„Alte“ mobile Websites durch touchscreen-taugliche und leistungsstärkere ersetzt.
1. From User Studies to User Experience User-Centered Design of Next-Generation Catalogs and other Emerging Library Services Anne Christensen State and University Library Hamburg, Germany Digital Libraries à la Carte 2010 Tilburg University, The Netherlands, July 30
2. Agenda <ul><li>What and why: Next generation catalogs and user experience </li></ul><ul><li>Methods of user-centered design </li></ul><ul><li>Results from research in Hamburg and other projects </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusions and discussion </li></ul>
3. Additional „layers“ for discovery of catalog and other data. Integrated Library System Next generation catalog ACQ CAT OUS OPC
4. More than just some lipstick on the pig.
5. <ul><li>Which features do you connect with „next generation“ library services? </li></ul>
11. <ul><li>Homegrown next generation catalog </li></ul><ul><li>Technology: Solr, Catalyst, Starfish (metadata normalization) </li></ul><ul><li>Prototype stage </li></ul><ul><li>Development funded by local e-learning consortium </li></ul>http://beluga.sub.uni-hamburg.de
12. „ What I really like is that you actually involve people who are going to suffer from the system.“ Student in focus group for beluga, January 2009
13. Methods of user-centered design Focus groups Anthropological studies Usability Tests
14. Anthropological Studies (examples) Foster, Nancy F, and Susan Gibbons. Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester . Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries, 2007 Akselbo, Jeppe L. The Hybrid Library - from the Users' Perspective: A Report for the Deff Project "the Loaners' Expectations and Demands for the Hybrid Library" . Århus: Statsbiblioteket, 2006
15. Focus groups with both faculty and students, 35 participants, focus on reference management and social functionality students got paid 30 € for 2 hours Usability Tests for prototypes 0.5 and 0.7 15 students participated, got paid 20 € for 1 hour supported by Usability Lab at the Department of Information Science
16. „ Everything you always wanted to know about the catalog“ <ul><li>Making of the catalog </li></ul><ul><li>Who is entering the data? </li></ul><ul><li>Who decides what subject headings are used? </li></ul><ul><li>Comprehensiveness and delivery </li></ul><ul><li>Which libraries does the catalog cover? </li></ul><ul><li>What exactly does the catalog contain? Are articles included? </li></ul><ul><li>Will I find everything on my topic? </li></ul><ul><li>How do I obtain the books I want? </li></ul><ul><li>Search </li></ul><ul><li>Who decides how the results are sorted? </li></ul><ul><li>Are there any conventions for entering the name of an author? </li></ul><ul><li>How do I know if the term I used for searching was correct? </li></ul><ul><li>Not just a list </li></ul><ul><li>Why aren‘t books on the same topic linked to each other? </li></ul><ul><li>How do I know if this book is suitable for my paper? </li></ul><ul><li>How can I see if something is a good introduction to my topic? </li></ul>
17. Results and conclusions from our and other research Good synopsis of various studies! Dickey, Timothy J, and Lynn S. Connaway. The Digital Information Seeker: Report of the Findings from Selected Oclc, Rin, and Jisc User Behaviour Projects . Bristol, England: HEFCE, 2010.
18. 1/10 Students expect ready bibliographies. „ What I would like to see are lists of books for my topic.“
19. Best practice: Wiwi-Werkbank http://wiwi-werkbank.de/
22. beluga: drilldown „Genre“, but metadata is insufficient
23. 3/10 Users are sensitive to the neutrality of the catalog and the quality of its content.
24. Enrich carefully „ Please don‘t mash it up with Amazon book reviews and other information from commercial sites Studierende und Lehrende in beluga-Fokusgruppen „ Why pull all sorts of s**** into the catalog when you have a table of contents or a link to Google Book Search?“
25. 4/10 Students and faculty seek serendipity.
26. Best Practice: Shelf browsing http://www.opl.on.ca/
27. 5/10 Being like Google is very unfamiliar. „ Where is the advanced search?“
28. Best Practice: Simple interface with a „safety net“ http://yufind.library.yale.edu/yufind/
29. 6/10 Don‘t expect the catalog to become a social platform. „ Would rather write something about the book in Moodle“
30. Credit points or ILL-vouchers are no suitable incentive for creation of content.
31. Opinions of fellow students and professors do seem to matter.
32. The social stuff happens elsewhere.
33. Library catalogs as aggregators for user-generated content related to books etc.?
34. Best Practice: „Mini catalog“ with selected material and social features http://ub.meduniwien.ac.at/wpopac/
35. 7/10 Sharing lists and recommendations are highly controversial.
36. beluga: Sharing still pending
37. Sharing lists „ My lists are pretty intimate.“ „ I don‘t want to do all the work for people.“ Student and teacher in focus group for beluga, January 2009
38. Also controversial: Recommendations „ Professors are scarcely up to date“ Students in focus group for beluga, January 2009 „ I would like to know what my professor thinks about this book“
39. Shared lists and recommendations would be a good starting point for unexperienced searchers.
40. „ How do I know if I picked the right term?“ 8/10 Expectations regarding the „search experience“ are very high. „ Who decides how the results are sorted?
41. Give users feedback about their search terms Spell checking Autocompletion Faceted Browsing Integration of thesauri as Linked Open Data
42. Bibliographic data is not sufficient for powerful relevance ranking. Number of copies Circulation data Citations Publishers Usage in lists Impact Factor Download statistics
43. Helpful or patronizing?
44. Personalization might be an answer, but it‘s also controversial.
45. 9/10 Users want more electronic resources, but need easier access.
46. Best Practice: Include as much digital content as possible http://trove.nla.gov.au/
47. Best Practice: Limit search to material available online http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/catalog/
48. 10/10 Don‘t forget the delivery in all the discovery!
49. Best Practice: Visualization of available copies on a map http://libris.kb.se/
50. Summary <ul><li>Social features have not kept their promise so far. </li></ul><ul><li>There are ample possibilites for enhancements in discovery and delivery. </li></ul>
51. Discovery solutions: Wide variety of commercial and open source products
52. Next generation catalog: Hall of Fame Make Buy
53. http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcmarkie/315868918/ When did libraries stop to create their own tools?
54. It‘s time for disruption and diversity.
55. Next Generation Catalogs in Europe http://www.communitywalk.com/next_generation_catalogs_in_europe/next_generation_catalogs_in_europe/map/363838
61. Trust and quality are main concerns of researchers regarding 2.0 and open science tools. Procter, R.; Williams, R.; Stewart, J.: If you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use web 2.0. Research Information Network. 2010.
62. ...know where they fail.
63. How to cite? How to get it? How to ask? How to choose?
64. ... make sure to safe their time.
65. Integration with Course Management Systems
66. Integration with VREs http://www.sysmo-db.org/demo
67. Controversial: Need for library instruction
68. ...do something nice for them.
69. Mobile Services http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/m/about.html http://cf.uba.uva.nl/mobiel/ Mobile Site Application
70. Mobile Services Screenshots: Regina Pfeifenberger, InetBib2010
71. Mobile Services http://www.bsb-muenchen.de/Mobile-App-Famous-books-Tre.virtuelle-angebote-app.0.html http://mobil.uni-koeln.de Mobile: 5 catalog queries per day Website: 6642 catalog queries per day
72. Encourage feedback and participation.
73. Thank you! Anne Christensen [email_address] I am xenzen on Twitter & Slideshare
74. Recommended Reading <ul><li>Aalen, Ida: I've got Google, why do I need you? URL: http://www.slideshare.net/idaiskald/ive-got-google-why-do-i-need-you </li></ul><ul><li>Dickey, Timothy J. Connaway, Lynn S.: The Digital Information Seeker: Report of the Findings from Selected OCLC, Rin, and Jisc User Behaviour Projects. Bristol, England: HEFCE, 2010. URL: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2010/digitalinformationseekers.aspx </li></ul><ul><li>Foster, Nancy F., Gibbons, S.: Studying Students: The Undergraduate Research Project at the University of Rochester. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries, 2007. URL: http://docushare.lib.rochester.edu/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-4436 </li></ul><ul><li>Procter, R.; Williams, R.; Stewart, J.: If you build it, will they come? How researchers perceive and use web 2.0. Research Information Network. 2010. URL: http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/web_2.0_screen.pdf </li></ul><ul><li>Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., Williams, P.: Information behaviour of the researcher of the future - Executive summary. CIBER/JISC, 2007. URL: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/gg_final_keynote_11012008.pdf </li></ul><ul><li>User Experience: Weblog „Designing Better Libraries“: URL </li></ul>