JISC

Start date: 17 October 2005

End date: 17 May 2006

Funding programme: PALS Metadata and Interoperability programme (phase 2)

Project website: http://www.projectCounter.org

JISC theme(s): Information environment

Background  

Project COUNTER was initiated to improve the reliability of usage statistics available for online publications. It has done so by developing Codes of Practice that set standards for the recording, reporting and delivery of vendor usage statistics. Release 1 of the COUNTER Code of Practice for journals and databases, published in January 2003, has been widely adopted by vendors and the resulting usage reports are widely used by librarians. Over 40 vendors now provide COUNTER compliant usage reports; these vendors represent over 60% of the output of articles covered by the Science Citation Index. 

Release 2 of the COUNTER Code of Practice requires that full text requests are reported by format -- PDF and HTML. An analysis indicates that the design of a publisher’s electronic interface can have a measurable effect on electronic journal usage statistics. The ratio of PDF to HTML views is not consistent across publisher interfaces, and the number of full-text downloads may be artificially inflated when publishers require users to view HTML versions before accessing PDF versions or when linking mechanisms, such as CrossRef, direct users to the full text. This suggests that usage reports from COUNTER-compliant publishers may not be directly comparable in their current form. 

Aims & Objectives  

The COUNTER Executive Committee has agreed that the most practical remedy for any inflation of usage statistics that is due to interface effects is to work with publishers to develop an appropriate filter to be applied to the usage data. A similar filter is already in place in the COUNTER Code of Practice to eliminate the problem of ‘double clicks’ by the same user on the same document; it is simple and works well. The development of a filter to deal with the apparent inflation of usage statistics due to interface effects would be more challenging and has implications beyond COUNTER, especially for publisher metadata. The aim of this project is to develop such a filter, assess its implications for the application of unique article identifiers, such as DOIs, and to propose how the filter could be implemented by publishers. 

Overall Approach

• Phase 1 (October-December 2005): Development of Version 1 filter using Elsevier Science Direct data. Invite and brief other publishers/vendors to participate in Phase 2.
• Phase 2 (January-March 2006): Test viability of Version 1 filter with key major publishers/vendors. Assess whether modifications will have to be made to current publisher practice regarding the application of unique article identifiers.
• Phase 3 (March-May 2006): Analysis of survey results, assessment of viability of filter, preparation of report for JISC, identify relevant modifications to the COUNTER Code of Practice.

Key Standards

• COUNTER Code of Practice for Journals and Databases, Release 2
• Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

Project Outputs

• A data filter to eliminate double clicks on different versions of the same article that can be applied by vendors to COUNTER usage data to remedy the inflation in usage statistics that results from interface effects and linking protocols.
• A COUNTER protocol for the application of unique article identifiers, such as DOI, to the same article in different formats, such as PDF and HTML
• A report for JISC that will describe the problem addressed, the approach taken to solving it, as well as conclusions, results and recommendations for action.

Outcomes

• Improvements of the COUNTER Code of Practice that will further improve the compatibility of online usage statistics from different vendors. This will benefit publishers by providing them with a simple tool that will enable them to improve the reliability of their usage statistics. Further improvements in the comparability of usage statistics from different vendors will also benefit libraries and researchers.
• Standardisation of the usage of unique article identifiers for different versions of the same article. Currently there is a diversity of practice among publishers regarding the implementation of unique article identifiers. Some publishers give all formats of the same article the same article identifier; others give each format a different article identifier. A standard should be adopted by all publishers. Clearer guidance, with COUNTER’s authority, on the application of such a crucial item of metadata would benefit both publishers and libraries.

Project Partners

• COUNTER Online Metrics
• EvidenceBase, University of Central England 
• Elsevier Science 
• EBSCO Information Services