This article was downloaded by: [Heriot-Watt University]On: 07 October 2014, At: 02:17Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Electronic ResourcesLibrarianshipPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wacq20

A Review of “The LibraryJournal Guide to E-ReferenceResources”Kathleen Folger aa University of Michigan , Ann Arbor, MIPublished online: 19 Dec 2009.

To cite this article: Kathleen Folger (2009) A Review of “The Library Journal Guideto E-Reference Resources”, Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 21:3-4,296-297

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19411260903446295

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Her

iot-

Wat

t Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

2:17

07

Oct

ober

201

4

296 Reviews

Bradford Lee EdenAssociate University Librarian for Technical Services and Scholarly

Communication, University of CaliforniaSanta Barbara, California

Roncevic, Mirela, (ed). The library journal guide to e-reference re-sources. New York. Neal-Schuman Publishers, 2009. 133p. (ISBN9781555706852).

The Library journal guide to e-reference resources provides qualitative as-sessments of nearly 200 subject-specific electronic resources in 16 subjectcategories: arts, biography, business/economics, current events, genealogy,general reference, health and medicine, history, information technology,language/linguistics, literature, philosophy and religion, popular culture,science, social sciences, and travel and tourism. Written by both publicand academic librarians, brief overviews cover each of the products, pluseasy-to-read charts rate each in seven categories: scope, writing, design,bells and whistles, ease of use, linking, and value. The resources reviewedare indexed by title, producer, and subject. There is also an index to allresources that received a four-star rating in any of the seven criteria and adirectory of publishers.

The library journal guide to e-reference resources is ambitious in scope.In one slim volume, it reviews and rates nearly 200 resources in 16 differentsubjects. Among the resources reviewed, however, there were some surpris-ing absences. There were 14 products reviewed in the business/economicssection but EconLit was not one of them. There were 13 products reviewedin health and medicine, but Medline wasn’t even mentioned. In addition,all of the resources reviewed were subscription-based. What about freeresources? For libraries on a tight budget, it would have been helpfulto compare the free version of databases like ERIC or Criminal JusticeAbstracts to their commercial versions.

The reviews are concise and thorough, providing a good sense of thescope and quality of each individual resource. Many of the reviews alsoinclude comparisons to related resources, helping to differentiate betweencompeting products and providing a good indication of the relative valueand importance of a product. For example, the review for Gale’s HealthReference Center Academic points out academic libraries would gravi-tate toward that resource, geared toward nursing and allied health studentstudents, whereas Gale’s Health and Wellness Resource Center would bemore cost-effective for public libraries. This knowledgeable comparativereview is exactly what librarians are looking for, helping the Guide to liveup to its stated intention of being a tool “to help inform decisions aboutwhat databases to purchase to build your e-resources collection.”

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Her

iot-

Wat

t Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

2:17

07

Oct

ober

201

4

Reviews 297

Each chapter concludes with a chart evaluating each resource’s scope,writing, design, bells and whistles, ease of use, linking, and value. Theproducts are ranked in each category on a scale of one to four stars, fromone (poor/insufficient) to four (excellent/comprehensive). Given the rangein the types of resources being reviewed, which includes abstracting andindexing (A&I) tools, directories, full-text databases, image archives, andthe like, not all the criteria work with every type of resource. In rating thewriting, for example, the evaluators take into consideration the audienceand the quality of the writing. How does one evaluate the quality of writingin an A&I resource such as Historical Abstracts? What about Books inPrint or Marquis Who’s Who? Linking seemed another example of a crite-rion that didn’t seem appropriate for all resources as the quality of linkingvaries depending on vendor. Several databases, such as ERIC or PsycINFO,though available from multiple vendors, were evaluated on the basis offunctionality from a single vendor. So, though it appears that linking inERIC is good (three stars), in reality it’s the linking in the EBSCO versionof ERIC that is good. We have no idea how well linking works in theCSA, FirstSearch, Ovid, or the free Department of Education versions ofERIC.

For many librarians, one of the most important considerations whenevaluating the value of a resource is cost. The Introduction of the Guideacknowledges that value is a relative term that takes into consideration notonly cost but “myriad related factors.” Unfortunately, though recognizingthat cost is a factor in determining value, the Guide fails to provide pricinginformation on any of the resources. Vendors are, of course, notoriouslyloath to share pricing information. Pricing can vary depending on a numberof factors, including the size and type of institution and the model beingused. Cost would have to be determined on an individual basis using someother resource.

The idea of a compendium of evaluative reviews of electronic resourcesis appealing—a good way for busy librarians to separate the wheat from thechaff. The printed book format is, however, probably not the best choice.Some of the entries in this Guide, for example, were already dated bythe time the book was published. One entry mentioned a planned newinterface release in Fall 2008, and another made reference to the “currentBush Administration.” The library community as a whole would benefitgreatly if Editor Mirela Roncevic and her team of evaluators could takethis work to the Web, expanding and updating the reviews.

Kathleen FolgerUniversity of Michigan

Ann Arbor, MI

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Her

iot-

Wat

t Uni

vers

ity]

at 0

2:17

07

Oct

ober

201

4