Use and usability in a digital library search system

Digital libraries must reach out to users from all walks of life, serving information needs at all levels. To do this, they must attain high standards of usability over an extremely broad audience. This paper details the evolution of one important digital library component as it has grown in functionality and usefulness over several years of use by a live, unrestricted community. Central to its evolution have been user studies, analysis of use patterns, and formative usability evaluation. We extrapolate that all three components are necessary in the production of successful digital library systems.

[1]  Christine L. Borgman,et al.  Why Are Online Catalogs Still Hard to Use? , 1996, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[2]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Study of Interactive Feedback During Mediated Information Retrieval , 1997, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[3]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  Indexing and Access for Digital Libraries and the Internet: Human, Database, and Domain Factors , 1998, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[4]  H. Rex Hartson,et al.  Developing user interfaces: ensuring usability through product & process , 1993 .

[5]  Patty Curthoys,et al.  Developing user interfaces: Ensuring usability through product and process , 1997 .

[6]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  Cases, scripts, and information-seeking strategies: On the design of interactive information retrieval systems , 1995 .

[7]  Shan-Ju L. Chang,et al.  Taking account of User Tasks, Goals and Behavior for the Design of Online Public Access Catalogs , 1990 .

[8]  Raya Fidel,et al.  Moves in online searching , 1985 .

[9]  Kenton O'Hara,et al.  Student readers' use of library documents: implications for library technologies , 1998, CHI.

[10]  Edward A. Fox,et al.  Envision: a user-centered database of computer science literature , 1995, CACM.

[11]  Paul B. Kantor,et al.  A study of information seeking and retrieving. I. background and methodology , 1988 .

[12]  Christine L. Borgman,et al.  Why are Online Catalogs Hard to Use? Lessons Learned from Information=Retrieval Studies , 1986 .

[13]  Edward A. Fox,et al.  Visualizing search results: some alternatives to query-document similarity , 1996, SIGIR '96.

[14]  John T. Kelso,et al.  Remote evaluation: the network as an extension of the usability laboratory , 1996, CHI.

[15]  Edward A. Fox,et al.  Development of a modern OPAC: from REVTOLC to MARIAN , 1993, SIGIR.

[16]  Kenton O'Hara,et al.  A diary study of work-related reading: design implications for digital reading devices , 1998, CHI.

[17]  David M. Levy,et al.  I read the news today, oh boy: reading and attention in digital libraries , 1997, DL '97.

[18]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface , 1989 .

[19]  Gary Marchionini.  Information Seeking in Full-Text End-User-Oriented Search Systems: The Roles of Domain and Search Expertise , 1993 .

[20]  Stephen E. Robertson,et al.  Large Test Collection Experiments on an Operational, Interactive System: Okapi at TREC , 1995, Inf. Process. Manag..

[21]  Deborah Hix,et al.  Visualizing Search Results: User Interface Development for the Project Envision Database of Computer Science Literature , 1993, HCI.