Next Generation Catalogs:  What Do Users Think?  Conclusions from the beluga Project Anne Christensen State and University...
Agenda <ul><li>Short introduction to NGCs </li></ul><ul><li>beluga – a German NGC project </li></ul><ul><li>Results and co...
The next generation catalog… - aka Catalog 2.0, 0PAC 2.0,  (social) discovery tool -
… improves searching & allows browsing
…  combines data from different sources
…  makes metadata re-usable – for machines and humans
… features user-generated metadata & content
... leverages new models for bibliographic data
…  offers user experience
Next Generation Catalogs  Hall of Fame Make Buy
Catalog 2.0 in Hamburg State and University Library Hamburg + 7 other libraries from the Hamburg area November 2007 – Octo...
Search interface indexed with Solr, normalization format: Dublin Core Google-like simplicity first stab at visualization
Results list Relevance ranking Facetted Browsing
Full view Similar titles Availability information from ILS Export to other platforms and in different formats Mashups
So, what do users think?
„ What I really like is that you actually involve people who are going to suffer from the system.“
Results from focus groups and usability tests
Create lists   Share lists „ My lists are pretty intimate!“   „ I don‘t want to do all  the work for people.“
Users want more metadata.
They seem to be waiting for FRBR (or something like it). „ Can‘t you just sort of put all those editions on one page?“
Mashup with Amazon „ Need to make up my own mind“  „ What really matters: The tables of content“
User-generated content „ Would only contribute on course website“ 
   Opinions of fellow students and professors matter.
  But: The social stuff happens elsewhere.
Library catalogs as aggregators?
They don‘t trust us to be like Google. „ Where is the advanced search button?“
„ How do I know if I picked the right term“ People have high expections regarding the „search experience“ „ Who defines ho...
Relevance Ranking Spell checking Controlled vocabulary    
Faculty and students seek serendipity.  „ I love finding stuff I wasn‘t looking for in the first place“
Facets New titles  Circulation statistics    
Students want to be given starting points for their subjects. „ Why isn‘t there some sort of pre-selected bibliography?“
Library catalogs as knowledge hubs. (Or even dating services)
Visualizations provide a better „User Experience“
Research from other projects shows similar results:
<ul><li>Personalization </li></ul><ul><li>Content Enrichment </li></ul><ul><li>User-Generated Content </li></ul><ul><li>Se...
Anyway: Rethinking the catalog is worth the effort.
Thank you! <ul><li>Anne Christensen </li></ul><ul><li>E:  [email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>W:  http:// beluga.sub.uni-ham...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Next Generation Catalogs: What do users think?

2,247 views

Published on

Talk given at the IFLA Satellite Meeting of the Information Technology Section: "Emerging trends in technology: libraries between Web 2.0, semantic web and search technology". Florence, August 19-20, 2009

Published in: Education
0 Comments
7 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,247
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
167
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
7
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • .
  • However enrichment of the catalog with metadata from Amazon bombed. We figured that people would be happy to see as much information as possible about a title, especially since studies showed that Amazon is the go-to place when looking for literature. But both students and faculty made a strong case for the neutrality of the catalog, accepting only „neutral“ information like ToCs and renouncing the inclusion of reviews from non-academic users.
  • Quite surprisingly, users in our usability tests complained about the simplicity of the user interface, specifically the lack of an advanced search interface. This still strikes us as very odd, seeing how seldomly the advanced search is used in our current catalog. But obviously it is very surprising for users to see such a simple interface for a library catalog. Yet when people started using the simple search, they quickly forgot about the advanced options because the drilldowns seemed to help them a lot.
  • Next Generation Catalogs: What do users think?

    1. 1. Next Generation Catalogs: What Do Users Think? Conclusions from the beluga Project Anne Christensen State and University Library Hamburg, Germany IFLA Satellite Meeting Emerging trends in technology Libraries between Web 2.0, semantic web and search technology Florence, August 20, 2009
    2. 2. Agenda <ul><li>Short introduction to NGCs </li></ul><ul><li>beluga – a German NGC project </li></ul><ul><li>Results and conclusions from user research </li></ul>
    3. 3. The next generation catalog… - aka Catalog 2.0, 0PAC 2.0, (social) discovery tool -
    4. 4. … improves searching & allows browsing
    5. 5. … combines data from different sources
    6. 6. … makes metadata re-usable – for machines and humans
    7. 7. … features user-generated metadata & content
    8. 8. ... leverages new models for bibliographic data
    9. 9. … offers user experience
    10. 10. Next Generation Catalogs Hall of Fame Make Buy
    11. 11. Catalog 2.0 in Hamburg State and University Library Hamburg + 7 other libraries from the Hamburg area November 2007 – October 2010 348.000 € grant from E-Learning Consortium Hamburg
    12. 12. Search interface indexed with Solr, normalization format: Dublin Core Google-like simplicity first stab at visualization
    13. 13. Results list Relevance ranking Facetted Browsing
    14. 14. Full view Similar titles Availability information from ILS Export to other platforms and in different formats Mashups
    15. 15. So, what do users think?
    16. 16. „ What I really like is that you actually involve people who are going to suffer from the system.“
    17. 17. Results from focus groups and usability tests
    18. 18. Create lists Share lists „ My lists are pretty intimate!“   „ I don‘t want to do all the work for people.“
    19. 19. Users want more metadata.
    20. 20. They seem to be waiting for FRBR (or something like it). „ Can‘t you just sort of put all those editions on one page?“
    21. 21. Mashup with Amazon „ Need to make up my own mind“  „ What really matters: The tables of content“
    22. 22. User-generated content „ Would only contribute on course website“ 
    23. 23.  Opinions of fellow students and professors matter.
    24. 24. But: The social stuff happens elsewhere.
    25. 25. Library catalogs as aggregators?
    26. 26. They don‘t trust us to be like Google. „ Where is the advanced search button?“
    27. 27. „ How do I know if I picked the right term“ People have high expections regarding the „search experience“ „ Who defines how the lists are sorted?“
    28. 28. Relevance Ranking Spell checking Controlled vocabulary   
    29. 29. Faculty and students seek serendipity. „ I love finding stuff I wasn‘t looking for in the first place“
    30. 30. Facets New titles Circulation statistics   
    31. 31. Students want to be given starting points for their subjects. „ Why isn‘t there some sort of pre-selected bibliography?“
    32. 32. Library catalogs as knowledge hubs. (Or even dating services)
    33. 33. Visualizations provide a better „User Experience“
    34. 34. Research from other projects shows similar results:
    35. 35. <ul><li>Personalization </li></ul><ul><li>Content Enrichment </li></ul><ul><li>User-Generated Content </li></ul><ul><li>Search Experience </li></ul><ul><li>Discovery </li></ul><ul><li>User Experience </li></ul><ul><li>Export Options </li></ul>      
    36. 36. Anyway: Rethinking the catalog is worth the effort.
    37. 37. Thank you! <ul><li>Anne Christensen </li></ul><ul><li>E: [email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>W: http:// beluga.sub.uni-hamburg.de </li></ul><ul><li>Links: http://delicious.com/christensen/ifla2009it </li></ul>

    ×