Roundup 5th Feb: The Pleasure Principle
Posted by: Lorraine on: February 5, 2010
So you might have noticed the different title for this week’s weekly round-up. The reason for this change is to make each week’s title a bit more meaningful to readers. I also suspect that navigating old posts would be easier if the titles alluded to the content rather than forcing people to remember the date it was written. It’s an experiment for now and I might tweak it a bit in the future so feedback is always welcome.
This week the team have been doing some final edits to the inspection report. Although the content was completed last week, a few minor changes have been done to orientate readers through the report, provide better context and tweak the layout. It is expected to be finalised next week (promise!) so will post download details when it is available.
Measuring the user’s experience: pleasure and satisfaction
Something that I was reading about recently is the idea of measuring the playfulness and pleasure of digital libraries. In a short paper by Toms, Dufour and Hesemeier- ‘Evaluating the User’s Experience with Digital Libraries’, they have devised a method of assessing the entertainment value of digital libraries by adapting an e-commerce experiential value scale. It struck me reading this paper that there is little research on this aspect of evaluation. As with the ITF framework, many evaluation models focus on usability, usefulness and performance of a digital library. However, there appears to be scope for libraries to be more than just for the purpose of finding, acquiring and using information (Toms et al.). This becomes important as new features and services are added to digital libraries. The heuristic inspection that UX2 carried out provides evidence to support this idea and suggests that digital libraries are already doing this: bringing people together through social media and using new UI patterns that provide a more engaging experience than traditional search systems. Good examples include the ‘Stuff’ feature provided by Scran and the timeline and map used by World Digital Library.
Satisfaction is another term used when evaluating digital libraries. Myke Gluck wrote a paper: ‘Exploring the Relationship Between User Satisfaction and Relevance in Information Systems’ (1995) which revealed a strong relationship between user satisfaction, the relevance of retrieved items and the process of retrieving the item. This supports the idea that there is a connection between the performance of a system and it’s usefulness to the user. It also reveals that the usability of the UI affects satisfaction, supporting the need to evaluate an information system by adopting a holistic approach. As usefulness and usability are both determinants in the user acceptance of digital libraries (as discussed in last week’s blog), satisfaction is an influential factor in the success of a digital library.
BBC Virtual Revolution Series
Back in November I blogged about the documentary series being created by the BBC on the World Wide Web. I realised this week that it’s now finished and the first episode aired last Saturday. I plan to watch it on iPlayer this weekend before the next episode airs. If you want to know more about the documentary and watch the episodes, you can do so on their website.
Nanocrowd
This week Phil Bradley blogged about the movie search engine, Nanocrowd. I decided to check it out for myself and was impressed. The autocomplete or autosuggest system prevents users from misspelling words, reducing the chance of returning no results. The only thing that seems to be missing is information on the movie. Synopsis information appears when a user hovers over the film link, this information is loaded directly from Amazon. However, users are more likely to select the film link and expect to find information on the following page. Although there is a ‘movie in a nutshell’ word cloud in the right-hand column, the body of the page is blank. It would be nice to have things like the synopsis in this space or at least a link pointing users in the right direction. Alternatively, move the word cloud into the body of the page so people are more likely to notice it. Overall, this is a great tool for exploring movie genres and discovering new films. I’ll certainly be using it next time I’m searching for a film that matches my mood.
Weekly Round-Up: 29th January
Posted by: Lorraine on: January 29, 2010
- In: #inf11| Evaluation| Round-up
- 1 Comment
My second round-up of the new year and already my last one for January. It seems that this month has flown by quite quickly!
Technology Acceptance Model (TAM)
Returning my attention to the evaluation of the Interactive Triptych Framework which I first blogged about in November has included the investigation of other evaluation concepts. One such concept which is discussed by Tsakonas and Papatheodorou (2006) is the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). This model, which seeks to understand acceptance of computers systems, was first put forward by Fred D. Davis in 1989 with his paper- ‘Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology‘. It was later used by Thong, Hong and Tam in 2002 to understand user acceptance of digital libraries in their paper- ‘Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: what the roles of interface characteristics, organisational context, and individual differences?‘
Thong, Hong and Tam state that TAM has been used frequently by researchers to explain and predict user acceptance in information technology. It is predominantly based on the belief that a person’s intention to adopt an information system is affected by two beliefs; the perceived ease of use and the perceived usefulness. Ease of use is commonly described as the ease with which people can employ a particular tool or other human-made object in order to achieve a particular goal. Usefulness is defined as the extent to which a person believes using the tool or system will benefit their task performance.
It feels that the TAM system provides a manageable framework which can evaluate the main barriers to user acceptance; ease of use and usefulness. One difference between TAM and ITF is the absence of a performance attribute. The role of the evaluation period of the project will be to identify the most suitable framework to use when assessing the technological outcomes. Historically performance has been missing from similar research and would be required if a holistic approach was being sought. If the ITF is selected for ux2, one of the challenges will be to design a data gathering system (or systems) that can accurately and thoroughly investigate the performance aspect of digital libraries. This could include questionnaires, interviews, observation and web metrics.
One thing that the Thong et al. paper considered was the influence of individual differences and organisational context on user acceptance of digital libraries. External factors such as these are more difficult to control or change as they deal with the experience and knowledge of users and the accessibility/visibility of the system within the organisation. These factors can affect the perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness of a system and are therefore worthwhile investigating. Methodologies such as contextual enquiry have the potential to address these factors by understanding typical user groups to generate appropriate personas. This strengthens the argument for using this data gathering method in the project.
iPad
Well everyone has been talking about it for weeks (apparently) so as a curious non-apple user I thought I would tune in to see what the fuss was about. Turns out Apple went with one of my least favourite names for their new device but that aside the new device certainly looks interesting. I guess time will tell how successful it is but marketing it at the lower than expected price will certainly help. A lot of disappointment and scepticism (me included at times) was the general reaction to the new product but I’m told the reaction was similar for the iPhone and look at it now! If you want to read why the iPad will succeed from a usability perspective, check out the blog by Econsultancy.
Fun Apple tablet created for a local iPad event, hosted by Moo Cafeteria
Weekly Round-Up: 22nd January
Posted by: Lorraine on: January 22, 2010
Firstly, apologies for the long gap in blog entries. My Dad passed away aged just 57 in Dec from skin cancer. Consequently I took an unscheduled break from work and with the holidays on top of that and then catching up on everything when I got back, the blog has been neglected. However, since my return I’ve manage to finalize the summative report on the heuristic evaluation which I’ve been blogging about. I’m hoping to write a separate blog with some of my conclusions as requested in the next week or so. This week’s round-up is slightly shorter than usual but normal service will resume next week!
Now that the summative report is complete, attentions have turned to the next 6 months of the project. Researching the evaluation process with regards to existing frameworks and structures is next on the agenda and will inform the evaluation of ux2 outputs. Evaluation of the technological outcomes from the project will initially be conducted next and will include persona research followed by usability and usefulness testing of the prototype.
Alan Cooper talks about qualitative research in his book ‘About Face 3: The Essentials of Interaction Design’. In the book he uses the term ‘Persona Hypothesis’ which is a good term to describe the first stage in synthesizing personas. It attempts to discuss questions such as ‘What different sorts of people might use this product?’, ‘How might their needs and behaviours vary?’ and ‘What ranges of behaviour and types of environments need to be explored?’ In the case of this project these questions relate to the type of library user who would visit library@nesc, what their needs would be and how they vary. Borrowing from existing persona research will help to generate such a hypothesis and enable recruitment for subsequent user interviews. The existing persona research being reviewed for the project is documented on the ux2 wiki.
Weekly Round-Up: December 4th
Posted by: Lorraine on: December 4, 2009
Re-visiting the definition of a digital library
This week has been pretty busy, filled with lots of meetings and preparation for the project meeting which we are hosting on the 15th December. This week ux2 have been re-visiting the definition of the digital library and came to the (perhaps obvious) conclusion that it is something which cannot be tied down to one definitive version. I’ve been reading ‘Evaluation of Digital Libraries: an insight into useful applications and methods’ Edited by Giannis Tsakonas and Christos Papatheodorou. The definition by Jesse H. Shera mentioned in the introduction was one which resonated with me as it seemed to touch on what we are trying to achieve in our project:
…contributing to the total communication system in society…
Though the library is an instrumentality created to maximise the utility of graphic records for the benefit of society, it achieves that goal by working with the individual and through the individual it reaches society. (Shera, 1972:48)
Too often it feels like definitions concentrate on the technical parameters of a digital library and in differentiating it from the traditional library. This idea describes a common goal of both traditional and digital libraries; the interaction with individuals and society. Including users in the evaluation of a digital library is something which we hope to do at each stage in the project because social and individual benefits and feedback between them are important criteria to evaluate. Whatever definition used, there seem to be four critical elements which should be present in addition to the digitised format for a digital library to be correctly labelled: curation, preservation, archiving and cataloguing.
Interactive Information Retrieval (IIR)
Another term which was discussed during the meeting was Interactive Information Retrieval. It came up during the Designing User Interface tutorial which ux2 attended at ECDL09. Some of the examples discussed involved multifaceted ways of retrieving information. I started to think that there might be a better term for describing these particular interfaces because IIR can describe most forms of interaction with digital libraries from simple to complex and unique. A term was floated which might better describe IIR which uses multi-faceted/web2.0 interaction: Immersive Interactive Information Retrieval (I²R)? The dictionary defines Immersive as “pertaining to immersing or plunging into something”. I think this could describe the synchronous interaction that takes place when using web2.0 technology because the interaction is immediate and does not have to stop and start, keeping the user’s experience fluid and continuous. If there is an existing term for the type of interaction I am talking about I would be interested to find out.
Wordle
For some Friday fun I thought I would share a few word clouds that I generated through the services Wordle and Tweet Cloud. I’ve known about Worlde for a while but never used it in anger. Earlier this week I heard people at the Online09 conference tweeting about the idea of using it in conjunction with a CV which seemed like a good idea. This got me thinking about it as a good way of quickly communicating information to someone to give them a snapshot of someone’s ideas and interests. I therefore decided to create one for this blog and for my delicious links to see what patterns were emerging. I’ve provided the resulting images below.
Twitter Cloud does the same kind of thing, grabbing data from all your tweets over a specified period (day/week/month/year). The clouds aren’t quite as impressive as the Wordle ones and you can’t customise the design yet but its a great idea and something which I imagine will grow in interest as people seek to analyse their tweets. As I will be marking my first anniversary using Twitter on the 9th Dec, I thought it would be appropriate to include a cloud from a year of tweets to see what it looked like. I was pleased to discover that the three most used words were: usability, thanks and blog! 
Wordle blog
Wordle delicious links
Twitter Cloud: a year of tweets
Usability Inspection of Digital Libraries (Part 5 of 5)
Posted by: Lorraine on: December 2, 2009
- In: #inf11| UX2
- 4 Comments
The final part of the usability inspection of selected digital libraries examines Edinburgh University’s Aquabrowser. Hopefully at this point the patterns which emerged can now be seen. Although directly comparing each DL is not necessarily appropriate, it is possible to examine how each DL has approached similar design problems.
The full report will be presented in a slightly different format to the blogs without the separate analysis of each DL. Instead the common themes such as resource discovery, navigation, and personalisation will be discussed in relation to the DLs. Creating these five blogs has not only helped to formulate a clear structure for the full report but also formalise the findings similar to a drafting process.
Edinburgh University Aquabrowser background
The Aquabrowser technology used in this digital library was developed by the Dutch company, Medialab Solutions. Aquabrowser provides a visual search tool for digital libraries. It’s unique attribute is the ‘Discover’ system which allows users to search using a spacial 2-D animated word cloud. The technology has been adopted by many other digital libraries around the world in addition to The University of Edinburgh.
Findings
Resource discovery
Similar to WDL, Aquabrowser does not provide an advanced search form. In these cases it is because both DLs provide an alternative method of searching the site that does not rely on the search form throughout the task flow. Aquabrowser encourages users to narrow their search using tools such as the word cloud and the faceted navigation. WDL encourages users to use the world map in conjunction with the time-line. The absence of an advanced search may have been determined by the typical user groups of each DL. Alternative search tools are often aimed at new or inexperienced users which could be the reason these have been deployed. They are also a good way for users to browse information when they do not have a set idea what they are looking for. However, if advanced or experienced users are likely to visit the DL they will expect it to have an advanced search. In order to provide accelerators for advanced users as recommended in Heuristic 7 then an advanced search should be provided.
Navigation
The predominant navigation system used by Aquabrowser is their unique animated spatial 2-D word cloud in addition to more conventional faceted navigation and pagination. All of these systems were evaluated and some of the findings are below:
Animated spatial navigation
Aquabrowser uses a primary navigation system which is different from all other DLs evaluated. An animated spatial word cloud is provided to illustrate users results (see image). Associated words are offered in addition to alternative spellings and translations from other languages. A key at the bottom is supplied which explains the different colour coding. Overall this system appears intuitive to use with some minor usability findings. However, as this navigation system is unusual, user testing would provide more insight into the user’s understanding of the tool and would therefore be recommended.
Narrowing a search is possible by selecting several words in the cloud. The ‘Discovery Trail’ in blue indicates all the words selected by highlighting them to the user. However, if a user seeks to widen their search again and remove some selected words, it is not possible to do this. As a result, the user must start a new search by entering a search into the form. There does not appear to be any other method of resetting the search criteria. Consequently a user is unable to manipulate their search effectively as recommended in Heuristic 3.
Faceted navigation
Faceted navigation in the right hand column provides a wide variety of categories to narrow search results. Each category provides 5 sub sections but also provides a ‘more’ link for the full list if there is more than 5. If a user selects links from several categories, each chosen category is removed from the navigation options. This is not immediately obvious to the user who may become confused and disorientated at the changes. In this situation the visibility of system status (Heuristic 1) could be more explicit to inform users of what’s happening. The breadcrumb navigation across the top of the search results indicates which categories have been selected. Users can narrow their search by selecting a link in the breadcrumb trail which is within a higher level within the site, but this does not provide as much flexibility as the breadcrumb trail used by WDL for example (see image).
Pagination
Aquabrowser uses pagination in addition to faceted navigation in the same way as WDL and Europeana. The faceted navigation allows users to narrow the number of results, making it easier for users to move through the number of paginated results. Combining both types of navigation gives users greater control over their search as suggested in Heuristic 3. Doing so allows users to identify what they are looking for quickly and easily.
Global navigation
A traditional global navigation system is positioned across the top of the page. In Aquabrowser it is prefixed with the text ‘Go to’ which assumably is there to indicate that the links are external to the DL. However, users may scan the links quickly and not see this text (which is also less prominent than the links). Consequently users might not expect the links to lead to external sites such as the University Catalogue and Library Online. Conventionally global navigation links positioned here is used for internal navigation. As the links do not follow platform conventions (Heuristic 4) they are unlikely to meet user expectations.
Labelling
Aquabrowser provides users with detailed information on the location of an item, including its shelf-mark. The shelf-mark information is linked, however when the link is selected it starts a new search. Users may expect the link to navigate to a reservation page where they can login and reserve the item prior to collection. Providing shelf-marks are important for a University library where a physical copy of the item is available. However, it is not clear to the user where a hyper-linked shelf-mark and this will lead to confusion. Re-labelling the link or adding additional wording to explain its purpose in the context of the DL would ensure that it follows real-world conventions thereby meeting users expectations as set out in Heuristic 2.
Search results
Search results are clearly presented with icons to represent the type of item and sometimes a thumbnail image of the book where appropriate. Similar to Scran, Aquabrowser provides a drop-down menu of options to sort results by author, relevance, year or title. Aquabrowser’s sort options are more visible because the user does not have to select a link to reveal the drop-down menu, unlike Scran. Providing sort options offers an additional system which gives users control over their search results as suggested in Heuristic 3 by allowing users to determine how the results are presented.
Recovery from errors when no results are returned
Help is provided to users to allow them to complete their task even when no search results are returned. Similar to Scran, suggested spelling, advice and tips are provided. The suggested spelling is linked making it quick and easy for users to search again. However, the advice in Aquabrowser is limited and does not contain as much detailed advice or links to other resources as Scran. Doing so can help users to recover from errors quickly (Heuristic 9) and this can positively affect the overall user experience of the DL.
Social interaction, personalisation and customisation
There is currently no provision for users to interact with each other through Aquabrowser. There is also no way for users to save searches, mark or tag items of interest or create a personal folder. As Aquabrowser is often not the sole DL for an institution, it is likely that these services are provided elsewhere and are therefore not required. It would be interesting to know if users want and/or expect such services in DLs and how often they are used. This is something which will be examined in more detail when the user-centred evaluation of NeSC digital library begins later in the project.
Weekly Round-Up: November 27th
Posted by: Lorraine on: November 27, 2009
Mendeley
You might notice that I’ve put a link to my Mendeley profile in the right-hand column of the blog recently. I finally got round to taking a closer look at it after hearing good things about it back in September. I’ve created a public folder for the ux2 project which I want to use to keep track of papers relevant to the project. For those who do not know what I’m talking about Mendeley is a network which allows researchers to create a bibliographic database (there is also a video presentation on YouTube). So far it seems to be a good way of organising papers because they are tagged and categorised for you. Recommendations aren’t available yet but I can see it being very useful and a good way to find new material.
I did run into a couple usability issues when trying to find other members and build my network. Firstly, if you want to check your email for contacts it is not possible to do so with your University email address (which is likely to be a common problem for academics). Currently you can only search Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail, AOL and GMX. Secondly, the search system within ‘Find People’ was not as intuitive to use as I was hoping. Turns out the search form searches your contacts by default. I did not realise this at first for a couple reasons:
- The search is very responsive and immediately starts searching your contacts as you type letters by highlighting where the letters appear in all of your contacts. Responsiveness is not necessarily a bad thing but I wrongly assumed that this meant it was only searching my contacts and started to think that I had to go elsewhere to search the whole system.
- Secondly, I did not read the message which appeared once I submitted my search and as a result, drew the wrong conclusions again (see image). I did what users often do and that is to scan the words quickly. The first part I read was ‘None of your contacts match this search term’ which only helped to reinforce my conclusion that this search form only searched my existing contacts. I therefore did not bother to continue reading the second line which said ‘Click Search to include all Mendeley users in the results’. The word ‘Search’ was linked making it a different colour and as a result it stood out from the rest of the text. Again I only read ‘Click Search’ and quickly dismissed it because I felt that I had already completed this action when I selected Search this first time. I spent quite a while looking around the rest of the site to find out how to search all members and eventually came to the conclusion that it wasn’t possible yet. To the credit of Mendeley, I tweeted my difficulties on Twitter and got a quick response. This showed how proactive they are at fixing problems. It wasn’t until I asked a colleague for help that I finally realised that the message asks users to click Search a second time to search all members. I think that it would be more intuitive for users if it did this by default. In addition it should give users the ability to choose whether they want to search all users or just their contacts, otherwise it is likely to be confusing. If something requires instructions to be used correctly it often means that it is not intuitive!
Anyway, I still believe that Mendeley has the potential to be a useful tool for researchers and I will continue to use it. Please feel free to connect with me if you also have an account.
COI Usability Toolkit
This week COI announced that they had developed a usability toolkit aimed at public sector websites (although anyone can access it). The toolkit provides good-practice guides on a variety of topics including search form design and search results design. After briefly looking at some of the guides they are effective in communicating the main points in a clear and concise manner with annotated illustrations to help time-poor users get a good understanding very quickly. There is also a section where you can test your knowledge and this helps to reinforce user’s learning. It is predominantly aimed at those with limited or no previous knowledge of usability and avoids using any techy words or code.
To use the toolkit visit http://usability.coi.gov.uk/.
Infomaki
Infomaki is an open-source, lightweight usability testing tool developed by The New York Public Library’s Digital Experience Group which I came across this week. It is based on the ideas of fivesecondtest, a tool which I have come across in the past. Based on the same premise, it asks users to answer one question. The questions can either be multiple choice or a design question asking users to state where they would click on a page to complete a specified task. You can also make comparisons between two designs and test the user’s recall of features. The beauty of the concept is that it does not require a lot of the users time. Answering one question can take only a few seconds and this has been shown to be attractive to users as the response to the survey was very high. So much so that the developers found that 90% of users wanted to answer more than one question – behaviour which is difficult to elicit through traditional market research methods.
Evidence suggests that tools like this are extremely successful in gathering a large volume of quantitative data which can help to back up one-to-one usability test data. The developers also plan to incorporate features that collect demographic data. This will add even more value to the tool as it will help in the construction of user persona’s.
Tools such as Infomaki are particularly useful to those working in digital libraries without a dedicated user research team. Open source means it is free and it can be set up by anyone interested in gathering data about their digital library.
There is more information on the software available in addition to the article on Code4Lib by Michael Lascarides which can be found here: http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/2099.
Usability Week, Berlin
My UX2 colleague, Boon returned for Nielsen Norman Group Usability Week in Berlin with lots of knowledge to share. One of the many things that came out of his time there was the idea of user persona creation for digital libraries. After a couple leads we were pointed to the work by Max Planck Digital Library and the persona’s they created. If anyone else knows of other work that has been conducted in persona creation for digital libraries please let us know, thanks.
Weekly Round-Up: Friday 20th November
Posted by: Lorraine on: November 20, 2009
Interactive Triptych Framework (ITF)
This week has been largely spent reading papers as I try to review the Interactive Triptych Framework as a possible framework for evaluating library@nesc later in the project. I still feel like I’m at the beginning of a long journey on this subject and often find that Twitter can be a massive distraction when trying to concentrate for longer than 20 minutes! That being said, I wanted to summarise the framework below from the paper which proposed it. Other papers of relevance will be documented in subsequent blogs.
Analysing and evaluating usefulness and usability in electronic information services, Tsakonas & Papatheodorou, Journal of Information Science, 2006;32
This paper presents the ITF model and suggests that interaction is effected equally by content and system characteristics. It also states that usefulness and usability are interconnected from the user’s point of view. ITF is a holistic picture of user interaction and other approaches to Electronic Information Services (EIS) evaluation. The proposed framework illustrates the interactions taking place between the three components: system, content and users. Each component interacts with each other and it is these interactions which define three evaluation approaches: usefulness, usability and performance.
An important observation of the research paper was the identification of a correlation between usefulness and usability from the users point of view. In addition to this is that fact that all attributes (usefulness, usability and performance) were equally preferred by users and considered important for their interaction. However, the research also reported that usefulness precedes usability when users are asked to state a preference suggesting that content quality is paramount for EISs.
An integrated approach which evaluates usefulness and usability is recommended in order to provide a holistic image of user interaction. If the ITF were to be adopted for the planned evaluation of library@nesc then such an approach would need to be designed. This is something which I intend to give some thought to.
Social Media event from NESTA
In addition to reading this week I also watched a streamed event on social media organised by NESTA entitled ‘Social media – a force for good?’. This well organised and interesting event invited three people with something to say on the subject to answer questions: Stephen Fry, Biz Stone (founder of Twitter) and Reid Hoffman (founder of LinkedIn). If you missed the live stream you can watch on the NESTA website. Although it was a talk on social media, Twitter inevitably dominated the questions. I’ve summarised a couple of points raised which I thought were topical and of interest:
- Biz stated that his prediction for Twitter in years to come is that it won’t be triumph of technology, more a triumph of humanity. It seemed like there has been recent debate about social media and whether or not it is a saviour or slayer of humanity. I think scientific research will play a great role in attempting to answer this question. Twitter is relatively young and very little (if any) solid research has been done on its effects on individuals and society. There seems to be a huge amount of potential for researchers on this subject and this makes it an exciting subject.
- Another similar question asked if things like Twitter are increasing isolation amongst people. Biz refuted this when he pointed to the many Tweetups that happen around the world. As an attendee of a weekly Twitter related meet-up- Edinburgh Coffee Morning I tend to agree. Although I am relatively new to the group it seems that many friendships have been formed through face-to-face conversation which has continued on into Twitter and more recently Facebook. The Guardian wrote this week ‘Is local the new social now?’ and when thinking about the popularity and regularity of local Tweetups then it is fair to say that it is.
- Finally a topic which cropped up a few times was the power of the masses on Twitter. Reid Hoffman put it as “The wisdom of the crowd or the madness of the masses.” This refers not only to the information which influences us on an individual basis but also the potential of Twitter (and all forms of mass communication) to whip people up into a frenzy with (possible) catastrophic consequences. One could argue that the masses are not on Twitter which is equally correct but I wonder how long it will be before this changes and we see more extremists using Twitter to communicate their message (if not already)? Something to be aware of at least.
Finally
I thought I would post another Dilbert strip which I saw this week. Its on the theme of cloud computing and made me laugh. Have a great weekend!
Usability Inspection of Digital Libraries (Part 4 of 5)
Posted by: Lorraine on: November 16, 2009
- In: #inf11| UX2
- Leave a Comment
Scran Background
Scran is a multimedia digital library providing a database of items from museums, galleries, archives and media across Scotland. It provides limited access to users for free. Those who pay a fee to subscribe can have full access to all services including the social network, Scribble.
Findings
Resource discovery
Scran provide another search feature in addition to the advanced search called ‘Fielded’ search. This appears to be similar to the advanced search but it is not made clear to the user what the purpose of this search is and how it differs from advanced search. This does not meet Heuristic 2: Match between the system and the real world which recommends that words and phrases should be used that are familiar to the user. In addition, the links within both search forms that start a new search are not clearly identifiable. The design of the ‘Go’ link means that it does not look like a link and could be overlooked (see image). The close proximity of a ‘Clear’ link could cause users to accidentally wipe their search and force them to start again. The design of the forms are not forgiving for the user as highlighted by ISO heuristics and do not prevent potential errors from happening as recommended in Heuristic 5.
Navigation
Scran also does not use faceted navigation, instead providing paginated results which users can navigate. This alternative system does not allow users to manipulate the results in the same way as other navigation systems, limiting user control (Heuristic 3). Scran does allow users to re-order results and increase the number of results presented per page. This helps to speed up time on task and therefore meets the ISO heuristics which recommend controllability and customisation.
Presentation of search results
The results are displayed in a ‘gallery’ presentation style with thumbnail images and text displayed in a grid formation. Where images are not available a replacement graphic is provided to categorise the type of information e.g. pathfinder pack. Unlike WDL and Europeana, Scran does not provide users with the option to change the view of results from gallery for list. Instead, drop-down menus are provided to allow users to alter the order of results. However, these options are hidden beneath a link titled ‘Search options’ and could therefore benefit from being more visible. Providing this service means that it meets Heuristic 3: User Control and Freedom but does not meet ISO heuristic which asks if it is clear what the user should do next.
Presentation of results in a gallery format can speed up time spent searching but DLs should be weary of a possible disadvantage to this system; the hierarchy of results is less clear, meaning that users may be unsure which results are most relevant. This can potentially conflict with Heuristic 2 (Match between the system and the real world) if the information does not appear in a logical order. Where possible users should be given to choice to display results by list if they wish.
Help and guidance
The help section within Scran can only be located via the Site map when a user is not logged in. Even for members who are logged in, the help section is difficult to find. This makes it harder for users to get help when they need it. This does not meet Heuristic 10: Help documentation which states that help information should be easy to search. However, if a user does locate the help section, Scran provides useful video tutorials which communicate information in an engaging way and reduce the size of help documentation as also suggested by Heuristic 10.
When a search returns no results, Scran provide sufficient help for users to complete their task. Suggested spelling is provided as well as advice and tips on recovering from an error (see image). As a result, Scran provide a forgiving dialogue (ISO heuristic) which is successful in helping users diagnose and recover from errors (Heuristic 10).
Interactive tools
Scran provide a ‘Create’ link next to each image which allows users to interact with images in a unique way. Users can manipulate the image to create a variety of media such as calendars, posters or greeting cards. A step-by-step form allows the users to step through the each option and customise their design (as recommended in Heuristic 3). Creations can then be saved to the site or downloaded in a PDF format. Providing such interactive tools helps to engage the users and allows users to customise information to suit their needs as recommended by the ISO heuristic on individualism.
Social Interaction
The online community service provided by Scran is called Scribble. It is not immediately recognisable from the title what Scribble is and there is very little information for users to explain Scribble and how it benefits users. Limited information on labels and services means that Scribble does not meet Heuristic 4: Consistency and standards.
Access to Scribble requires a separate password to that used to log in to Scran. It currently uses the login details from ‘Stuff’ which is the service for creating calendars etc. A link is provided to allow users to do register for Stuff if they have not already done so. However, if a user is already registered and logged into My Stuff, they are still required to log in again for Scribble. This is potentially confusing for users. By conforming to a minimalist design as recommended in Heuristic 8, a streamlined service would be created with one log in required for all Scran services.
Finally, if a user forgets their Scran ‘Stuff’ login a ‘Forgotten Password’ link is provided. However, when this is selected a message is returned that password changing has been disabled. No other information if provided to help users remember their user name and password. This makes it very difficult for those users to be able to log in to Scribble and does not meet Heuristic 9: Help users diagnose and recover from errors.
Personalisation and customisation
My Stuff is the users’ personal section of Scran and opens in a new window. This is potentially confusing for users, especially those using assisted technology such as screen readers. It can cause disorientation for those who are unaware that a new window has opened and prevent them from navigating back to the previous page. Limiting control for the users conflicts with Heuristic 3 (User control and freedom) and providing insufficient feedback to keep users informed of what is going on conflicts with Heuristic 1 (Visibility of system status).
When a user wants to save what they are working on in Scran, they must select the ‘Save’ link below the relevant item. However, when this happens a new window opens and if the user already has the Stuff section open in another window, nothing appears to happen. Users are not provided with sufficient feedback to indicate a change has happened so are less likely to know if their action was completed. Visibility of system status should be maintained to avoid confusion (Heuristic 1). It should also be made clear to users what they should do next (ISO standard: self descriptiveness).
On the whole, the customisation tools provided by Scran are engaging and increase the usefulness of the material available. Making some changes to improve the interface would ensure that the tools are intuitive to use and consequently encourage more members to utilise them.
Weekly Round-Up: Friday 13th November
Posted by: Lorraine on: November 13, 2009
I’ve decided that since reading the excellent blog by Social Media Officer, Nicola Osborne, I have been inspired to start writing a weekly round-up of news/events/topics/discussions that have interested me. It will help me track my own research and hopefully be of interest to others.
World Usability Day (WUD): 12/11/09
Although this year’s theme was sustainability, the general purpose of WUD is to raise awareness of usability. So in that spirit I wanted to share some great usability related resources which I refer to frequently and that do a great job spreading the word:
- UX booth: a blog with guest posts from people throughout the usability community.
- UX blog: a blog from a usability professional, Barry Briggs who frequently posts links to other useful resources on the web.
- IxDA: has a discussion forum on all things usability and new topics are frequently posted on Twitter to follow.
- A List Apart: Very well known in the design community for producing great articles from some of the most prominent professionals around. Topics are not restricted to usability but also cover design, code and business.
- UX Exchange: Relatively new to me, this is a simple UX Q&A site that aims to build a community lead, authoritative resource on the User Experience disciplines. Post a question and get an answer back fast.
I also came across a blog by Dana McKay on this year’s WUD theme which discusses the connection between usability and sustainability.
Library 2.0 Community
I joined Ning’s Library 2.0 community online yesterday and although I’ve not had much time to look through the site in detail, it does look like a promising resource for information, discussion and networking with like minded people.
BBC Digital Revolution: open source and collaborative documentary
Perhaps later than others, this week I discovered that the BBC are in the process of creating a documentary about the internet and are using a suitably interactive process to produce the 4 part series which will be aired in 2010. If you happen to be in London this weekend they have an event going on which aims to test the way the internet effects us. For more information please visit their site. It sounds really interesting and something I would love to attend if I wasn’t so far away. If like me you cant attend then there is lots of other stuff to check out on their site including film clips which you can not only watch but also download and edit. One interview which I was particularly interested in was that from Twitter creators, Biz Stone and Evan Williams. Something which they pointed out in their interview was that Twitter is essentially ‘Recipient driven communication’. This is a great term to describe Twitter and the fact that users decide what information they wish to receive and not the individual/company/corporation providing the information. This for me is one of the defining things about Twitter and the reason I think it has become so popular and consequently so powerful.
JISC mailing list: Web2
If however you still like your information pushed to you through more traditional forms such as email, a new JISC mailing list had been set up recently on the theme on Web 2 and its uses in libraries. I joined last week and have already started receiving emails with links to some useful information (one example being the Library 2.0 community above).
Twitter Re-tweet beta
This week people started tweeting about the Retweet functionality that was being trialled by Twitter and it wasn’t long before I got to test it myself. Yesterday however it was pulled by Twitter while they try to fix a bug. Anyway while it was available there seemed to be a lot of grumbling about the fact that users can’t edit their Retweets at all. This on the surface sounded crazy, the majority of people like to add their own value to Retweets and I could predict that many users would shun Twitters attempt at this service and continue using their own system through their respective client manager. However after reading an article on the subject from e-consultancy I realised what Twitter is trying to do. Quite often when users add their own comments to a tweet, character real-estate quickly becomes a problem and the users have to make an executive decision of what to delete from the original tweet. This quickly degrades tweets and consequently they become more difficult to track. Twitter could be trying to address this issue by removing this problem from tweets, leaving more room for content. However, I didn’t get the chance to try the Retweet function before it was promptly removed by Twitter so the jury is still out on this one!
Twitter Lists: filtering out all the irrelevant noise
Last week Twitter lists were the talk of the Twitterverse because they had finally been rolled out for everyone to use. At first it seemed quite novel to have a new feature but I quickly began to wonder how useful lists were in their current incarnation. Lists seem to be a way for individuals to categories groups of people they follow on Twitter, similar to groups in Tweetdeck. The group can be named anything and only be edited by the creator so if you find yourself in a list you don’t agree with there is little you can do about it, something which has been touched upon by others in the past. Additionally, if someone visits the group stream, there could be a large proportion of tweets which are unrelated to the group name. For example, although I am a usability analyst, not all my tweets are related to the subject. Thankfully I came across a blog which provides instructions on how to solve this problem by creating a hack to filter groups by a hashtag. This is a good short term solution but something I hope Twitter start to seriously think about as it could have a huge impact on the success of lists.
In plain English: Cloud Computing
Finally I wanted to share some brilliant videos which do a great job of explaining technology in laymen’s terms. They are by a company called Common Craft and their most recent edition is ‘Cloud Computing in Plain English’. They also have some other useful videos on Twitter, Web Search Strategies and Social Media (which is a personal favourite because it uses a brilliant ice cream metaphor to explain the concept). Next week there is a free webinar from TechSoup which will be interviewing Common Craft, Mary Beth Facciolo from the Colorado State Library and Carolyn Blatchley from Cumberland County Library System in Pennsylvania to hear how they are usign these videos to support the needs of their community. If you are interested in registering from this event then sign up with TechSoup.
New Beta British Library Catalogue: Initial Impressions
Posted by: Lorraine on: November 9, 2009
It was brought to my attention on Twitter this morning that the British Library (BL) have a new beta catalogue system. This was great timing on my part since I had just blogged about the current system which has been evaluated at part of the project’s usability inspection of selected digital libraries. After taking a quick look at the new beta version, I’ve noted a few first impressions and how it compares to the current version. Feel free to try out the catalogue for yourself before reading my notes, it might help to provide some context.
- Advanced search is still available but less prominent than before. As BL currently state that 75% of their users are academic researchers (including students), it seems likely that many will want to use the advanced search. Therefore making it easier to find will benefit most target users.
- Search results are more clearly presented making it easier for users to scan the page. Icons are also used to classify each item into type e.g. audio, book, journal etc. It would appear that a more user centric approach has been taken but providing all results in one place rather than separated into individual catalogues as before. This ensures that the user’s experience remains consistent throughout.
- Search results can now be refined further using the new faceted navigation on the right hand side. Categories such as author, subject, language, material type can be selected to narrow results and will make it quicker and easier for users to find information.
- The faceted navigation allows users to remove selected facets individually to widen search (see image). This provides users with complete control over their search, reversing out of an action easily if they change their mind or make a mistake.
- The user’s search remains at the top of the results page. Making the search criteria persistent allows users to review the search strings and check for spelling errors. This cuts out any unnecessary time spent by the users re-entering a new search which could be them same or very similar to their original search.
- Advice and guidance is provided below search results. A section titled ‘Haven’t found what you are looking for?’ is similar to that provided in the current version however the biggest difference is the advice that is provided. Links to external resources including Google Books and subject related websites may be more relevant to users than generic advice and help them complete their task.
- A personal section titled ‘My Workspace’ is provided. Here users can save items, add tags and review their search history. To obtain full access users are encouraged to login. British Library Reader Pass holders and registered document supply customers can log in but for those who are not pass holders, there is no information on how to obtain a pass or join the library in order to use the features in full. Providing such a link would be useful for new users, especially because it is common for users to register online to use a site’s services.
- Finally BL have a link to a feedback form which users can use to send their thoughts on the new beta site. This not only lets users feel involved in the design process but also provides developers with some free unsolicited feedback which can make positive changes to the DL and ultimately create a positive experience for the user.
The new beta interface has many more features which users will like compared to the old version. BL have moved away from individual specialised catalogues towards one comprehensive search engine. From the users point of view this is a positive development.
