Traditionally users access their personal files mainly by using folder navigation. We evaluate whether recent improvements in desktop search have changed this fundamental aspect of Personal Information Management (PIM). We tested this in two studies using the same questionnaire: (a) The Windows Study-a longitudinal comparison of Google Desktop and Windows XP Search Companion, and (b) The Mac Study-a large scale comparison of Mac Spotlight and Sherlock.There were few effects for improved search. First, regardless of search engine, there was a strong navigation preference: on average, users estimated that they used navigation for 56-68% of file retrieval events but searched for only 4-15% of events. Second, the effect of improving the quality of the search engine on search usage was limited and inconsistent. Third, search was used mainly as a last resort when users could not remember file location. Finally, there was no evidence that using improved desktop search engines leads people to change their filing habits to become less reliant on hierarchical file organization. We conclude by offering theoretical explanations for navigation preference, relating to differences between PIM and Internet retrieval, and suggest alternative design directions for PIM systems.

Users' preferences for folders versus tags was studied in 2 working environments where both options were available to them. In the Gmail study, we informed 75 participants about both folder-labeling and tag-labeling, observed their storage behavior after 1 month, and asked them to estimate the proportions of different retrieval options in their behavior. In the Windows 7 study, we informed 23 participants about tags and asked them to tag all their files for 2 weeks, followed by a period of 5 weeks of free choice between the 2 methods. Their storage and retrieval habits were tested prior to the learning session and, after 7 weeks, using special classification recording software and a retrieval-habits questionnaire. A controlled retrieval task and an in-depth interview were conducted. Results of both studies show a strong preference for folders over tags for both storage and retrieval. In the minority of cases where tags were used for storage, participants typically used a single tag per information item. Moreover, when multiple classification was used for storage, it was only marginally used for retrieval. The controlled retrieval task showed lower success rates and slower retrieval speeds for tag use. Possible reasons for participants' preferences are discussed.

In a previous work we tested users' preferences with systems that allow to store and retrieve information either using tags or folders. In the current study we asked participants sampled from the same population about their attitudes towards tags by using a questionnaire (N = 168). We then compared the results regarding attitudes gathered in this study with the ones testing actual behavior gathered in our previous one. Overall, results showed positive attitudes towards tagging and multiple classification. These finding are in sharp contrast with our previous behavioral study which showed clear preference for folders and single classification: Our participants tended to agree with statements such as "most people use folders only due to habits", "if users were taught to use tags they would prefer them over folders", and "In 20 years children born today will use mostly"; however in our previous study in which we taught our participants to use tags there was a clear behavioral preference for folders over tags. Most participants in the present study thought that giving several classifications to personal information is a good idea, while our previous results showed that even when tags were used, multiple classification was exceptional. Furthermore, our current participants tended to agree that "the use of tags is more efficient than folder use" while in our previous study retrieval was faster without tags. We conclude this paper with suggestions regarding future research.

No abstract

No abstract