De Montfort University has been involved in the UK LOCKSS Alliance since its formation in 2007. Since then we have been building up the electronic content preserved there, but during 2012 it became possible to demonstrate the extent of the material collected. By the end of November 674 preserved journals had been activated in SFX, our OpenURL Resolver and journals A-Z list (most people know this as ‘Find It @ DMU’).
Over the roughly two-week period 1-16 December 2012, 12364 requests passed through SFX, each generating an individualised menu screen. The purpose of an OpenURL Resolver, like SFX, is to point people to ‘appropriate copies’ of the article they are looking for. The challenge is to match the request with the right source (where the user has the correct access rights) and the right date range (where their university has a subscription in place or other reason why access would be granted).
After probing the usage statistics it was found that 838 of the menus generated by SFX included LOCKSS as a target. This comes out as 6.77%.
838 / 12364 X 100 / 1 = 6.77
What conclusions can be drawn from this figure? LOCKSS preserved materials are clearly becoming visible to people using ‘Find It @ DMU’. Is that because librarians are preserving relevant material or users are asking for stuff that LOCKSS has preserved? It is also probably too early to compare this with other institutions running LOCKSS as not many have integrated LOCKSS with their OpenURL Resolvers – though I would be interested in hearing from anyone with similar figures.
It is possible to compare the popularity of LOCKSS with other full text services on SFX in the same period.
After just a few week with a full list of LOCKSS archived journals appearing on SFX, this service is in 20th position in the ‘top services shown in the menu’ chart. If you exclude the top four services, which have to appear in any menu, then LOCKSS is in 16th place.
Targets more popular than LOCKSS include mainly aggregator services like EBSCO and Proquest, with the exception of Elsevier. Targets less popular include the publishers represented in in LOCKSS, but this is not surprising, if you think about it.
DMU has continued to add content to LOCKSS where we think we would miss it if it were to become unavailable elsewhere for any reason. The effect is to add a kind of guarantee to the links made in reading lists and assignments.