A tale of two interfaces: How facets affect the library catalog search

Abstract

In the summer of 2008 all University of North Carolina libraries switched from a traditional library catalog interface supporting text-based searching (TextOnly) to a text and facet-based interface (TextFacet) to improve users' search experiences. This study seeks to understand the differences between these two interfaces and how they affect the search experience of the novice user. In this study, 40 participants were asked to search for resources using both interfaces. Their search times and accuracy were measured across three types of search tasks (known, partially known, and exploratory ). After completing the searches, they were asked a series of questions about their experiences. The data were analyzed in order to identify strengths and weaknesses in both search interfaces. Thirty-six out of 40 participants preferred the TextFacet interface to the TextOnly interface. Using three dependent variables-time, accuracy, and rating-the two interfaces were compared and interactions were tested with the three task types. Search times for the TextFacet were shorter and participants preferred the TextFacet search interface over the TextOnly search interface. Performances across the three task types were different in terms of search time. The partially known and exploratory task types showed similar distributions for rating and accuracy. These distributions were distinctly different from the known task type. The results of this study may assist libraries in developing improved library catalog search interfaces that utilize facets as well as text searching.

Emerging Roles: Academic Libraries Crossing the Digital Divide

“…When the expectation of easy and efficient access to information comes up against the demands of time pressures and in-depth academic research tasks, the most commonly observed behavior illustrating this balancing act is the use of Google to supplement or replace specific library resources rather than using facets and advanced search techniques Ramdeen & Hemminger, 2011). It seems that many libraries expect that extensive training will change this behavior and shepherd students out of Google and back into the fold of the library's ecosystem.…”

“…The unspoken assumption here is that not only can most information be found online, it is not-or at least should not be-difficult to find it. As Ramdeen and Hemminger (2011) explain, it has become accepted now that users have been influenced by Web search engines, and rather than plan out elaborate "library approved" research strategies, they prefer simply to enter a few initial search terms, skim the list of results, and then filter through them using simple interactions.…”

Partial materialization for online analytical processing over multi-tagged document collections

“…Faceted search helps to narrow a large result set down to a more manageable size for browsing, and a study at the University of North Carolina library showed that it was preferred by users over traditional search interfaces based on text content alone [40]. In a variety of other settings, user studies have found that systems supporting faceted search and browsing are superior to traditional search engines and to systems based on clustering by document content [17].…”

What’s in a word? : Rethinking facet headings in a discovery service

“…Several studies have shown that the use of facets in the library environment has proven effective in assisting searchers. 16 However, it is equally clear that library vendors have not thought deeply about the facet category labels, and libraries, which can do a certain amount of customization, tend toward unquestioning acceptance of the vendor--supplied labels. This is a critical area involving both the user interface and the user experience; libraries and vendors need to spend far more time and effort on ensuring the intelligibility of the facet labels and on finding effective ways to encourage their use.…”

“…9 Ramdeen and Hemminger discuss the role of facets in the library catalog. 10 To date, reviews of discovery systems or catalog interfaces tend to place emphasis on helping patrons to search our demonstrably flawed systems rather than considering the interfaces as the actual source of problems for users. 11 While it can be argued that comparing an academic site and a commercial site compares apples and oranges, there being little connection between the complex, open--ended subject/research questions and searching a company's inventory of goods.…”