Reviews 267

This study pointed to a number of implications for schools. Signilicantly, “educational preparation was found to be a significant factor among the school librarians in this study” (p. 134). Because graduates of institutions accredited by the American Library Association made better application of the principles of intellectual freedom than graduates of state colleges and universities, the training offered in the state schools in this area needs review. School administrators influence selection and removal of sources, but neither they nor classroom teachers appear to have had training in the principles of intellectual freedom and how to apply them.

Murfin, Marjorie E., & Whitlach, Jo Bell (Eds.). Research in &$crerrce Effec%ivmm: l+vceedins of a Pmwnfmnce Sponsored by the Reseaach Stotistico copnmiltec, M~ondopemtionof~~servicessection,~f~eond~swices Division, American Libmry Ass- San Floncircq CblifM June 26j 1992 (RASD Occasional Papers, No. 16). Chicago, IL: American Library Association, 1993. 129 pp. $22.00 (RASD members); $25.00 (non-members) (ISBN O-8389-7704-9).

Reviewed by Bryce Allen, Associate Professor, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 501 E. Daniel, Champaign, IL 61820.

This volume of proceedings is valuable for presenting a variety of interesting approaches to reference effectiveness and for featuring a wide range of research methods. However, the quality of the papers varies substantially.

Danuta Nitecki’s qualitative study of online catalog effectiveness could serve as a model for naturalistic investigations of the reference environment. Her paper describes the method (interviews with catalog users) in detail and presents the findings in a summary form. Users emphasized the importance of ease of use in online catalogs and gave tantalizing suggestions of how systems could achieve greater usability. Unfortunately, due to restrictions imposed by the conference paper format, Nitecki could not present all of the rich data obtained from the study. More insight into user perspectives on OPACs would have been derived from a more discursive presentation of these data.

The paper on “Cognitive Processes of Reference Librarians” by Karen Williams, Janet S. Fore, and John M. Budd presents another in-depth study using protocols recording the comments of reference librarians who “thought aloud” while answering simulated reference questions. Despite the detail they obtained by using thii method, the authors were unable to discern patterns in the searches that they could attribute to particular cognitive processes. They note that individual diierences in, for example, personality can mask and confound common cognitive processes of, for example, problem-solving during reference work. Much additional research will be necessary before an understanding of the thought processes of reference workers can be achieved but this study provides an interesting starting point.

Experimental methods are well represented in these proceedings. Michael Havener’s study of the relative performance of print, ondisc, and online indexing and abstracting sources was well designed although readers may wish that he had used subjects from the general student body rather than library school students. The findings

268 Reviews

show that print sources outperformed electronic equivalents in precision but that the electronic sources were superior on other measures of efliciency and effectiveness. Helen Tibbo’s comparison of search strategies used a different experimental method to illuminate the complex interrelationship between strategies such as the use of synonyms to increase recall and the use of descriptors to improve precision. Tibbo presented preliminary results of sufficient interest to suggest that the detailed fmdings, when published, will provide more insights into search strategies for online databases.

John Richardson, Matthew Schall, and Nancy F. St&on presented their plan for an unobtrusive test of reference work that seems quite ambitious. They proposed varying the initial conditions of the reference process, in terms of the race and gender of the patron, and the emotional content of the question posed. If these conditions can be shown to affect reference accuracy we will have an additional insight into the nature of the reference process. Unfortunately, when this volume was prepared the authors had not yet begun data collection, so readers will have to wait for future publications to learn about their findings.

The remaining three papers tackled interesting topics, but in ways that make it difficult to have confidence in their findings. Sharon L. Bostick’s attempt to develop a quantitative scale to assess reference anxiety seems to have encountered problems in factor analysis. The paper did not provide enough details to assess the reliability of the resulting scale and questions of validity remain unanswered. Anna Donnelly based her physical environment checklist entirely on librarian perceptions, and, although she presents detailed descriptive statistics, there seems to be little that is original in the perceptions reported. Kathleen Gunning and Kimberly Spyers-Duran evaluated an “expert system” for suggesting reference sources, the Reference Expert developed at the University of Houston, but used only a user satisfaction survey. Although such surveys provide some useful information, they are of limited value in assessing system performance.

Overall, these research papers demonstrate a high level of competence in methods and a wide range of approaches to reference effectiveness. It is particularly interesting to see the inclusion of assessments of inputs (electronic tools, the physical environment, and the librarians themselves) as well as the more usual evaluation of outputs (accuracy and user satisfaction). The organizers of the preconference, and the editors of these proceedings, are to be commended for bringing together a worthwhile collection of research papers.

Shneiderman, Ben (Ed.). S&T&S of Innovcrtion in Human Gmputer Intemction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1993. 400 pp. $54.95 (cloth, ISBN l-56750-078-1); $24.95 (paper, ISBN: 1-56750-079-X).

Reviewed by Andrew Dillon, Research Fellow, HUSAT Research Institute, Loughborough University of Technology, England.

Human-computer interaction (HCI) is a rapidly developing field addressing the design, evaluation, and use of information technology from the user’s perspective. Growing out of ergonomics’ concern with system design in general and computer science’s realization that the information revolution was stumbling for human rather than