Toward a typology of e-mail reference questions

Internet Reference Services Quarterly

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 1-15

  Schwartz, Jennifer ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

E mail reference; Question classification; Virtual reference

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746480034     PISSN: 10875301     EISSN: 15404749     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J136v08n03_01     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Eileen Abels, “The Email Reference Interview,” RQ 35.3 (1996): 345-58.
2. Joseph E. Straw, “A Virtual Understanding: The Reference Interview and Question Negotiation in a Digital Age,” RUSQ 39.4 (2000): 376-379.
3. Helen R. Tibbo “Interviewing Techniques for Remote Reference,” American Archivist 58 (1995): 294-310.
4. Annette Haines and Alison Grodzinski, “Web Forms: Improving, Expanding, and Promoting Remote Reference Services,” College and Research Libraries News 60.4 (1999): 271-272+.
5. Massey, Burzio “Reference Encounters of a Different Kind: A Symposium,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 18.5 (1992): 276-286.
6. Jeffrey St. Clair and Rao Aluri, “Staffing the Reference Desk: Professionals or Nonprofessionals?” Journal of Academic Librarianship 3 (1977): 151.
7. Marjorie E. Murfin and Charles A. Bunge, “Paraprofessionals at the Reference Desk,” Journal of Academic Librarianship 14.1 (1988): 10-14.
8. Richard L. Derr, “Questions: Definitions, Structure and Classification,” RQ 24.2 (1984): 186-190.
9. Thomas Mann, “Reference Service, Human Nature, Copyright, and Offsite Service-In a ‘Digital Age’?” RUSQ 38.1 (1998): 55-61.
10. Anne Parent, “Analysing Design-Oriented Dialogues: A Case Study in Conceptual Data Modelling,” Design Studies 18 (1997): 43-66.
11. Questions were categorized as interdisciplinary based on the available subject specialist librarians. If a question required the expertise of more than one librarian, it was considered interdisciplinary. If the question covered two different disciplines that are the responsibility of the same librarian, it was not considered interdisciplinary.
12. The referral process, in the current context, describes the routing of a question within the Bobst Library from the “front line staff” to another party for treatment. Once referred, the service did not track the handling of the question or answer.
13. Implied referrals were answers that instructed the user to make an appointment with a subject specialist, but did not specify with whom, and did not route the question to the appropriate expert.
14. Although this type of an answer was supplied early in the development of the service, it was quickly abandoned, and our policy was changed to ensure that the patron was supplied with sufficient information about whom to contact, and the appropriate subject specialist was copied with the question.
15. Joe Janes, “What Is Reference For?” RUSA Forum: The Future of Reference, http://www.ala.org/rusa/forums/janes_forum.html [January 13, 2003].