LibQUAL+ 2003: The New York Medical College Report

In Spring 2003 the Medical Sciences Library (MSL) of New York Medical College (NYMC) participated for the second consecutive year in the Association of Research Libraries' LibQUAL+ web-based user satisfaction survey. The Library was one of 21 academic health sciences libraries, and 308 library institutions throughout the United States and Europe who participated in LibQUAL+, with almost 130,000 users responding. The survey is intended to solicit user perceptions of their desired level of service, the minimum they are willing to accept, and the actual or perceived level. The survey is premised on the concept that only users can judge service quality. Overall, NYMC library users reported higher results in every category for 2003 over those reported in 2002.

The NYMC LibQUAL+ participation was funded by the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries (AAHSL) and the New York State Library's METRO 3R Council. The MSL is a member of AAHSL and METRO, the latter is one of nine Reference and Research Resources (3Rs) systems in New York State. A total of 7,388 library users participated from the AAHSL cohort. All AAHSL institutions targeted populations, rather than sampling participants. A total of 180 NYMC users completed the LibQUAL+ survey for 2003, a response rate of 2.4%.

2003 LibQUAL+ Survey
The 2003 LibQUAL+ survey differed somewhat from that of 2002, although the dimensions stayed the same. A total of twenty-five core questions focused on four dimensions of library service quality:

Several of the basic questions were reworded from the 2002 version. In addition, five questions focused on information literacy issues and three addressed overall user perceptions. Cohorts then added five local questions designed to cull information targeting needs of academic health sciences libraries. Users rated their perceptions and expectations on a scale of one through nine. Gap scores, termed adequacy means, were then derived from differences between users' perceived levels of service and minimum (adequacy means) and desired (superiority mean) levels.

The web-based survey period began in March 2003 and continued through April. Announcements, including three follow-ups were sent to NYMC email user groups of faculty, employees, students, and fellows representing all three schools.

Results:
Comparing LibQUAL+ results for 2002 and 2003 should be cautiously stated, particularly because of the differences in the survey, different institutions and the relatively low number of respondents. Seven of the 25 questions were reworded on the 2003 survey, no doubt to better assess user perceptions by dimensions. One of the local questions, notably "Having comprehensive electronic resources" was changed to "Electronic resources matching my needs." Users throughout all cohorts reported an insatiable desire for access to these resources.

NYMC Results:
NYMC results were summarized from the 176 individuals who completed the survey, a response rate of 2.4%. Demographic categories were not required fields, so totals will not be the same for all tables. Respondents did self-identify by affiliation and discipline. Inherent limitations of using NYMC email groups did affect response rates. A large number of NYMC users do not routinely use the College email as their primary means of communication.

Table 1. NYMC Respondents Self-reporting By User Group
  2002 2003
Undergraduate* 6 2.67% 29 16.48%
Graduate 82 36.44% 57 32.39%
Faculty 95 42.22% 59 33.52%
Library Staff 16 7.11% 15 8.52%
Staff 26 11.56% 16 9.09%
Total 225 100.0% 176 100.0%


Table 2. NYMC Respondents Self-reporting By Discipline
  2002 2003
Graduate School 31 14.0% 25 17%
Hospital/Health System 16 7.0% 7 5%
School of Allied Health/Pub Health 20 9.0% 15 10%
School of Medicine 130 58.0% 93 64%
Shared Services 16 7.0% 1 1%
Total 225 100% 145 100%

In contrast to 2002 results, 2003 NYMC respondents perceived their level of satisfaction above their minimum expectations. Gap scores measure differences between actual user perceptions and minimum or desired expectations. The highest positive NYMC gap scores, or adequacy means, related to dimensions of "Library as Place" and "Affect of Service." Specific aspects included the following questions:

>
  • A comfortable and inviting location    		 1.04
  • Employees who instill confidence in users    		 0.93
  • Giving users individual attention    		 0.91
  • Readiness to respond to users' questions    		 0.88
  • Willingness to help users    		 0.87

    These positive dimensions were consistent with those from 2002, yet almost 100% higher. Users continue to value the library service and place dimensions.

    The most negative scores related to the dimensions of "Personal Control" and "Access to Information." Specific aspects included the following questions:

  • Making e-resources accessible from my home or office    		 -0.5
  • Print and/or electronic-journal collections I require for my work    		 -0.41
  • The electronic information resources I need    		 -0.2
  • A library website enabling me to locate information on my own    		 0.12
  • The printed library materials I need for my work    		 0.13

    All of the above were still three times lower (or higher!) this year over 2002 results.

    Questions regarding general satisfaction, information literacy and cohort-specific local questions were also included. Tables below compared NYMC with other cohorts notably: AAHSL, ARL group, the AAHSL sub-group of ARL libraries, the New York 3R colleges and university libraries, and METRO sub-group.

    Table 3. General Perceived Levels of Satisfaction: Cohort Comparisons
    General Satisfaction Questions NYMC Mean AAHSL Mean ARL Mean* AAHSL/ARL Mean** NY3Rs Mean METRO Mean
    In general, I am satisfied with the way I am treated at the library 7.52 7.57 7.26 7.53 7.29 6.85
    In general, I am satisfied with library support for my learning, research, and/or teaching needs 7.03 7.04 6.83 6.98 6.77 6.18
    How would you rate overall quality of the service provided by the library 7.2 7.26 7.05 7.21 7.02 6.55
    *Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Group results
    **AAHSL/ARL sub-set of the ARL Group results that are also included in the AAHSL cohort.


    Table 4. General Perceived Levels of Information Literacy:
    By Cohort Information Literacy Questions NYMC Mean AAHSL Mean ARL Mean AAHSL/ARL Mean NY3Rs Mean METRO Mean
    Library helps me stay abreast of developments in my field(s) of interest 6.5 6.69 6.07 6.68 5.54 5.24
    Library aids my advancement in my academic discipline 6.78 6.98 6.7 6.95 6.27 5.88
    Library enables me to be more efficient in my academic pursuits 6.89 6.99 6.79 6.95 6.53 6.08
    Library helps me distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy 5.6 5.7 5.56 5.6 5.65 5.38
    Library provides me with the information skills I need in my work or study 6.45 6.44 6.14 6.35 6.15 5.85

    Generally AAHSL libraries, including NYMC, scored higher than other reported groups. Gap scores were not available for these questions.

    Table 5. General Perceived Levels of Satisfaction to Local AAHSL Questions
    Local Questions NYMC Perceived Mean NYMC Adequacy Mean AAHSL Perceived Mean AAHSL Adequacy Mean AAHSL/ ARL Perceived Mean AAHSL/ ARL Adequacy Mean
    Providing health information when and where I need 6.69 0.26 7.0 0.51 6.93 0.51
    Employees teaching me how to access or manage information 7.33 1.01 7.08 0.80 7.01 0.85
    Environment that facilitates group study and problem solving 6.21 0.58 6.19 0.53 6.01 0.55
    Access to information resources that support patient care 6.82 0.50 7.11 0.41 7.02 0.40
    Electronic resources matching my information needs 6.55 -0.17 7.12 0.05 7.06 0.04
    *ARL Group results less AAHSL ARL data
    **AAHSL/ARL sub-set of ARL Group results NYMC results are consistent with peer AAHSL institutions, and generally higher than college and research libraries in New York.


    Table 6. Overall User Satisfaction by Dimension Gap Score
    Adequacy Mean)
    General Dimension
    AAHSL
    NYMC
    NYS3Rs
    2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003
    Access to Information 0.31 0.21 -0.32 0.11 NA 0.29
    Affect of Service 0.72 0.76 0.17 0.76 NA 0.61
    Library as Place 0.84 0.59 0.35 0.76 NA 0.62
    Personal Control 0.33 0.33 -0.32 0.12 NA 0.43
    Overall: NA 0.49 NA 0.46 NA  

    Results from this table indicate that all NYMC gap scores for 2003 were positive. Respondents were far more satisfied with the NYMC library in 2003, although access to information and personal control were still issues. These are consistent with AAHSL respondents' desires for better access to more information and more personal control. The New York participating libraries include undergraduate, graduate and research institutions. Their scores, though somewhat higher, confirmed their users' desires for more and better access, with much personal control. LibQUAL+ norms scores provide information about how NYMC ranks in relation to other AAHSL libraries participating in the survey. Norms are reported in comparison to other AAHSL users below. In general, NYMC ranked in the 50th percentile for adequacy means which is an important indicator.

    Table 7. NYMC: AAHSL Individual Norms - rounded up to next higher percentile
      NYMC Perceived Score Percentile AAHSL NYMC Adequacy Mean Percentile AAHSL NYMC Superiority Mean Percentile AAHSL
    Access to Information 6.87 40 0.11 48 -1.37 40
    Affect of Service 7.37 46 0.76 52 -0.63 41
    Library as Place 6.83 50 0.76 54 -0.68 47
    Personal Control 6.86 36 0.12 45 -1.42 35
    TOTAL 7.03 43 0.46 52 -0.97 42

    The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) General Response:
    Overall results, ARL staff report that the highest desired needs for all respondents were for Personal Control, then Access to Information. Generally, results indicate that perceived quality is getting better. At the July 18, 2003 results meeting for New York State library participants, staff noted "users have an insatiable desire for complete runs of journals and access to them." Generally, students care very much about library as place; faculty do not. Graduate students tend to be the most critical.

    NYMC Library General Response:
    The 2003 NYMC survey results reflect substantial improvements in terms of library user satisfaction. Although construction and renovations are not yet completed, both physical and electronic access to library resources has greatly improved. This may be attributed to a number of factors notably

    All NYMC library staff has participatedin the assessment of the LibQUAL+ results for 2002 and 2003. The staff responses above clearly reflect many internal discussions and steps taken to increase and improve library user satisfaction. Users rated our service dimension highly, and staff care very much that they do. The low response rate must be noted. Use of preferred email addresses by user groups will be explored to improve communications with our users. Finally, an ad hoc assessment task force continues to work to better measure our effectiveness.