Real-World Applications of Informetrics in Libraries and Information Services

Every library faces the same hard questions. Which journals are worth their rising subscription costs? Which books should stay on the shelf and which should make way for new titles? Where should a limited budget go for maximum impact? Informetrics offers a way to answer these questions with evidence rather than guesswork. As the quantitative study of information production, use, and dissemination, it gives librarians and information professionals a measurable, data-driven foundation for everyday decisions. This post explores how informetrics moves from theory into practice, shaping library services, collection development, and performance evaluation.

Informetrics in library services
From data to decisions in resource allocation
Using informetrics for collection development
Evaluating resource usage
Identifying gaps in the collection
Assessing impact and weeding the collection
Evaluating performance using informetrics
Measuring service usage and value
Combining multiple data sources
Improving information dissemination

Informetrics in library services

Informetrics is concerned with the regularities that underlie how information is produced and used, and it studies these patterns quantitatively. When applied to a library, it turns abstract activity into measurable data: which resources users access, how often, in what subject areas, and with what intensity. This data becomes the basis for smarter management.

The most well-known practical use of informetrics is in core periodical selection. Academic and research libraries cannot subscribe to every journal in a field, and rising subscription costs make selective decisions unavoidable. Informetric analysis helps identify the small set of journals that carry the bulk of relevant articles, so that limited funds support the resources users actually need.

This is where one of the classic bibliometric laws becomes a working tool. Bradford’s Law of Scattering states that if journals are ranked by how many articles they publish on a given subject, they fall into zones: a small nucleus of highly productive journals, followed by progressively larger zones that each contribute the same number of articles but require far more titles to do so. The practical lesson is direct. A handful of “core” journals satisfy a large share of demand, while later zones offer diminishing returns. A librarian working under a tight budget can prioritise the nucleus with confidence.

From data to decisions in resource allocation

Beyond journal selection, informetrics supports broader resource allocation. Measurement of information use informs choices that affect budgets, staffing, and space. If usage data shows that a particular subject area is growing rapidly, a library can shift acquisition funds toward it. If a section of the collection sees little activity, those funds may be better spent elsewhere. The result is a library that allocates its resources in proportion to demonstrated need rather than habit or assumption.

Informetric thinking also extends to the systems behind the scenes. The field has been used to inform information retrieval design, including practical tasks such as estimating the size of index files for a document collection or deciding how exhaustively material should be indexed. These may seem like technical details, but they directly affect how quickly and accurately a user finds what they need.

Using informetrics for collection development

Collection development is a cornerstone of library work. Building a collection that is relevant, balanced, and current requires constant evaluation and planning. Informetrics provides the tools to do this systematically rather than intuitively, helping professionals track usage, find gaps, and assess the impact of new acquisitions.

Evaluating resource usage

The starting point is usage analysis. Libraries track which materials are accessed most often, whether print books, journals, or digital resources. Analysing this data reveals patterns and trends that guide future acquisitions. If a research area is gaining popularity, informetric tools can pinpoint the key journals, books, and e-resources in that field, directing collection-building where interest is real and growing.

For electronic resources, this usage tracking has become highly standardised. The COUNTER (Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources) standard gives libraries consistent and comparable usage reports from different publishers and platforms. Using COUNTER data, a library can measure downloads, searches, and turnaways across its digital collection, then calculate metrics that feed directly into renewal decisions.

Identifying gaps in the collection

A balanced collection is hard to maintain when so many disciplines compete for attention, and gaps are easy to miss. Informetrics helps by revealing what users are citing and accessing in a given field. If students and faculty frequently cite research in a niche subject but the library holds little material in that area, the data signals a clear need for development. This shifts gap analysis from a matter of opinion to a matter of evidence.

Author productivity patterns add another layer. Lotka’s Law describes how, in any subject, a small number of authors produce a large share of the publications while most contribute only a few. Understanding which authors and research groups dominate a field helps a library prioritise the work most likely to be in demand, strengthening the collection in areas of genuine scholarly weight.

Assessing impact and weeding the collection

Collection development is not only about adding material. It also involves removing items that no longer serve users, a process known as weeding or de-selection. Here informetrics is especially valuable. Library evaluation methods commonly include circulation statistics, interlibrary loan data, citation analysis, network usage analysis, and vendor-supplied statistics. Each provides a quantitative basis for deciding what to keep and what to discard.

Usage-based criteria are the most widely trusted. The time a resource sits between uses, often called its shelf-time period, is a practical signal: titles that have seen few uses over several years become candidates for weeding. Because these calculations can be automated, large collections can be reviewed efficiently. That said, data alone should not make the final call. A trained librarian still needs to judge whether a low-use title is a classic, a work of local interest, or the only copy available across a consortium, and therefore worth keeping despite the numbers.

Citation analysis brings a complementary view. While usage data shows what readers borrow or download, citation analysis reveals which journals scholars actually build their own research upon. This is decisive when two resources see similar usage but budget cuts force a choice. The journal that consistently drives an institution’s research output is the one that cannot be sacrificed, and citation data makes that case clearly.

Evaluating performance using informetrics

The third major application turns the lens onto the library itself. Informetrics helps assess how efficiently a library operates and how well its services reach users, making the whole system of information dissemination more effective.

Measuring service usage and value

Collection usage analysis does more than guide acquisitions; it measures performance. By revealing which resources are most used, it shows whether a library’s offerings match its community’s needs. A wide gap between what a library provides and what users actually use is a performance signal that calls for adjustment.

For electronic resources, the key performance metric is cost-per-use, calculated by dividing a resource’s annual cost by the number of times it is used. A high cost-per-use figure raises questions about value; a low one confirms a resource is earning its place. As cost-per-use analysis shows, this metric is central to deciding how funds are allocated across subscriptions, though it works best alongside other measures rather than as the sole criterion. A journal essential to a small but vital research group may have a high cost-per-use yet still be indispensable.

Combining multiple data sources

Robust evaluation rarely rests on one metric. Strong practice combines several streams of evidence. A collection development study at a health sciences library illustrates this well: librarians supplemented standard electronic usage reports with citation data drawn from a major database, comparing them against cost-per-use figures and interlibrary loan statistics. By looking at correlations and discrepancies across these sources, they built a fuller, more contextual picture of each journal’s value than any single number could provide.

This layered approach matters because each metric has blind spots. Usage statistics capture immediate demand but not scholarly influence. Citation analysis captures influence but lags behind current interest. Interlibrary loan data reveals unmet needs the existing collection does not satisfy. Together, they let a library evaluate its performance from several angles and respond with confidence.

Improving information dissemination

Ultimately, performance evaluation through informetrics aims to improve how information reaches users. When a library understands which resources are used, by whom, and for what purpose, it can refine its dissemination systems, promoting underused but valuable resources, redesigning access points that users struggle with, and reallocating effort toward services that demonstrably help. Informetrics provides the quantitative insight that makes evidence-based service improvement possible, replacing assumptions about user needs with measured understanding.

This evidence-based approach is increasingly relevant as more library activity moves online and generates rich digital data. The growing availability of this data gives information professionals abundant material for informetric study, and the practice continues to mature as new tools and standards emerge. What remains constant is the core principle: better measurement leads to better decisions, and better decisions lead to libraries that serve their users well.

What do you think? If your library had to choose between a journal with high download numbers and one that is heavily cited in research but rarely borrowed, which metric should carry more weight? And as more services move online, do you think usage data alone can capture the true value a library brings to its community?

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

References

PDF 📄

Table of Contents

Informetrics in library services 🔗

From data to decisions in resource allocation 🔗

Using informetrics for collection development 🔗

Evaluating resource usage 🔗

Identifying gaps in the collection 🔗

Assessing impact and weeding the collection 🔗

Evaluating performance using informetrics 🔗

Measuring service usage and value 🔗

Combining multiple data sources 🔗

Improving information dissemination 🔗