Evaluation of a personalized digital library based on cognitive styles: Adaptivity vs. adaptability

Personalization can be addressed by adaptability and adaptivity, which have different advantages and disadvantages. This study investigates how digital library (DL) users react to these two techniques. More specifically, we develop a personalized DL to suit the needs of different cognitive styles based on the findings of our previous work [Frias-Martinez, E., Chen, S. Y., & Liu, X. (2008) Investigation of behavior and perception of digital library users: A cognitive style perspective. International Journal of Information Management]. The personalized DL includes two versions: adaptive version and adaptable version. The results showed that users not only performed better in the adaptive version, but also they perceived more positively to the adaptive version. In addition, cognitive styles have great effects on users' responses to adaptability and adaptivity. These results provide guidance for designers to select suitable techniques to develop personalized DLs.

[1]  Johan Bollen,et al.  MyLibrary, A Personalization Service for Digital Library Environments , 2001, DELOS.

[2]  Alfred Kobsa,et al.  A Review and Analysis of Commercial User Modeling Servers for Personalization on the World Wide Web , 2000, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[3]  Shu-Sheng Liaw,et al.  An investigation of user attitudes toward search engines as an information retrieval tool , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[4]  Alan F. Smeaton,et al.  Personalisation and recommender systems in digital libraries , 2005, International Journal on Digital Libraries.

[5]  Anthony Jameson,et al.  Pros and Cons of Controllability: An Empirical Study , 2002, AH.

[6]  R. Riding,et al.  Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies , 2013 .

[7]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Information seeking and mediated searching. Part 4. Cognitive styles in information seeking , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[8]  Ann Blandford,et al.  From physical to digital: a case study of computer scientists’ behaviour in physical libraries , 2004, International Journal on Digital Libraries.

[9]  Nigel Ford,et al.  Web search strategies and human individual differences: Cognitive and demographic factors, Internet attitudes, and approaches: Research Articles , 2005 .

[10]  Melody Y. Ivory,et al.  Evolution of web site design patterns , 2005, TOIS.

[11]  Xiaohui Liu,et al.  Investigation of behavior and perception of digital library users: A cognitive style perspective , 2008, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[12]  David Miller,et al.  Web search strategies and human individual differences: Cognitive and demographic factors, Internet attitudes, and approaches , 2005, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[13]  Vasileios Hatzivassiloglou,et al.  Leveraging a common representation for personalized search and summarization in a medical digital library , 2003, 2003 Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, 2003. Proceedings..

[14]  David A. Tyckoson.  What's Right with Reference. , 1999 .

[15]  Kathryn F. Cochran,et al.  An information processing view of field dependence‐independence∗ , 1989 .

[16]  Joanna McGrenere,et al.  A comparison of static, adaptive, and adaptable menus , 2004, CHI.

[17]  Ken Winter.  MyLibrary can help your library , 1999 .

[18]  Nancy A. Vanhouse,et al.  Digital Library Use: Social Practice in Design and Evaluation , 2003 .

[19]  Pankoo Kim,et al.  A Comparison of Web Searching Strategies According to Cognitive Styles of Elementary Students , 2004, ICCSA.

[20]  Kent L. Norman,et al.  Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface , 1988, CHI '88.

[21]  Judy Kay,et al.  Learner Control , 2001, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[22]  Umberto Straccia,et al.  The Personalized, Collaborative Digital Library Environment CYCLADES and Its Collections Management , 2003, Distributed Multimedia Information Retrieval.

[23]  D. Goodenough.  The role of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in learning and memory. , 1975, Psychological bulletin.

[24]  Monica M. C. Schraefel,et al.  Usable adaptive hypermedia systems , 2004, New Rev. Hypermedia Multim..

[25]  Richard Riding,et al.  Cognitive style, gender and learning from multi-media materials in 11-year-old children , 1999, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[26]  Carolena L. Lyons-Lawrence.  Effect of Learning Style on Performance in Using Computer-Based Instruction in Office Systems , 1994 .

[27]  Kyung-Sun Kim,et al.  Cognitive style and on-line database search experience as predictors of Web search performance , 2000, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[28]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Information-seeking and mediated searching. Part 1. Theoretical framework and research design , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[29]  Ann Blandford,et al.  Digital Libraries in Academia: Challenges and Changes , 2002, ICADL.

[30]  Holly Mistlebauer,et al.  MyLibrary: Personalized Electronic Services in the Cornell University Library , 2000, D Lib Mag..

[31]  Sherry Y. Chen.  The Relationships between Individual Differences and the Quality of Learning Outcomes in Web-based Instruction , 2002 .

[32]  Barbara P. Buttenfield,et al.  The People in Digital Libraries: Multifaceted Approaches to Assessing Needs and Impact , 2003 .

[33]  James R. Lewis,et al.  IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: Psychometric evaluation and instructions for use , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[34]  Eileen Scanlon,et al.  How gender influences learners working collaboratively with science simulations , 2000 .

[35]  Maria Madlberger,et al.  Evaluating personalization and customization from an ethical point of view: an empirical study , 2004, 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[36]  Judi Repman,et al.  The Relationship of Learning, Behavior, and Cognitive Style in Hypermedia-Based Instruction: Implications for Design of HBI , 1995, Planning Continuing Professional Development.

[37]  Nigel Ford,et al.  Cognitive styles and virtual environments , 2000, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[38]  Kellogg S. Booth,et al.  An evaluation of a multiple interface design solution for bloated software , 2002, CHI.

[39]  C. A. Moore,et al.  Field-Dependent and Field-Independent Cognitive Styles and Their Educational Implications , 1977 .

[40]  Chien Chou,et al.  Navigation Maps in a Computer-Networked Hypertext Learning System. , 1997 .

[41]  Judith C. Reiff.  At-Risk Middle Level Students or Field Dependent Learners?. , 1996 .