Annals of Patron Behavior

I don't want to bother you by telling you
exactly what I need

A patron stands before your online catalog and types the following into the keyword search space: "Diagnosis of and treatments for knee pain and swelling on the left side of the kneecap," operating under the theory that the more keywords one provides, the more results one gets.

After his search produces nothing useful, his next stop is, of course, the reference desk, where his inquiry morphs into "Where are your books on health?"

It is a curious phenomenon: Faceless bots get told the need in exquisite detail, but human librarians receive only the most general of inquiries, often containing just the barest whiff of what the inquirer actually needs. What then follows is the "reference interview," in which the librarian attempts to extract the true need from the hesitant, if not resistant, patron.

Fans of the Fox show "House" know that Dr. Gregory House maintains that "all patients lie." Librarians have their own version of this: "Patrons may lie, and most would rather seize up and die in front of you than tell you what they need."

What the heck is going on here?

After a career at the reference desk, I can only postulate that it is psychologically difficult to appear before another human being as a supplicant. That human being may judge you, may be inwardly laughing at your question, or, worst of all, may think you are stupid for asking it. So best to keep the question as general and as innocuous as possible.

And quite a few also think that they, you know, don't want to bother us, having somehow missed the point that the sole purpose of a paid reference librarian is to be bothered.

So... much easier and less threatening to just type the inquiry into a faceless bot, which is incapable of forming any judgment about you.

Which is why reference is dead.

Google provides something we cannot: Anonymity. You can flail away in Google and no one will think you're perverted, laughable, or stupid. (Oh, I know that theoretically a transaction with Google can be traced back to an IP address, but for most all intents and purposes, Google offers anonymity. Besides, Google has promised us that they won't be evil.)

In addition to eliminating the need to appear before a fellow human being as a supplicant, Google offers the allure of do-it-yourself, the chance to thrash about in its universe on your own terms and on your own schedule. And most patrons think they are good searchers, just like most people think they are good drivers.

So reference is truly dead and will not be coming back.

One would think that Google, as it continually refines its search algorithms, could obtain something useful from the long, long experience of reference librarians. I have wondered if they have ever talked with a librarian, much less hired any to help in the effort. Or do they think that the methods and experience of librarians offer no insight into how people seek information?

I will ask them, and report back if I get an answer.