Pitt's Virtual Reference

University of Pittsburgh provides virtual reference ask-a-librarian via http://www.library.pitt.edu/reference/. Please choose either the IM version or the email version of the service, and ask a reference question that you are interested to get an answer on.

Based on this experience and any previous experiences of face to face reference, think of the advantages or limitations of this virtual reference. I have created a discussion thread in the discussion board for any discussion about this.

I decided to contact the “Ask-a-Librarian” virtual reference system via e-mail, and this was the question I submitted:

“In regards to the "Instant Virtual Extranet," let me first say how much I appreciate your services, since it always helped me with my school work. However, I do have one concern: Has this library system or campus ever devised a solution for prolonging the connection time? Whenever I access an article through that service and take the time to read, I often find myself in a situation where I need to go through the whole connection process all over again each time I want to go on to the next article. I am not trying to hold anything against anyone. I just want to know if I simply have to deal with it. I am only asking out of curiosity's sake. I hope to hear from you soon.”

By the next day, this was the reply I was given in return:

“Hello Arek Toros Torosian

Thank you for writing to our Ask-a-Librarian service.

We appreciate your taking the time to send us your comments. I'll forward your email to our Web Services Librarian.

In the meantime, I'm wondering if you've considered downloading the articles to your desktop or to a flashdrive once you've located them.  This would allow you to take your time in reading articles without worrying about the amount of time that you take. When you finish reading the articles, you could delete them.”

I need not to wait for the response from the Web Services Librarian to be able to explain the differences between this experience and face-to-face interaction. One major advantage an e-mail has over the more direct, one-on-one method in regards to approaching those who work in reference is that the patrons have the opportunities to carefully compose and double-check what they want to say before bringing it to the other person’s attention. For the case of the face-to-face approach, the patrons need to know how to express themselves clearly on the spot if they want the person at reference to understand and address their concerns. However, I am not trying to suggest that one method is superior to the other. One major advantage that face-to-face interaction has is that the patrons are in a situation where those working in reference are easily able to retrieve the sources to directly present the solutions to the concerns being brought up. For the case of the e-mail, there is always a possibility that the patrons cannot express themselves clear enough, which leaves those working in reference to respond with the wrong solutions (assuming they are able to provide anything in return). This in turn leaves the two individuals in a situation where they are exchanging messages back in fourth until they are able to finally narrow down on the main issue. In the end, whichever is more reliable for presenting concerns, whether by e-mail or one-on-one interaction, would have to depend on what method the individual feels more comfortable using (and to each one’s own).