Purpose

The purpose of this study is to investigate why users turn to the university library’s reference desk and whether librarians make use of the opportunity to conduct reference interviews to disclose any unexpressed information needs.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper presents the results from a qualitative exploration study where interactions between librarians and users were observed in authentic situations at the reference desk and analyzed using a modified version of Radford and Connaway’s (2013) categorization of inquiries.

Findings

Most inquiries were seemingly easy to answer and pertained to collections and procedures in the library. Lending out desk supplies accounted for a high proportion of the activity. Only a small number of requests were subject-oriented and reference interview techniques were only used in 5% of the recorded inquiries. This means that the users’ information needs were not probed in the vast majority of the interactions.

Research limitations/implications

The study is exploratory and mirrors the activity that takes place in one specific library. The low number of reference interview techniques used may indicate a lack of interest in users’ information needs, which signifies a risk of the reference desk being reduced to an arena for instrumental and superficial interaction between librarians and users.

Originality/value

This study illustrates current developments in work at a physical library desk. Few recent studies address face-to-face interactions between librarians and users.

中文翻译：

---

参考咨询台是否用于参考采访

目的

这项研究的目的是调查用户为何求助于大学图书馆的参考咨询台，以及图书馆员是否利用这次机会进行参考采访以披露任何未表达的信息需求。

设计/方法/方法

本文介绍了定性探索研究的结果，该研究在真实情况下在咨询台观察了馆员与用户之间的互动，并使用Radford and Connaway（2013）的查询分类的改进版本进行了分析。

发现

大多数查询似乎很容易回答，并且与图书馆中的馆藏和程序有关。借出的办公桌用品占活动的很大一部分。只有少量的请求是面向主题的，参考访谈技术仅用于记录的查询的5％。这意味着在绝大多数交互中都没有探究用户的信息需求。

研究局限/意义

该研究是探索性的，反映了在一个特定库中发生的活动。使用的参考采访技术数量较少，可能表明对用户的信息需求不感兴趣，这意味着有可能将参考咨询台缩减为馆员与用户之间进行工具性和表面性互动的场所。

创意/价值

这项研究说明了物理图书馆柜台工作的最新进展。近期的研究很少涉及图书馆员与用户之间的面对面互动。