Shrimplin, Revelle, Hurst & Messner (2011)

Shrimplin, A. K., Revelle, A., Hurst, S., & Messner, K. (2011). Contradictions and consensus -- clusters of opinions on e-books. College & Research Libraries, 72(2), 181-190. Retrieved November 5, 2011, from Library Literature & Information Full Text database.

The goal of the research is to better understand the source of "resistance" (p. 181) among academic library patrons to the use of e-books. With the goal of shaping both collection development and the purchase of e-reader devices, the study seeks to answer three questions:

"1) What are the reasons some library users choose to use or not use e-books?

 "2) Do patrons differ in their reasons for selection or rejection of e-books as a technology? and

"3) Do some users' negative attitudes about e-books stem from issues that can be addressed by changes in library services?" (p. 182)

The researchers used Q methodology, which they define as a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods (p. 182-183).

The study took place at the Miami University of Ohio. E-books constitute 1 percent of the monograph collection. They come from a variety of distributors. Library policy is to not buy the print edition if the monograph is available as an e-book. The usage seems low compared to some other research reports I have read, although it is increasing, as other reports indicate: Downloads from Springer during spring semester 2008: 3,929; spring semester 2009: 4,096; spring semester 2010: 8,114. Downloads from all publishers/distributors during spring semester 2010 were 12,226 (p. 182).

Lit review: I saw Shelburne's article as marking an early point in the current phase of e-book studies, but in Shrimplin et al.'s list of nine studies of user perceptions (endnote 1, p. 189), only one is as recent as Shelburne's (on e-references, which is my concern at this point). So not much seems have been done on user perceptions between Shelburne and this article.

Findings: The research surfaced four distinct "factors" in relation to patrons' perceptions of e-books:

1. Book lovers (27 individuals of 74) -- "Book Lovers like print books as physical objects" (p. 185).
2. Technophiles (17 of 74) -- Understand, prefer and enjoy the benefit of e-books, although even they say they would prefer a print book for leisure reading.
3. Pragmatists (3 of 74) -- Can't see themselves reading an entire book online but like the features of e-books.
4. Printers (3 of 74) -- Like book lovers, they have a negative view of e-books, but their negative attitude arises from their displease of reading e-books rather than their pleasure in reading print books.

[Note that there is no explicit discussion of e-readers like Kindles; the references to devices up to this point in the article simply talk about "computer screens." I wonder what's up with that in terms of the experiences the research subjects have had and reported on? Did the researchers avoid this point because of limitations on how the library provides access to e-books?]

In the discussion section of the article, the authors provide very interesting comments on the implications of their findings for libraries:

• All four groups prefer print books for leisure reading.
• All four groups recognize the advantages of searching text in an e-book.
• E-resources need to be as easily available in the OPAC as print sources. [seems like a given]
• For some patrons (printers) the interface is as important as the content of the e-book collection.
• "Dedicated E-book readers would also address the portability concerns of Book Lovers, Pragmatists, and Printers" (p. 189). [Confirms the suspicions in the note above that the library was not loaning Kindles, Nooks, etc.]

My thoughts
I'm not sure I agree with the first phrase here:

"... although those scoring strongly on the Book Lover factor will likely remain opposed to e-books regardless of improvements in interface and usability, some library patrons (Printers) who are currently reluctant to use e-books might be persuaded by emerging display technologies" (p. 189).

I suspect that many book lovers will ultimately conclude that it is the stories in the books that they love, and that they will come to enjoy their Kindle or whatever with the same intensity that they now love their print books. 

Q methodology looks like it bears investigating for my research design project. It's not listed in Creswell's index; see notes on wiki for Shrimplin et al.'s sources. Q methodology seems to do what I had been vaguely thinking about: Use qualitative methods to define issues and then quantitative methods to define perceptions on those issues. Q methodology also includes a third step, interviewing participants to deepen understanding of their perceptions. Sounds very cool.

The fact that all four groups prefer to read leisure reading in print format is intriguing to me. I think our students would want to use the Kindles for leisure reading. With the limits on graphic display, it seems that's what Kindles are best for.

Although the printers were a small portion of the participants in this study, their concern with the interface of the e-reader device and their desire not to read a book on a computer has been true of all my students who I have tried to interest in the Follett's e-books in our OPAC.