“make it as easy as a google book search.” learning how to make the catalog usable

“Make it as easy as a Google Book Search.”

Learning how to make the catalog usable

“Make it as easy as a Google Book Search.”

Learning how to make the catalog usable

Presented by

Lynn Silipigni Connaway,

Ph.D.

Senior Research Scientist

OCLC Research

Cataloging and Beyond: The Year of Cataloging ResearchALA Annual ConferenceJune 27, 2010

The Digital Information Seeker: Report of findings from selected OCLC, JISC & RIN User Behaviour Projects

The Digital Information Seeker: Report of findings from selected OCLC, JISC & RIN User Behaviour Projects

•Funded by JISC

•Analysis of 12 user behaviour studies

•Conducted in US and UK

•Published within last 5 years

•Synthesis

• Better understand user information-seeking behaviour

• Identify issues for development of user-focused services and systems

“The majority of researchers in all disciplines have adapted readily to the widespread availability of digital content, accessible directly from their desktops.”

(Consortium of University Research Libraries, and Research Information Network. 2007. Researchers' use of academic libraries and their services: A

report. London: Research Information Network and Consortium of University Research Libraries (CURL), p. 23)

Common Findings:User BehaviorsCommon Findings:User Behaviors


•Convenience dictates choice between physical & virtual library

•Very little time using content

•“Squirreling” of downloads

•Prefer quick chunks of information

•Visit only a few minutes

•Use basic search

•Use snippets from e-books

•View only a few pages

•Short visits

•Simple searching of Google-like interfaces

•Power browsing

•Value human resources


Common Findings:The LibraryCommon Findings:The Library

•= Collections of books

•Desire Selective Dissemination of Information (SDI)

•More digital content = Better

•Used for research

•Use library less since began using Internet

Common Findings:The LibraryCommon Findings:The Library

•Criticize physical library & traditional services

•Faculty praise physical collection

•Electronic databases not perceived as library sources

•Frustration with locating and accessing full-text copies

Common Findings:User Literacy SkillsCommon Findings:User Literacy Skills

• Information literacy skills

•Lacking

•Not kept pace with digital literacy

•Researchers self-taught & confident

Common Findings:The WebCommon Findings:The Web

•Search engine first choice

•Starting point

•Easy and convenient to use

•Quick searches to become familiar with subjects

•Rate search engines better lifestyle fit than libraries

•Trust Google to understand

Common Findings:The SearchCommon Findings:The Search

•Search strategies differ by context

•Database interfaces hinder access

•Desire enhanced functionality & content to evaluate resources

•Prefer natural language

Common Findings:The CatalogCommon Findings:The Catalog

•Value databases & other online sources

•Do not understand what resources available in libraries

•Cannot distinguish between databases held by a library & other online sources


Library OPACs difficult to use

“I wish the results page would list a short blurb (one line) about the book similar to the way Google shows you a tiny bit about what a site link is about.”

(Calhoun, Karen, et al. 2009. Online catalogs: What users and librarians want: An OCLC report. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC, p. 17)

“Make the library catalog more like search engines.”

(Connaway, Lynn Silipigni, Chandra Prabha, and Timothy J. Dickey. 2006. Sense-making the information confluence: The whys and hows of college

and university user satisficing of information needs. Phase III: Focus group interview study. Report on National Leadership Grant LG-02-03-0062-03, to

Institute of Museum and Library Services, Washington, D.C. Columbus, Ohio: School of Communication, The Ohio State University, p. 16)


“The end user’s experience of the delivery of wanted items is as important, if not more important, than his or her discovery experience.”

(Calhoun, Karen, et al. 2009. Online catalogs: What users and librarians want: An OCLC report.

Dublin, Ohio: OCLC p. v)


•Search behaviors vary by discipline

•Desire seamless process from D2D

•Sciences most satisfied

•Social Sciences & Arts & Humanities have serious gaps

•Foreign language materials

•Multi-author collections

• Journal back files

•Lack of specialist search engines


•“Refine down” from large result lists

•More full-text digital content


•Make results obviously relevant

•Catalog should contain helps for navigation & evaluation of sources

•“Use weighting in the search algorithm.”

• Expect enhanced content• Provide advanced search

option & facets• Mixed reaction of social

features

(Calhoun, Karen, et al. 2009. Online catalogs: What users and librarians want: An OCLC report. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC, p.

14)


“It is very clear that Google has emerged as a real force in the accessing and discovery of research content which is rivalling university library catalogues.”

(Hampton-Reeves, Stuart, Claire Mashiter, Jonathan Westaway, Peter Lumsden, Helen Day, Helen

Hewerston, and Anna Hart. 2009. Students’ use of research content in teaching and learning: A report of

the Joint Information Systems Council (JISC), p. 30)

Common Findings:MetadataCommon Findings:Metadata

• Satisfactory information search

• Quality of information

• “Worthwhile” information

• Quality metadata essential for

discovery

• Inadequately cataloged resources

result in underuse

Common Findings:MetadataCommon Findings:Metadata

• Library ownership of sources essential data

element

• Differences exist between the catalog data quality

priorities of users & librarians

Contradictory FindingsContradictory Findings

•“Google generation” claims may not be supported

•Search engine speed may not be most important

•Little support for library OPAC advanced search options & social features

Transaction Log Analysis: WorldCat.org and First Search Interfaces

Transaction Log Analysis: WorldCat.org and First Search Interfaces

Types of Search

WorldCat.org Types of Search

FirstSearch

All indexes

29.82% Keyword 32.58%

ISBN 22.51% Title 26.50%

Author 7.54% Author 15.16%

Language 6.05% DocType 8.98%

Subject 5.24% Publication Date

3.13%

Title 3.81% Subject 2.19%

Transaction Log Analysis:WorldCat.org and First Search Interfaces


Results Sets WorldCat.org FirstSearch

Results=0 7.69% 13.40%

Results=1 32.77% 25.46%

Results=2-10 19.23% 32.51%

Results=11-30 7.29% 10.53%

Results=31-60 5.31% 5.65%



Results Sets WorldCat.org FirstSearch

Results 1-30 51.28% 68.50%

Results >30 33.04% 18.10%

Results >1000 10.36% 1.55%

Results >1,000,000

0.08% 0.01%

Transaction Log Analysis:Failed (0-hit) searchesTransaction Log Analysis:Failed (0-hit) searches

WorldCat.org FirstSearch

Typo 140 (27%) 83.5 (16%)

Wrong Field 14.5 (3%) 58 (11%)

Improper term or syntax 64 (12%) 46 (9%)

Incorrect term or too many terms

66.5 (13%) 109.5 (21%)

Seems ok 60 (11%) 56 (11%)

Other 5 (1%) 21 (4%)

Item not in database? 161.5 (31%) 147.5 (28%)

Not a bibliographic question 13.5 (3%) 2.5 (0%)

ConclusionsConclusions

• Simple searches & power browsing

• “Squirreling” of downloads

• Natural language

• Convenience very important

• Human resources valued

• D2D of full-text digital content desired

• Transparency of ranking results

• Evaluative information included in catalog

• More robust metadata

Implications for LibrariesImplications for Libraries

•Serve different constituencies

•Adapt to changing user behaviors

•Offer services in multiple formats

•Provide seamless access to digital content

•Create metadata based on user needs

•Advertise resources, brand, & value

“Who has the most scientific knowledge of large-scale organization, collection, and access to information? Librarians! A librarian can take a book, put it somewhere, and then guarantee to find it again.”

Peter Bol, Carswell Professor of East Asian Languages & Civilization

(Shaw, Jonathan. 2010. Gutenberg: Harvard’s libraries deal with disruptive change. Harvard Magazine, May-June, p. 36.)

Implications for Library SystemsImplications for Library Systems

•Build on & integrate search engine features

•Provide search help at time of need

•Chat & IM help during search

•Adopt user-centered development approach

Future ResearchFuture Research

•Development of a physical/virtual resource allocation model

•Roles of social networking, mobile technology, & texting

•Longitudinal user behavior study

•How individuals engage in both virtual and physical worlds

•How individuals navigate in multiple information environments

•Why people make their information choices

End NotesEnd Notes

Connaway, L.S., & Dickey, T.J. (2010). Towards a profile of the researcher of today: The digital information seeker: Report of findings from selected OCLC, RIN, and JISC user behavior projects. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/reports/2010/digitalinformationseekerreport.pdf

Funded by JISC

Project Web Site URL:

http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2010/digitalinformationseekers.aspx

Questions & CommentsQuestions & Comments

Lynn Silipigni Connaway

[email protected]

“make it as easy as a google book search.” learning how to make the catalog usable

Documents

user information

report of findings

user behaviorscommon

understandcommon findings

internetcommon findings

development of user

research information

text copiescommon findings