The Big Deal, Interlibrary Loan, and Building the User-Centered Journal Collection: A Case Study

REFERENCES

• Association of Research Libraries (ARL). (2012). ARL statistics 2011–12. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, D. (2004). What's the “big deal,” and why is it a bad deal for universities? Interlending & Document Supply, 32(2), 117–125. doi: 10.1108/02641610410538586
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blecic, D.D., Wiberley, S.E. , Jr., Fiscella, J.B., Bahnmaier-Blaszczak, S., & Lowery, R. (2013). Deal or no deal? Evaluating Big Deals and their journals. College & Research Libraries, 74(2), 178–193. Retrieved from http://crl.acrl.org/content/74/2/178.full.pdf+html
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boissy, R.W., Taylor, T.N., Stamison, C.M., Henderson, K.S., Okerson, A., Van Rennes, R., … Linoski, A.D. (2012). Is the Big Deal dying? Serials Review, 38(1), 36–45. doi:10.1080/00987913.2012.10765417
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Botero, C., Carrico, S., & Tennant, M.R. (2008). Using comparative online journal usage studies to assess the Big Deal. Library Resources & Technical Services, 52(2), 61–68. doi:10.5860/lrts.52n2.61
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucknall, T. (2005). Evaluating the Big Deal: The Carolina Consortium's experience. In K. Strauch, K. Steinle, T. Daniels, & B.R. Bernhardt (Eds.), Charleston Conference proceedings 2005 (pp. 157–159). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
   Google Scholar
• Bucknell, T. (2008). Usage statistics for Big Deals: Supporting library decision-making. Learned Publishing, 21(3), 193–198. doi:10.1087/095315108×323893
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucknell, T. (2012). Garbage in, gospel out: Twelve reasons why librarians should not accept cost-per-download figures at face value. The Serials Librarian, 63(2), 192–212. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2012.680687
   Google Scholar
• Ebert, L. (2005). What's the Big Deal? “Take 2,” or, How to make it work for you… The Serials Librarian, 48(1/2), 61–68. doi:10.1300/J123v48n01_07
   Google Scholar
• Edlin, A.S., & Rubinfeld, D.L. (2004). Exclusion or efficient pricing? The “Big Deal” bundling of academic journals. Antitrust Law Journal, 72(1), 119–157. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40843619
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• England, M., & Jones, P. (2014). Diversification of access pathways and the role of demand-driven acquisition: A case study at the University of Utah. The Serials Librarian, 66(1/4), 96–105. doi10.1080/036152X.2014.879012
   Google Scholar
• Franklin, B. (2005). Managing the electronic collection with cost per use data. IFLA Journal, 31(3), 241–248. doi:10.1177/0340035205058809
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, K. (2005). What's the Big Deal? The Serials Librarian, 48(1/2), 49–59. doi:10.1300/J123v48n01_06
   Google Scholar
• Gatten, J.N., & Sanville, T. (2004). An orderly retreat from the Big Deal: Is it possible for consortia? D-Lib Magazine, 10(10). doi:10.1045/october2004-gatten
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs, N.J. (2005). Walking away from the “big deal”: Consequences and achievements. Serials: The Journal for the Serials Community, 18(2), 89–94. doi:10.1629/1889
   Google Scholar
• Ives, G., & Fallon, S. (2009). Stung if you do, stung if you don’t—The good and bad of the Big Deal. The Serials Librarian, 56(1/4), 163–167. doi:10.1080/03615260802679572
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, M.E. (2003). Assessing ILL/DD services study: Initial observations. ARL: A Bimonthly Report, 230/231, 21–22. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/storage/documents/publications/arl-br-230-231.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jones, M., Marshall, D., & Purtee, S.A. (2013). “Big Deal” deconstruction. The Serials Librarian, 64(1/4), 137–140. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2013.760389
   Google Scholar
• Landesman, M. (2001). Sense and sensibility—The Big Deal. Against the Grain, 13(3), 86–88.
   Google Scholar
• Leon, L., & Kress, N. (2012). Looking at resource sharing costs. Interlending & Document Supply, 40(2), 81–87. doi:10.1108/02641611211239542
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGrath, M. (2012). Fighting back against the Big Deals: A success story from the UK. Interlending & Document Supply, 40(4), 178–186. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02641611211283831
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nabe, J., & Fowler, D.C. (2012). Leaving the “Big Deal”: Consequences and next steps. The Serials Librarian, 62(1/4), 59–72. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2012.652524
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen, W., Kress, N., & Leon, L. (2011, May). What does it really cost? An examination of ILL and acquisitions costs to inform current and future services. Panel discussion at the Greater Western Library Alliance Resource Sharing/Document Delivery and Collection Development joint meeting, Park City, UT.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, T.A. (2001). What's the Big Deal? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27(4), 302–304. doi:10.1016/S0099-1333(01)00232-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowse, M. (2003). Individual article supply: Some strategic directions. Interlending & Document Supply, 31(2), 86–93. doi:10.1108/02641610310477152
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weicher, M., & Zhang, T.X. (2012). Unbundling the “Big Deal” with pay-per-view of e-journal articles. The Serials Librarian, 63(1): 28–37. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2012.688167
   Google Scholar
• Wiley, L., & Chrzastowski, T.E. (2005). The impact of electronic journals on interlibrary lending: A longitudinal study of statewide interlibrary loan article sharing in Illinois. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 29(4), 364–381. doi:10.1016/j.lcats.2006.03.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe, D., Tafuri, N., Owen, N., Day, R., & Lesher, M. (2009). Smoking out the Big Deal: Getting what you want without getting stung. The Serials Librarian, 56(1/4), 116–121. doi:10.1080/03615260802679291
   Google Scholar
• Wolverton, R.E. , Jr., & Bucknall, T. (2008). Are consortium “Big Deals” cost-effective? A comparison and analysis of e-journal access mechanisms—Workshop report. The Serials Librarian, 55(3), 469–477. doi:10.1080/03615260802059858
   Google Scholar