides were developed.

The major innovations in library automation relate to bibliographic control and the desire to simplify access to information. Robert Maxwell (2009) defined bibliographic control as “the process of creation, exchange, preservation, and use of data about information resources” (497). In more basic terms, someone creates information, subject experts create finding aids, and librarians help users discover the information. According to James Rettig (2006), “Technology impacted the process of searching for bibliographic information more frequently than any other aspect of reference” (108).

Rettig (2006) described the changes in the search process that came during the early stages of information technology:

The processes of searching for citations and evaluating each citation’s relevance were conducted simultaneously by the person who would use the information in the cited sources. The advent of electronic databases changed that. The process of searching belonged exclusively to the librarian; the process of evaluating citations was usually shared by the librarian and the patron. Here in a kernel is the most important trend in reference service over the past 30 years. The respective roles and, in some ways, the responsibilities of the reference librarian and the user of reference service changed. (109)

The role of the librarian and the information seeker changed once again following the introduction of the personal computer (PC). As easy-to-use end-user systems were introduced in the form of laser discs and CD-ROMs, information seekers took back sole responsibility for evaluating the information they discovered. As database services subsequently moved to the web, users continued to be in control of the information they found. Information seekers became more independent with each new technological advance, entering into an Internet era characterized by self-service opportunities in all types of Internet-based enterprises.

Changes in the Provision of Reference Services

Library as Place

The library as place and the available library resources used by reference librarians in the latter part of the twentieth century were vastly different from their counterparts today. In large academic libraries, for example, large reference rooms were once populated with rows of index tables, lined with such familiar old friends from the H. W. Wilson Company as Readers’ Guide to Periodical Literature and the Social Sciences and Humanities Index. Row after row of printed reference books made up the reference department’s stacks. Huge card catalogs were often housed in separate bibliographic corridors, surrounded by massive national bibliographies, such as the National Union Catalog and the British National Bibliography. A grand wooden desk took center stage, with librarians imprisoned behind it.

Today, these reference departments no longer have index tables or card catalogs. There are few print indexes. The physical size of reference collections has shrunk. Some libraries continue to staff a physical reference desk, although the desk has totally disappeared from many libraries. If there is a reference desk, a computer connected to the Internet now takes center stage, and it is rare for the librarian to leave the reference desk to consult a paper-based reference source. If a library user physically enters the library, the reference librarian uses a computer with an Internet connection to help the information seeker locate needed information.

Redefining Reference

As noted at the start of this chapter, at the very core of reference services is the notion that librarians help users find the information they need. According to Linda C. Smith (2009), “To mediate between a library user’s information needs and the information resources accessible to that user through the library, libraries offer reference services” (4485).

In 1876, Samuel Swett Green first expressed the fundamental principles of reference services. The core functions of reference services remain today a reflection of those ideals first articulated by Green. Although Green described examples of types of questions asked by public library users, David Tyckoson (2011b) offers a more modern interpretation of Green’s vision focusing on four distinct functions of a reference librarian: teach people how to use the library and its resources; answer readers’ questions; aid readers in the selection of good books; promote the library within the community (9–10). In the past, the traditional modalities of reference were primarily face-to-face and by phone, with an occasional letter. Librarians helped users find information in card catalogs and printed indexes. When students came into the library with specific information needs, reference librarians would demonstrate how to find books using the library’s card catalog and how to find articles using printed indexes.

In 2008, the Reference and User Services Association (RUSA), a division of the American Library Association (ALA), redefined reference. In the press release issued by RUSA, Susan J. Beck, RUSA past-president, explained, “RUSA, the foremost organization of reference and information professionals in the world, has redefined reference to reflect the activities of the twenty-first century reference librarian to serve the needs of a new generation of information seekers” (RUSA 2010). RUSA’s current definition follows:

Reference Transactions are information consultations in which library staff recommend, interpret, evaluate, and/or use information resources to help others to meet particular information needs. Reference transactions do not include formal instruction or exchanges that provide assistance with locations, schedules, equipment, supplies, or policy statements.

Reference Work includes reference transactions and other activities that involve the creation, management, and assessment of information or research resources, tools, and services.

(The following bullets clarify what is meant by terms within the Reference Work definition.)

• Creation and management of information resources includes the development and maintenance of research collections, research guides, catalogs, databases, web sites, search engines, etc., that patrons can use independently, in-house or remotely, to satisfy their information needs.

• Assessment activities include the measurement and evaluation of reference work, resources, and services. (RUSA 2008; emphasis in the original)

Transforming Services

Accessibility

Today libraries offer, and users expect, a variety of services that meet the demanding information needs of our 24/7 anywhere, anytime society. Contemporary reference services offer an amazing number of ways for users to contact librarians. The following examples illustrate some of the ways users now communicate their needs to librarians:

• It is 3:00 a.m.; a genealogist, hundreds of miles away, discovers your library has an old family bible and she e-mails you with questions.

• It is 10:00 a.m.; a user approaches the reference desk in a busy library for help with a term paper on the economic impact of immigration on small communities.

• A student in a library café sees a box on your home page where she can ask a question, so instead of going to the reference desk on the other side of the building, she simply starts chatting with a librarian, latte in hand.

• A distance education student in China is having problems using your online catalog and fills out a web-based form to ask questions.

• A prison inmate sends a letter asking for a copy of a newspaper article you have on microfilm.

• A student sixty miles away calls the library about an item on reserve.

• A businessman connects to the library from his smart phone using a library app.

• A student texts the library to find out the hours it is open, and although the service is down for the evening, the student receives an automatic message indicating library hours.

• A student instant messages the social work librarian from a link in an online library guide.

Service Quality

Reference librarians value quality service. Today’s reference librarians report that they are providing better service to their users and are successfully answering more complex questions. This belief is partially based on the ability of users to connect with a librarian using a variety of methods, such as meeting face-to-face; sending an e-mail, chat message, or text; or calling on the phone. The increased availability of digital resources to satisfy users’ questions and the speed with which questions can be answered also contribute to this belief (Tenopir and Ennis 2002, 272).

Researchers are finding that the 55 percent reference rule (i.e., reference librarians answer questions correctly 55 percent of the time) may be a thing of the past in the current digital environment (Crowley and Childers 1971; Gers and Seward 1985; Hernon and McClure 1986). In a study of a university chat reference service, researchers reported questions were correctly answered 91.72 percent of the time (Arnold and Kaske 2005). The 55 percent rule was based on unobtrusive questioners and research-developed questions, whereas the 92 percent result was achieved using actual questions from real users. There remains the question of whether the accuracy criteria were comparable to those used in the 55 percent rule stream of research, but Arnold and Kaske suggest that service quality, in this one modality, is superior.

Job Satisfaction

Several studies indicate that librarians are having more fun as a result of helping users find information on the web. Academic members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) were surveyed four times over a decade (1991, 1995, 1997, and 2000) to measure the impact of technological changes in university reference services. The changes primarily focused on the impact of the digital resources available on the web. Reference librarians reported that they have greater job satisfaction because of technology and the greater availability of resources to answer difficult questions, and that their work has become more challenging, rewarding, and even “more fun” (Tenopir and Ennis 2001, 44).

Janes (2002) surveyed both public and academic reference librarians to determine their experiences with and attitudes toward the use of digital and networked technologies and resources in reference work. He found that librarians were both positive and optimistic about digital reference services. He reported, “Overall, then, our respondents felt that digital technologies make reference more accessible, more interesting, more challenging, and more fun. They are skeptical about their ability to make reference cheaper, but also don’t think digital technologies have become more time consuming or difficult” (557).

The reality of modern libraries is that many information service needs are expected to be met 24/7 in our anywhere, anytime society. Libraries are still expected to offer traditional reference services, but now these services can reach users wherever they are, and reference librarians need to be where the users are. Users still do walk in the front door of the library, but far more often, they visit the library via the Internet.

Defining Digital Reference

Librarians continue to experiment with different reference models to meet the continually changing information landscape and to support new user demands. Reference services that are offered on the Internet are often referred to as online, digital, or virtual. There is quite a difference of opinion in the profession as just what to call these services. RUSA uses the term “virtual”:

Virtual reference is reference service initiated electronically, often in real-time, where patrons employ computers or other Internet technology to communicate with reference staff, without being physically present. Communication channels used frequently in virtual reference include chat, videoconferencing, Voice over IP, co-browsing, e-mail, and instant messaging. (RUSA 2004b; emphasis added)

Both Joseph Janes (2003), founder of the Internet Public Library, and R. David Lankes (2009) use the term “digital,” and M. Kathleen Kern (2008), one of the authors of the RUSA definition, uses “virtual.” Andrew Pace (2003) provides an interesting perspective:

Well, in the first place, and most simply, there is nothing virtual about it! You’ve got real patrons on one end asking questions, and real librarians (mostly) on the other end answering them. In between you have real questions, real answers, and a real cost of transacting both. . . . The very notion of virtuality—something less than real—diminishes the reality of hard work, new paradigms, and the shifting set of skills required to do the job of librarianship. (55)

Googling the terms “digital reference services” (20,800 entries) and “virtual reference services” (26,500 entries) in September 2014 to see how often each term has been used showed that “virtual reference services” was more commonly used. “Online reference services” produced 825,000 entries, but that terminology has been around for quite some time. There simply is no consensus on which term is best.

The driving force behind implementing digital reference services was the Internet. E-mail reference, the first manifestation, was the natural result of having a library webpage. In the early days of the World Wide Web, users found that little link at the very bottom of each library webpage labeled “Website Feedback” and began to use it to ask reference questions. Librarians, recognizing a need, were quick to respond by launching formal e-mail reference services. The principal users of these services were the library’s primary clientele, although visitors would often request specific information about a library’s unique resources. Fluctuations in use of digital reference services over time can be attributed to a number of factors, including the addition of other digital reference services such as chat or instant messaging. Easier-to-use library webpages with better-organized content and a greater availability of information on the web that quickly satisfies users’ needs have also impacted this type of service.

The kinds of digital reference services offered vary among types of institutions and libraries. Many libraries have instituted some type of e-mail reference service. Other libraries offer chat reference, instant messaging, texting, or a combination of services to reach their primary user groups and to be where their users are. These services offer library users the convenience of asking questions from anywhere in the world, at any time. If the library is closed or users are not able to get to the library, they can, and do, still ask questions. An e-mail reference service is just one way to get the librarian to the user and the user to the librarian. Users are now accustomed to accessing the web 24/7, so why not the library? Of course, the reality is that librarians are not always answering the questions 24/7.

Two collaborative services do offer 24/7 availability: QuestionPoint and ipl2. QuestionPoint (www.questionpoint.org), a collaborative project of the Library of Congress (LC) and OCLC, is a cooperative comprising 1,400 libraries around the world that offers both chat and e-mail reference services 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. When this project was piloted by LC in 2000 as the Collaborative Digital Reference Service, the initial intent was to “provide unprecedented access to global resources, create an archive of questions and answers as a resource for its members, and generally, add value to information on the Internet, enable 24/7 service, and redefine the role of librarian in the Internet Age” (LC 2014). The ipl2 (www.ipl.org), formerly known as the Internet Public Library, originated from a 1995 seminar taught by Dr. Joseph Janes at the University of Michigan School of Information. Today the ipl2 is hosted by Drexel University’s College of Information Science and Technology and is run by a consortium of colleges and universities with graduate programs in information science. This is a 24/7, real-time, e-mail-based reference service.

Academic librarians have experimented with embedded librarians who create outposts in student centers and academic departments or through courseware, blogs, or Twitter (Kesselman and Watstein 2009), and public libraries have been moving to local shopping malls (ALA 2010). Other innovative solutions to the “go where the user is” movement include using social networking tools such as Facebook, MySpace, Ning, Twitter, and Google+ to create new online relationships with users. Since a large number of library users spend a great deal of time using social networking sites, librarians need to have a presence there to market their services. Before creating such a service, Rimland (2011) suggests reviewing the guidelines for remote access in RUSA’s (2004a) “Guidelines for the Behavioral Performance of Reference and Information Service Providers” before creating a social networking campaign. The 2004 guidelines were revised in 2011; although the revised guidelines do not specifically address social networking tools, they do provide “guidelines that are specific to reference encounters where traditional visual and non-verbal cues do not exist” (RUSA 2013).

Impact of Digital Formats

Reference Resources

Just as the variety of services provided by reference librarians has changed, so too have the resources they use to answer questions. Today, reference librarians are using more digital resources than paper-based resources. The reference tools librarians use are faster, more comprehensive, and more current. Tyckoson (2011a) reflected, “When computing power was applied to information resources, our reliance on print reference sources was profoundly shaken” (223).

The use of older paper-based collections has declined as users demand and expect access to digital content. In the predigital world, paper-based indexes and abstracts, such as Chemical Abstracts, Biological Abstracts, the New York Times, and Readers’ Guide to Periodical Literature, took up massive physical spaces in reference departments. The physical size of paper-based reference collections stored on familiar index tables and in the stacks has been reduced and replaced with tables laden with networked computers used to access the web. In a webinar on reference collections for the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services (ALCTS), Tyckoson (2010) observed that “Today’s reference collections were built for librarians not users.”

Reference team members at Stetson University analyzed their use of print versus electronic resources to answer reference questions. Results demonstrated that their librarians used online resources 58.54 percent of the time. The most heavily used resources were databases, the library catalog, and internally developed webpages. Printed reference books were consulted only 9.38 percent of the time (Bradford, Costello, and Lenholt 2005).

There are associated economic consequences of this conversion to digital information. An institution must continually invest in appropriate hardware infrastructure if users are to access these resources. Today, a larger proportion of a library’s reference budget is spent on digital reference products—so much so that in many academic libraries, funds have shifted from the reference departments to the library’s overall collections budget to support the seemingly astronomical costs associated with digital reference products with full-text content.

As more content becomes digitized, reference librarians are forced to decide whether they will replace and repurchase and, thus, duplicate large paper-based and film-based products with the expensive digital equivalents. Advantages such as increased accessibility and full-text searching capabilities offered by the digital format often provide a compelling added-value incentive.

In their decade-long study of the impact of technology on reference librarians, Carol Tenopir and Lisa A. Ennis (2001) observed, “Domination of the web as a delivery format and a portal to resources has created almost a calming effect as libraries can concentrate their efforts on a dominant format that is now familiar to most users and staff” (44–45). They concluded that “[t]o the reference librarian of the new millennium, electronic resources and services are just now the expected way of life” (45).

Instruction

Reference librarians provide different types of instruction based on the type of library in which they work. Librarians participate in formal instruction programs, which in academic libraries are often in group settings usually associated with a specific course, discipline, or assignment. Librarians also provide individual point-of-use instruction as they help users with their specific information needs. In each case, the librarian is communicating directly with the user.

Instruction delivery methods have changed as instruction found its way to the web. Today, librarians develop web-based tutorials, webinars, and library instruction modules in subject courses and offer online credit courses on information-seeking techniques. They produce YouTube videos, record podcasts, write blogs, and offer chat reference services as a means to instruct users and stay connected at the point of need. Librarians create user guides in anticipation of user needs, which Smith (2009) defines as indirect instruction. These guides offer library users information on how to use the library’s services and resources. Recently, librarians (as well as academic faculty) have begun providing worldwide access to their subject research guides by using the LibGuides portal (www.springshare.com/​libguides).

The focus of instruction classes has been modified to keep up with the advances in technology, the acquisition of digital resources, and the information explosion brought about by the web. Tenopir (1999) observed that “the sheer numbers of databases and online search methods and a fast-paced rate of change have made instruction more important than ever” (278). Before the introduction of computers, library instruction often included a tour of the library and an introduction to general library policies. Library users were shown how to find books using a card catalog and where to locate the books they identified. They were introduced to print subject indexes and abstracting services to identify relevant articles on their specific topics.

In the early days of PCs, librarians found themselves teaching both the technical features of the hardware and the resources available on the web. They taught users how to use a mouse; how to find unfamiliar keys on the keyboard, such as tildes, slashes, and the enter key; and how to issue print commands. The change from paper-based to digital resources brought about the need to instruct users on both common and idiosyncratic database features and operational command structures, such as Boolean logic and relevancy. As users became more comfortable with computers and software became easier to use, the need for technical instruction decreased.

The greatest challenge for today’s library users is how to harness the explosive amount of information available to them and how to identify and select the right resources for their needs. Library instruction now focuses more on the development of effective search strategies, the characteristics of different user interfaces, and the availability of unique resources. Instruction incorporates the identification and selection of appropriate disciplinary resources as well as methods to evaluate the authority, reliability, and accuracy of the information found on the web. Librarians are teaching users not only how to find information but also how to organize that information by providing instruction in the use of online bibliographic management tools, such as RefWorks, EndNote, and Zotero. These systems help researchers create databases of resources that can be used to generate bibliographies in a variety of standard formats. Instruction is often offered in specially equipped, electronic classrooms for hands-on practice.

Information Seekers

The major changes in reference work today have been driven by changes in media formats, storage capacity, computing, and the development of specialized bibliographic tools. Digitization of content has revolutionized how librarians create, store, retrieve, and preserve information. The massive amount of information available on the web has transformed how people search for information.

Since the advent of computers, the general public has believed that you can find everything you want by using a computer. At no time in history has this been as possible as it is today. Now people expect to be able to find everything they want on the web for free by simply Googling it. Conversely, librarians do not believe people always find the necessary information to fully satisfy their needs.

Today, library users no longer need to visit a library to use and/or find library resources. They are able to visit a library on the web, from anywhere in the world, at any time. Today, library users can consult the library’s online catalog to determine whether the library owns an item; search a multitude of databases to identify topical research information; gain instant access to full-text articles; stream video content; analyze data files; read an e-book; organize their research using online bibliographic management tools; chat, text, IM, e-mail, Twitter, Skype, or use their mobile devices to reach a librarian. Reference librarians, too, can now provide library services from anywhere in the world. They can work from home, from their office, while they are attending a conference, or even while taking a break at the local Starbucks. Librarians using current technology can be anywhere, at any time, trying to meet the information needs of their inquiring users.

That people need help to find the information they seek has been a continuing theme in librarianship. In 1876, Samuel Swett Green, the father of reference services, pointed out, “Persons who use a popular library for purposes of investigation generally need a great deal of assistance” (74). Margaret Steig, in 1990, following a decade of availability of personal computers and at the dawn of the World Wide Web, alleged, “Few scholars, professionals, or average citizens care to acquire the expertise necessary to solve their own information needs; they did not before the library was automated, and they do not now. . . . Most users still need personalized guidance” (49). More recently, Linda C. Smith (2009), in her comprehensive article on reference services in the most recent edition of the Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences,, proclaimed,, “Reference services continue to exist in libraries because the many means of access to and use of information resources are not intuitively self-evident” (4485).

The World Wide Web turned twenty-five on March 12, 2014. The Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project has documented the adoption of the Internet and its impact on American life since 1995. According to a February 2014 Pew report, 87 percent of adult Americans now use the Internet and many believe it is essential to them (Fox and Rainie 2014).

In February 2012, a Pew study on search engines found that 73 percent of all Americans use search engines to find information and 91 percent of search engine users report that they usually find the information they are seeking (Purcell, Brenner, and Rainie 2012). Americans are now using the Internet for many of the same reasons that they previously used libraries—and library use has consequently changed.

In the late 1990s and early 2000s, reference librarians and library educators expressed anxiety about the reported decline in reference transactions. They were concerned about the implications for the future of reference services. There has been a great deal of speculation within the profession about the factors contributing to this decline. Some argue that the physical library will disappear. Others attribute the decline to a change in library users’ information-seeking behaviors (Applegate 2008). In a survey of ARL member libraries in 2002, Novotny found that many librarians “lacked confidence in their data collection techniques” and believed that “reference service data does not accurately record their own level of activity” (12). One explanation of the decline was the movement of reference activities away from the traditional reference desk to other reference formats, such as e-mail or chat. Another explanation was that questions were becoming more difficult (Kyrillidou 2000).

Library users are now connecting with the library in different ways. They visit the library’s online catalogs and access the library’s indexes and databases on the web. They use library research resources such as LibGuides to find specialized disciplinary information. They find general library information, such as hours and policies, on library-created webpages. Ask any librarian today and he or she will report being busier than ever. With the explosion of information available on the web, the nature of reference questions has changed. They are often more complex and difficult and take longer to answer. Users no longer need to consult a reference librarian for simple questions that can be easily answered using their favorite search engine. Users find information on the web on their own, as is reported in the Pew surveys. They are often happy, and for the most part satisfied, when they select the top few hits from Google or Bing or check out their topic in Wikipedia. Smith (2009) pointed out, “In the past, reference librarians did more ready reference simply because the sources required to answer such questions were in library collections and not available to users” (4487). Today, this type of information is easily discoverable on the web.

User expectations regarding available information have also resulted in more difficult questions. Users who now consult librarians have often already checked the web and even searched some library resources. Seeking help may seem to them to be a desperate measure or possibly a last resort. Thus, users consult librarians when they cannot find the answers to their questions independently.

Not only are the questions more difficult and complex, but now there are many more places to look and resources to search to find the answers. While retrieval time itself may be shortened, searching a multitude of sources may take more time. Librarians seek to identify the best resource to satisfy a user’s information needs and today that takes more time.

There has been a natural maturation in users’ technological skills. Technical support questions have become more advanced as the population has developed greater computer competencies. People know more about technology; therefore, they can ask more complex questions about technology. Users in general are now more competent in the use of computers and searching the web. This increased competence can create overconfidence as well as foster a reluctance to seek assistance. It can also create great frustration when the information sought eludes discovery.

Today, users expect to find information on the web, but they are often confused by the many options confronting them. Even though they have developed relatively sophisticated web-searching skills, users may be unaware of relevant resources available and may be uncertain as to whether a specific resource is appropriate for their current need. Their access to value-added resources is often very limited if they do not use library portals. They must critically evaluate the information they find. According to one respondent in the Tenopir and Ennis (2001) study, “Gone are the days of a majority of the undergrads not having used a computer before, so computer literacy has increased, but information literacy has not in reality; although many students try to fake it, they still have very few ideas about how information is organized” (45).

The availability of digital resources has brought about significant changes in the attitudes and expectations of both reference librarians and users. Tenopir and Ennis (2002) reported, “Now both groups believe that an answer to almost every question can be found if the right combination of resources and search strategies is chosen from the multitude of web resources and online services accessible” (264).

Conclusion: Revolution or Evolution?

Reference service is an example of what Alvin Toffler (1970) called future shock. Over the past few decades, both librarians and library users have been challenged by the changes in reference resources and services. But for all of that change, the premise of reference service has held constant. Reference librarians continue to provide the link between users and the information they seek. What has really changed? Library users are more dispersed, sometimes thousands of miles away. Reference librarians need to develop fluent communication skills using multiple media. Library resources, typically available on a number of platforms, are more accessible and flexible. The questions reference librarians receive are more challenging. Answering those questions is more rewarding. The public does not always recognize that they need assistance in locating and using information. Helping library users become more capable information seekers who understand the complex realities of the information creation, distribution, organization, and use cycle remains a challenge, as it has always been.

REFERENCES

ALA (American Library Association). 2010. “Public Library in Shopping Mall.” Last modified August 26. http://wikis.ala.org/​professionaltips/​index.php?title=Public_Library_in_Shopping_Mall.

Applegate, Rachael. 2008. “Whose Decline? Which Academic Libraries Are ‘Deserted’ in Terms of Reference Transactions?” Reference and User Services Quarterly 48 (2): 176–89. http://rusa.metapress.com/​content/​tx16819743420h22/​fulltext.pdf.

Arnold, Julie, and Neal Kaske. 2005. “Evaluating the Quality of a Chat Service.” portal: Libraries and the Academy 5 (2): 77–193. doi:10.1353/pla.2005.0017.

Bradford, Jane T., Barbara Costello, and Robert Lenholt. 2005. “Reference Service in the Digital Age: An Analysis of Sources Used to Answer Reference Questions.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 31 (3): 263–72. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2005.03.001.

Crowley, Terence, and Thomas Childers. 1971. Information Service in Public Libraries: Two Studies. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow.

Fox, Susannah, and Lee Rainie. 2014. “The Web at 25 in the U.S.” Pew Research Center, Internet and American Life Project. February 27. www.pewinternet.org/​2014/​02/​27/​the-web-at-25-in-the-u-s/.

Gers, Ralph, and Lillie J. Seward. 1985. “Improving Reference Performance: Results of a Statewide Study.” Library Journal 110 (18): 32–35.

Green, Samuel Swett 1876. “Personal Relations between Librarians and Readers.” Library Journal 1: 74–81. http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/​jrichardson/​DIS245/​personal.htm.

Hayes, Robert M. 2009. “Library Automation: History.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, 3rd ed., edited by Marcia Bates and Mary Niles Maack, 3326–7. New York: Taylor and Francis. doi:10.1081/E-ELIS3–120044024.

Hernon, Peter, and Charles R. McClure. 1986. “Unobtrusive Reference Testing: The 55 Percent Rule.” Library Journal 111 (7): 37–41.

Janes, Joseph. 2002. “Digital Reference: Reference Librarians’ Experiences and Attitudes.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 53 (7): 549–66.

———. 2003. Introduction to Reference Work in the Digital Age. New York: Neal-Schuman.

Kern, M. Kathleen. 2008. Virtual Reference Best Practice. Chicago: American Library Association.

Kesselman, Martin A., and Sarah Barbara Watstein. 2009. “Creating Opportunities: Embedded Librarians.” Journal of Library Administration 49 (4): 383–40. doi:10.1080/01930820902832538.

Kyrillidou, Martha. 2000. “Research Library Trends: ARL Statistics.” Journal of Academic Librarianship 26 (6): 427–36.

Lankes, R. David. 2009. New Concepts in Digital Reference. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services, no. 1. San Rafael, CA: Morgan and Claypool.

LC (Library of Congress). 2014. “The Library of Congress Global Reference Network: Project History.” Accessed September 8. www.loc.gov/​rr/​digiref/​history.html.

Maxwell, Robert L. 2009. “Bibliographic Control.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, 3rd ed., edited by Marcia Bates and Mary Niles Maack, 497–505. New York: Taylor and Francis. doi:10.1081/E-ELIS3-120043092.

Novotny, Eric. 2002. Reference Service Statistics and Assessment. SPEC Kit 268. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries, Office of Leadership and Management Services.

Pace, Andrew K. 2003. “Virtual Reference: What’s in a Name?” Computers in Libraries 23 (4): 55–56.

Purcell, Kristen, Joanna Brenner, and Lee Rainie. 2012. “Search Engine Use 2012.” Pew Research Center, Internet and American Life Project. March 9. www.pewinternet.org/​2012/​03/​09/​search-engine-use-2012/.

Rettig, James. 2006. “Reference Service: From Certainty to Uncertainty.” Advances in Librarianship 30: 105–43. doi:10.1016/S0065-2830(06)30003-7.

Rimland, Emily. 2011. “Using Online Social Networking Tools for Reference and Outreach.” In Reference Reborn: Breathing New Life into Public Services Librarianship, edited by Diane Zabel, 193–202. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.

RUSA (Reference and User Services Association). 2004a. “Guidelines for Behavioral Performance of Reference and Information Service Providers.” American Library Association. Approved June. www.ala.org/​rusa/​resources/​guidelines/​guidelinesbehavioral.

———. 2004b. “Guidelines for Implementing and Maintaining Virtual Reference Services.” American Library Association. Approved June. www.ala.org/​rusa/​resources/​guidelines/​virtrefguidelines.

———. 2008. “Definitions of Reference.” American Library Association. Approved January 14. www.ala.org/​rusa/​resources/​guidelines/​definitionsreference.

———. 2010. “Redefining Reference.” RUSA News, July 1. http://rusa.ala.org/​blog/​2010/​07/​01/​redefining-reference.

———. 2013. “Guidelines for Behavioral Performance of Reference and Information Service Providers.” American Library Association. Approved May 28. www.ala.org/​rusa/​resources/​guidelines/​guidelinesbehavioral.

Smith, Linda C. 2009. “Reference Services.” In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, 3rd ed., edited by Marcia Bates and Mary Niles Maack, 4485–91. New York: Taylor and Francis. doi:10.1081/E-ELIS3-120043490.

Steig, Margaret. 1990. “Technology and the Concept of Reference, or What Will Happen to the Milkman’s Cow?” Library Journal 115 (7): 45–9.

Tenopir, Carol. 1999. “Electronic Reference and Reference Librarians: A Look through the 1990s.” Reference Services Review 27 (3): 276–9.

Tenopir, Carol, and Lisa A. Ennis. 2001. “Reference Services in the New Millennium.” Online 25 (4): 40–45.

———. 2002. “A Decade of Digital Reference: 1991–2001.” Reference and User Services Quarterly 41 (3): 264–73.

Toffler, Alvin. 1970. Future Shock. New York: Random House.

Tyckoson, David. 2010. “The Rise and Fall of Reference Collections: Strategies for Change.” ALCTS (Association for Library Collections and Technical Services) Webcast. Originally presented April 14. www.ala.org/​ala/​mgrps/​divs/​alcts/​confevents/​upcoming/​webinar/​coll/​041410refcoll.cfm.

———. 2011a. “From Print to E-Reference.” In Reference Reborn: Breathing New Life into Public Services Librarianship, edited by Diane Zabel, 217–36. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.

———. 2011b. “History and Functions of Reference Service.” In Reference and Information Services: An Introduction, 4th ed., edited by Richard E. Bopp and Linda C. Smith, 3–22. Denver, CO: Libraries Unlimited.