You are here: EDINA > About EDINA > Benefits of Services > SUNCAT 2012/2013

SUNCAT 2012/2013

EDINA undertook a survey of SUNCAT between November 2012 and January 2013. A link to the survey was available on the SUNCAT login page. The survey was not compulsory for users.

Sixty-two responses were received. A summary of the results is presented here:

Uptake by discipline, role and purpose

Role

Of the 62 respondents most of them, 90%, identified themselves as Library/Information Professionals. A further 7% identified themselves as Researchers and 3% as Students.

Discipline

Seventy-three percent of respondents reported working across more one than one subject area, with a large number working across a wide range of disciplines. Of the responses falling under ‘Other’, a significant percentage stated that their use of SUNCAT was library work and multi-discipline. These results reflect the high number of respondents who identified themselves as information professionals (see above), who often work in a multi-disciplinary environment.

Perceived quality of information (relevance, coverage and usefulness)

Almost all of the respondents, 97%, indicated that they would recommend SUNCAT to others. The main reasons reported for recommending SUNCAT are displayed in the following chart.

• “SUNCAT is easy to use and its coverage of UK serial holdings is great.”
• “Very trustworthy, fast and comprehensive. Records are to a very high standard.”
• “Whenever new ILL librarians ask about how to locate journals in the UK I point them towards SUNCAT because it is comprehensive and easy to use.”
• “Very easy to use; clear, accurate records; time-saving as don't have to search numerous catalogues or databases to locate a library which holds a particular journal.”

Two respondents indicated that they would not recommend SUNCAT. One reported that they didn’t find it necessary as the British Library provides a document delivery service for articles and the other stated that they didn’t find the service useful for locating older serials.

Perceived ease of use

The majority of respondents, 86% reported that SUNCAT was either “Easy” or “Very Easy” to use. Only one respondent indicated that the service was “Difficult” to use.

Perceived cost and or time saving

Eighty-nine per cent of respondents either “Agreed” or “Strongly Agreed” that their work would take longer without SUNCAT. Only 1% reported that their work would not take longer.

The main reasons reported as to how or why SUNCAT saved respondents’ time included:

• That it provides an aggregation of serials information and holdings in one source
• That it provides comprehensive coverage and an overview of collections across the UK research community
• The speed and ease of use of the interface compared to similar services
• That it provides reliable and quality information and serials records for creating or upgrading local catalogue records
• That it is a dedicated source of serials information
• That it distinguishes between print and electronic holdings

• “Best site for UK national aggregation of serials holdings data”
• “I'd be searching in more than one place which would take longer. Plus SUNCAT gives a picture across the research landscape of holdings and specialisms which is very useful.”
• “I'm an inter-library loans librarian and you're my first port of call when looking for articles from journals which British Library is unable to supply. Your coverage is better than COPAC and SUNCAT is easier to browse.”
• “It is such a comprehensive reference source it would take me much longer to check information elsewhere.”
• “I am the journals library assistant, charged with upgrading our serials records - SUNCAT is an invaluable one-stop shop. I also use it for locating article requests for inter-library loan - the interface is much speedier than COPAC.”

Alternative services if SUNCAT were not available

Sixty-six per cent of respondents indicated that they would need to use an alternative service if SUNCAT was not available. A further 32% did not know of a suitable alternative.

The most popular alternatives listed included:

• COPAC
• OCLC/WorldCat/FirstSearch
• British Library
• Search25
• Individual library catalogues
• Library of Congress
• SALSER
• ARLIS
• British Union Catalogue of Music Periodicals
• Google
• Other unspecified union catalogues or lists

• “Find SUNCAT invaluable. If it wasn't available I would try to source an alternative. Don't know what though!”
• “COPAC, LOC etc. not comparable though in depth or accuracy.”
• “We also use Copac - more difficult to use than SUNCAT and the display is inferior. However, if there was an alternative, I would indeed use that probably in addition to Suncat to verify the accuracy of the results.”