Federated Searching: User Perceptions, System Design, and Library Instruction

Transcription

1 Federated Searching: User Perceptions, System Design, and Library Instruction Rong Tang (Organizer & Presenter) Graduate School of Library and Information Science, Simmons College, 300 The Fenway, Boston, MA Ingrid Hsieh-Yee (Organizer & Moderator) Catholic University of America, School of Library and Information Science, Washington, DC David Lindahl University of Rochester. Rush Rhees Library, Rochester, NY Karen S. Groves Ex Libris, Inc. 313 Washington Street, Suite 308, Newton, MA Lynn D. Lampert Reference and Instructional Services, California State University at Northridge. Oviatt Library, Northridge, CA The Google Phenomenon has fostered a generation of users who are accustomed to searching for information across a variety of sources all at once. Some professional librarians believe that the federated search system interface enables users to search library catalogs, subscription databases, e-journals, and other digital repositories in a way that is similar to Google and other search engines (Miller, 2004; Fryer, 2004; Cervone, 2005). While the cross-database searching capability presents a powerful one-stop shopping solution, it may also promote a simplistic search mentality that values quick retrieval of full-text documents and lowers users" interest in conducting more sophisticated searches or understanding what sources their searches are running against (Frost, 2004; Curtis & Dorner, 2005). It is critical for librarians to keep in mind that the

2 operational model of federated searching is different from that of Google in multiple aspects. At the minimum, library users of federated searching need to select a set of databases under a subject area to start the search (Cervone, 2005). Unfortunately, as Cervone (2005) has indicated, currently users are not equipped with a built-in mental model of federated searching. As a result, librarians face great challenges in incorporating federated searching into reference services and teaching patrons to make use of federated search systems effectively. The purpose of this panel is to explore various aspects of federated searching systems, including user perceptions of how federated search systems work, how libraries use such systems to support user research, how libraries prepare users to take advantage of such systems, and how to design user-centered federated search systems. Tang is an assistant professor at the Graduate School of Library and Information Science, Simmons College, and Hsieh-Yee is a professor at the School of Library and Information Science, Catholic University of America. Both of them have substantial experience in studying users mental models and search behaviors. They will present findings on user perceptions of MetaLib Combined Search. As the Director of Digital Library Initiatives at University of Rochester Libraries, Lindahl has managed the development of four generations of user interfaces for metasearch products. He has extensive experience with and has presented multiple projects on User-Centered Design. He will describe the development of a metasearch program to facilitate two clicks to full-text. Groves is the Product Manager of MetaLib, a metasearch system developed by Ex Libris. As an integral part of Ex Libris user-oriented development process, she works closely with customer user groups, focus groups, and advisory panels. She will present a vendor s perspective on the design of user-oriented search systems. Lampert is the Chair of Reference and Instructional Services and the Coordinator of Information Literacy at California State University at Northridge. She has both led national workshops and published multiple articles on information literacy. She will discuss her views on the relevance of federated search skills to information literacy standards and library instructions. User Perception of MetaLib Combined Search Rong Tang & Ingrid Hsieh-Yee We will report on an investigation of users perceptions of MetaLib Combined Search, a federated search system implemented in the Washington Research Library Consortium (WRLC). Two groups of users participated in the study: Professional reference librarians from selected WRLC universities and MLS students from the School of Library and Information Science (SLIS) of the Catholic University of America (CUA). We collected data through a survey that contained questions about user background, experience with MetaLib, and opinions about federated searches, and a series of screen shots that

3 simulated a MetaLib "Combined Search" session. The simulation was designed to probe participants" understanding of how MetaLib processed search requests and presented search results. Participants provided a description of their understanding of MetaLib and drew a sketch to illustrate it. They also identified areas and elements of MetaLib that were not clear to them and, in the case of reference librarians, the knowledge and skills related to federated searches they would cover in user education or library instruction. A model of MetaLib provided by an expert from the WRLC system served as the reference for comparing and contrasting the perceptions of reference librarians and student users. This research is the first in a series of studies designed to investigate people s perceptions of federated search systems and related usability issues. Our goal is to provide recommendations for interface design of federated search systems and information literacy education about federated search systems. Questions to be raised for panel or audience In what ways are federated search systems useful to users? What areas of federated search systems need to be improved in order to facilitate high precision retrieval initiated by relatively unsophisticated information requests? Anything that is surprising to you in our findings on the differences between librarians perceptions of federated searching and those of student users? What do we need to teach users for them to use federated search systems effectively? What is the mental model needed for users to make effective use of federated search systems? Metasearch: Two Clicks to Full-Text David Lindahl The University of Rochester, River Campus Libraries is focused on solving the problem of serial failure. This refers to the inability of the average undergraduate to successfully find scholarly article content on an academic library website. When library users search in the wrong library search engine or enter a query without the necessary precision, accuracy, and limits, they do not get useful results. Most students have the perception that they are skilled searchers. They are always able to find useful results on Google. This leads many students to believe that Google has more content to offer than the library. Libraries have better content than Google alone can provide, but library user interfaces lead patrons to believe the opposite is true. The availability of metasearch software alone is not sufficient to solve serial failure. Most user interfaces provided by vendors are difficult to use without training. At Rochester, a number of changes have been made to address the serial failure

4 problem. The River Campus Libraries have begun to engage in activities such as work practice study, user-centered design, and software development as a part of our continuing mission. As a result of these activities, the Libraries have designed new software that helps undergraduate users to find articles without any training. As with Google, our Find Articles user interface offers the ability to get to full-text content with only two-clicks. Users enter keywords into a box, and click submit without picking databases, subjects, or a search type. They just search a pre-selected set of sources. We improve on the pre-selected sources by embedding search boxes on other parts of the library website. For example, a search box on a course-specific page searches databases related to that course. After a search is submitted, a merged results list is displayed with key metadata for identification and selection. We eliminated the item page, which is a page that displays metadata for a single result, from the user s pathway. When the user clicks on an item of interest, the full text article is displayed. If full-text is not available, the user will see either local-holdings information with a map, or a pre-filled interlibrary loan form. OpenURL technology is used, but this eliminates the typical OpenURL menu of full-text choices that most users don t care about. Our system also eliminates many of the dead-end pathways that can result from native database changes and knowledgebase errors. Questions to be raised for panel or audience: Metasearch improves the usability of subscription databases by providing a single interface. How do you persuade librarians to accept the tradeoff of precision and comprehensiveness that can often result? Would metasearch interfaces benefit if times-cited and historic usage information were incorporated into the calculation of ranking in a results list? What technologies are needed to automate the database selection process? What obstacles exist to the application of the FRBR data model to metadata retrieved from databases in a metasearch? In what ways do libraries, with their vast collections of fielded metadata, have an advantage over Google, and how can we deliver that advantage to our users? In what ways can user-generated metadata (such as reviews, and tagging) be integrated into metasearch? The Role of Search Tools in Information Seeking by Users: The Ex Libris Perspective Karen Groves Federated searching poses many challenges for vendors, librarians, and end-users alike,

5 beginning with an understanding of basic terminology. What is federated searching? What is metasearching? Are they the same or different? After providing an overview of these basic concepts, focus will be placed on how metasearch tools such as MetaLib differ from federated search tools such as Google Scholar and search engines such as Google. Each type of search tool provides advantages and disadvantages for the user, including what types of information can be accessed, how the search is processed, and how the search results are retrieved and processed for effective display to the user. Encompassing all aspects of the search process is the user interface of the search tool. How do vendors approach user-oriented design of their search interfaces? Factors that influenced Ex Libris design of MetaLib s user interface will be presented, as well as current and future search trends that influence our continued development of MetaLib. Examples of customer implementations of MetaLib will highlight the flexibility of our application in meeting the unique user expectations of our customers. Suggested best practices will be summarized based on customer implementations of MetaLib, as well as suggestions for successful implementation of a metasearch tool. Questions to be raised for panel or audience How can federated search tools, metasearch tools, and search engines help your users meet their information needs more effectively? And, can one tool meet all of the information-seeking needs of your users, or is a more effective model offering a variety of search tools to meet different information needs? What are the latest trends in user-oriented searching? How closely do these trends mirror your own users, and how should they influence your implementation of search tools? How is Ex Libris responding to these trends in the on-going development of MetaLib and our other products? Federated Searching - Will One Search Box Meet Every Need? Lynn Lampert In 2004 California State University implemented a metasearch/portal tool from Ex Libris (Metalib) that utilizes federated search technology to provide students with a single search interface for their research needs. Since our implementation we have studied how this new form of searching has impacted the user, librarian and library instruction program s ability to deliver information literacy instruction. After providing an overview of our implementation experience, focus will be placed on how both librarians (within and outside our university) and students view this addition to their research arsenal. Survey results of librarian reactions to federated searching tools and their role in information literacy instruction will be reviewed. By examining ACRL s Information Literacy Standards

6 for Higher Education s relationships to the instructional needs involved in presenting federated search tools, and how the literature views the emergence of these new information retrieval interfaces, the challenges of successful integrations of federated search products bring to existing library instructional programming will be summarized. Questions to be raised for panel or audience How/do federated search technologies improve student information literacy skills? How should federated searching be incorporated into library services and information literacy instruction? What do mixed reactions of librarians and students reveal about the future of federated searching and information literacy instructional needs? References Cervone, F. (2005) What we ve learned from doing usability testing on OpenURL resolvers and federated search engines Computers in Libraries 25(9), Curtis, A. M. & Dorner, D. G. (2005) Why Federated Search? Knowledge Quest 33(3), Frost, W. J. (2004) Do we want or need metasearching? Library Journal 129(6), 68 Fryer, D. (2004) Federated search Online 28(2), Miller, T. (2004) Federated Searching: Put it in its place Library Journal 1976, 32