Hi everyone, just a quick follow-up on our discussions about retaining INSPEC we had two years ago. We continue to have low usage and we may need to review continuation of access again…
A question was put out to a number of academic science librarian listservs regarding keeping or canceling INSPEC and why. A summary of the results are below:
24 responses: 9 retain, 2 switched to a different format, 11 canceled, 2 did not have
*Retain*
· Arizona State University at Tempe — usage has decreased over last 3 years, but still in top third of overall database usage; search capabilities probably not as sophisticated as other databases such as SciFinder or BIOSIS; having both on same platform with their backfiles an argument for retention as well
· Carnegie Mellon University — retain for now; not sure why it seems to be getting an up-tick in use — physicists and computer scientists don’t seem to be interested in it, and astrophysics and biophysics aren’t well-covered… maybe part of federated searching or drafting off of Compendex (using E-Village platform)?
· Purdue University — used mostly by electrical engineers; on Ei Village platform which is included in “physical sciences” federated searching — patrons are both directly and indirectly steered to it
· Rice University — Physics agreed to cancel 5 years ago, but engineering (most users) wants it kept
· University of California at Santa Cruz — high cost is making it harder to justify retaining
· University of New Brunswick
· University of New Hampshire — strengths are international coverage and conference proceedings; not used by physics faculty, but grad students and electrical engineers use it
· University of Notre Dame — haven’t cancelled it yet, but have thought about it; not very happy with searching experience or content; users are gradually moving to other sources — physics faculty seem to prefer preprint servers and WoS
· University of Wisconsin — Madison — still have it but regularly monitor it
*Switched to different format*
· Trinity College — switched to “pay-per-view” via STN
· University of Alaska at Fairbanks — canceled a couple years ago; retain password access, but very few requests for it; no pushback from users over the cancellation
*Canceled:*
· AT&T Shannon Laboratory Library — canceled in 2010 due to low use and high cost/use (canceled WoS in 2011 due to low use and budget cut); no user complaints
· Auburn University — canceled due to low use; some mathematicians a little sad but physicists happy with Web of Science, etc.
· Caltech — use stats v. cost didn’t justify keeping it; had already purchased Inspec archive; polled faculty and only had one user (rare use); no complaints since cancelling it; EE faculty used WoS and IEEE Explore, physics faculty used ArXiv and ADS
· Emory University — canceled in 2009; physicists use WoS and SciFinder Scholar; no push-back on cancellation
· Iowa State University — canceled about 10 years ago due to low use; no regrets; the few patrons who ask for it are happy when shown alternatives that are available
· Naval Postgraduate School — canceled a few years ago; low use, high cost; have substantial graduate engineering program; do have IEEE and Ei Village; no pushback from users
· Oregon State University — canceled in 2009 due to low use; no patron response
· University of Illinois at Chicago — canceled last fall after consultation with engineers and physicists; canceled to save journals from being cut; no complaints
· University of Nebraska at Omaha — canceled last fall due to low use
· University of New Mexico — canceled about 2 years ago; a few complaints but not many
· University of Oregon — canceled 2008/9 to protect physics journal subscriptions; faculty not really happy about losing it, but WoS, ArXiv, SPIRES, and ADS, SciFinder Scholar (and probably Google Scholar) meant that it was no longer essential; high cost didn’t help it either
*Did not have*
· Brigham Young University — used to get occasional complaint about not having it, but now physics faculty seem quite happy with SPIN and WoS
· College of New Jersey
