Search (101 results, page 2 of 6)

0.015070582 = product of:
  0.060282327 = sum of:
    0.060282327 = product of:
      0.120564654 = sum of:
        0.120564654 = weight(_text_:instruction in 1497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.120564654 = score(doc=1497,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.45899904 = fieldWeight in 1497, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1497)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The first ten years of the MELVYL system have profoundly affected the lives of University of California librarians. The rapid growth of the system's content, complexity, and use has required frequent modifications of its interface. These changes have required the continuous involvement of librarians in advising the system's designers on new features and new databases, in instructing users, and in observing user behavior. This article traces, from a librarian's perspective, the evolution of the system from its origins as a poweful prototype online catalog to its present role as a complex of multiple databases, services, and resources. The article's primary focus is on ways in which the growth, refinement, and development of the system have entailed adaptive design, flexible instruction, and user tolerance for change

0.015070582 = product of:
  0.060282327 = sum of:
    0.060282327 = product of:
      0.120564654 = sum of:
        0.120564654 = weight(_text_:instruction in 2348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.120564654 = score(doc=2348,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.45899904 = fieldWeight in 2348, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2348)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

An analysis of transaction logs from an academic library online catalog describes instances in which users have tried both controlled and uncontrolled (title keyword) vocabulary subject access during the same search session. Eight hypotheses were tested. Over 6.6% of all dial access search sessions contained both methods of subject access. Over 58% of the isolated sessions began with an uncontrolled vocabulary attempt. Over 76% contained only one vocabulary shift. On average, user persistence was greater during controlled vocabulary search logs, but search output was greater during uncontrolled vocabulary search logs. Several recommendations regarding catalog design and instruction are made.

0.015070582 = product of:
  0.060282327 = sum of:
    0.060282327 = product of:
      0.120564654 = sum of:
        0.120564654 = weight(_text_:instruction in 5156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.120564654 = score(doc=5156,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.45899904 = fieldWeight in 5156, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5156)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Controlled vocabulary and subject headings in OPAC records have proven to be useful in improving search results. The authors used a survey to gather information about librarian opinions and professional use of controlled vocabulary. Data from a range of backgrounds and expertise were examined, including academic and public libraries, and technical services as well as public services professionals. Responses overall demonstrated positive opinions of the value of controlled vocabulary, including in reference interactions as well as during bibliographic instruction sessions. Results are also examined based upon factors such as age and type of librarian.

0.012917642 = product of:
  0.051670566 = sum of:
    0.051670566 = product of:
      0.10334113 = sum of:
        0.10334113 = weight(_text_:instruction in 2772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10334113 = score(doc=2772,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.39342776 = fieldWeight in 2772, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2772)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports the results of a research project, conducted by the School of Computing and Mathematics and the Library of Huddersfield Polytechnic, into the problem of matching the user interface of OPACs to the needs of users. The project brought together issues involving: Human Computer Instruction (HCI); system methods in the determinination of user requirements; and user centred design, and prototyping in a sequence of design and evaluation cycles. These cycles applied appropriate HCI styles, techniques and equipment (such as Graphical User Interface (GUI) and a mouse pointing device) and incorporated the lessons of each evaluation, to produce an OPAC user interface, ICARUS, which differs considerably in style, behaviour and characteristcs from those commonly encountered in academic and public libraries. The project concluded by evaluating ICARUS, against the BLCMP OPAC with 38 subjects in the Library of Huddersfield Polytechnic, and demonstrating a significant improvement in performance for different tasks for the ICARUS interface

0.012917642 = product of:
  0.051670566 = sum of:
    0.051670566 = product of:
      0.10334113 = sum of:
        0.10334113 = weight(_text_:instruction in 4894) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10334113 = score(doc=4894,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.39342776 = fieldWeight in 4894, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4894)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In June 1998 Oakland University's library migrated to a new online catalog. In order to determine user acceptance of the new OPAC, students receiving library instruction were asked to complete an open-ended questionnaire eliciting comments on their likes, dislikes and online catalog preference. From the data collected, a second questionnaire was designed and distributed that focused on specific features of the new catalog identified in the first survey. Results indicated that users overwhelmingly preferred the new OPAC and found it easy to use; however, they experienced some difficulty using special features like truncation. The most popular feature of the new catalog was its remote access capability. Second-generation OPACs possess features - such as electronic reserves capabilities and hypertext links - that are beginning to simplify the search process; but they have not yet developed into the intuitive, comprehensive systems that can empower users to seek information in new ways.

0.01199291 = product of:
  0.04797164 = sum of:
    0.04797164 = product of:
      0.09594328 = sum of:
        0.09594328 = weight(_text_:22 in 7403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09594328 = score(doc=7403,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 7403, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7403)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Program. 22(1988), S.21-31

0.01199291 = product of:
  0.04797164 = sum of:
    0.04797164 = product of:
      0.09594328 = sum of:
        0.09594328 = weight(_text_:22 in 7483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09594328 = score(doc=7483,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 7483, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7483)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Program. 22(1988), S.133-142

0.010764702 = product of:
  0.04305881 = sum of:
    0.04305881 = product of:
      0.08611762 = sum of:
        0.08611762 = weight(_text_:instruction in 6974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08611762 = score(doc=6974,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.32785648 = fieldWeight in 6974, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6974)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.010764702 = product of:
  0.04305881 = sum of:
    0.04305881 = product of:
      0.08611762 = sum of:
        0.08611762 = weight(_text_:instruction in 8772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08611762 = score(doc=8772,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.32785648 = fieldWeight in 8772, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=8772)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In order to test the impact of system and domain knowledge on search behaviour in an online catalogue, an experiment was set up in a university library where students from three specialisation areas performed a number of search tasks in the online catalogue. The subjects differed in the amount of domain and system knowledge. In two sessions the subjects performed searches inside and outside their 'own' domain. During the first session, half of the group received instruction in catalogue use and the other half did not. To observe whether the induced differences in system knowledge had effects on the search performance, a second session was carried out. Subjects' search behaviour was videotaped and their comments recorded (They were encouraged to think aloud). Results show that the amount of system knowledge had a significant effect on search time as well as on the number of search patterns observed. regarding domain knowledge, only one out of the six analyses concerning search time or the amount of patterns yielded a significant effect. A possible explanation for this result could be the questionable validity of the criteria used to distinguish between known and unknown domains. The difference in knowledge regarding familiar and unfamiliar domains is not as large as had been expected. The notion of end-users displaying habitual modes of behaviour is given considerable support by the data. This is reflected by the limited number of patterns observed

0.010764702 = product of:
  0.04305881 = sum of:
    0.04305881 = product of:
      0.08611762 = sum of:
        0.08611762 = weight(_text_:instruction in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08611762 = score(doc=2591,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.32785648 = fieldWeight in 2591, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2591)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

As we seek both to improve public school education in high technology areas and to link libraries and classrooms on the 'information superhighway', we need to understand more about children's information searching abilities. We present results of 4 experiments conducted on 4 versions of the Science Library Catalog (SLC), a Dewey Decimal based hierarchical browsing systems implemeted in HyperCard without a keyboard. The experiments were conducted over a 3-year period at 3 sites, with 4 databases, and with comparisons to 2 different keyword online catalogs. Subjects were ethnically and culturally diverse children aged 9 through 12; with 32 to 34 children participating in each experiment. Children were provided explicit instruction and reference materials for the keyword systems but not for the SLC. The number of search topics matched was comparable across all systems and all experiments; search times were comparable, thought hey varied among the 4 SLC versions and between the 2 keyword OPACs. The SLC overall was robust to differences in age, sex and computer experience. One of the keyword OPACs was subject to minor effects of age and computer experience; the other was not. We found relationships between search topic and system structure, such that the most difficult topics on the SLC were those hard to locate in the hierarchy, and those most difficult on the keyword OPACs were hard to spell or required children to generate their own search terms. The SLC approach overcomes problems with several searching features that are difficult for children in typical keyword OPAC systems; typing skills, spelling, vocabulary, and Boolean logic. Results have general implications for the desing of information retrieval systems for children

0.010764702 = product of:
  0.04305881 = sum of:
    0.04305881 = product of:
      0.08611762 = sum of:
        0.08611762 = weight(_text_:instruction in 1009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08611762 = score(doc=1009,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.32785648 = fieldWeight in 1009, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1009)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: TYCKOSON, D.A.: Enhancing access to information: building catalogs for the future; TYCKOSON, D.A.: The twenty-first century limited: desinging catalogs for the next century; DWYER, J.: Bibliographic records enhancement: from the drawing board to the catalog screen; SYRACUSE, R.O. u. R.K. POYER: Enhancing access to the library's collections: a view from an academic health center library; STUDWELL, W.E.: Of eggs and baskets: getting more access out of LC Subject Headings in an online environment; STEPHENS, I.E.: Getting more out of call numbers: displaying holdings, locations and circulation status; MICCO, M.: The next generation of online public access catalogs: a new look at subject access using hypermedia; SLOAN, B.G.: Remote access: design implications for the online catalog; ENGEL, G.: User instruction for access to catalogs and database on the Internet; BARNES, S. u. J. McCUE: Linking library records to bibliographic databases: an analysis of common data elements in BIOSIS, Agricola and the OPAC; HARWOOD, R.: Adding a nonlibrary campus collection to the library database; CARTER, K., H. OLSEN u. S. AQUILA: Bulk loading of records for microform sets into the online catalogue; DYKEMAN, A. u. J. ZIMMERMAN: The Georgia Institute of Technology Electronic Library: issues to consider; MOLHOLT, P. u. K. FORSYTHE: Opening up information access through the electronic catalog

0.010600335 = product of:
  0.04240134 = sum of:
    0.04240134 = product of:
      0.08480268 = sum of:
        0.08480268 = weight(_text_:22 in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08480268 = score(doc=4368,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 1.2000 19:36:10
22. 1.2000 19:41:58

0.010493796 = product of:
  0.041975185 = sum of:
    0.041975185 = product of:
      0.08395037 = sum of:
        0.08395037 = weight(_text_:22 in 3628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08395037 = score(doc=3628,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3628, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Bulletin des bibliothèques de France. 34(1989) no.1, S.22-47

0.010493796 = product of:
  0.041975185 = sum of:
    0.041975185 = product of:
      0.08395037 = sum of:
        0.08395037 = weight(_text_:22 in 5575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08395037 = score(doc=5575,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5575, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5575)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Eine Replik zu Auer: OPAC und Zeichensatz (Mitteilungen der VÖB 46(1993) H.2, S.21-22)

0.010493796 = product of:
  0.041975185 = sum of:
    0.041975185 = product of:
      0.08395037 = sum of:
        0.08395037 = weight(_text_:22 in 7584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08395037 = score(doc=7584,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7584, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7584)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Mitteilungen der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekare. 46(1993) H.2, S.21-22

0.010493796 = product of:
  0.041975185 = sum of:
    0.041975185 = product of:
      0.08395037 = sum of:
        0.08395037 = weight(_text_:22 in 211) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08395037 = score(doc=211,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 211, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=211)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Open. 22(1990) no.10, S.326-330

0.010493796 = product of:
  0.041975185 = sum of:
    0.041975185 = product of:
      0.08395037 = sum of:
        0.08395037 = weight(_text_:22 in 4513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08395037 = score(doc=4513,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4513, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4513)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

23. 3.2000 15:22:58

0.008994682 = product of:
  0.035978727 = sum of:
    0.035978727 = product of:
      0.071957454 = sum of:
        0.071957454 = weight(_text_:22 in 3373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.071957454 = score(doc=3373,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3373, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3373)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 4.1996 20:07:57

0.008994682 = product of:
  0.035978727 = sum of:
    0.035978727 = product of:
      0.071957454 = sum of:
        0.071957454 = weight(_text_:22 in 4106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.071957454 = score(doc=4106,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15498674 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4106, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4106)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 4.1996 20:07:57

0.008611761 = product of:
  0.034447044 = sum of:
    0.034447044 = product of:
      0.06889409 = sum of:
        0.06889409 = weight(_text_:instruction in 4380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06889409 = score(doc=4380,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26266864 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04425879 = queryNorm
            0.26228517 = fieldWeight in 4380, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.934836 = idf(docFreq=317, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4380)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

We return to arguments made 10 years ago that online catalogs are difficult to use because their design does not incorporate sufficient understanding of searching behavior. The earlier article examined studies of information retrieval system searching for their implications for online catalog design; this article examines the implications of card catalog design for online catalogs. With this analysis, we hope to contribute to a better understanding of user behavior and to lay to rest the card catalog design model for online catalogs. We discuss the problems with query matching systems, which were designed for skilled search intermediaries rather than end-users, and the knowledge and skills they require in the information-seeking process, illustrated with examples of searching card and online catalogs. Searching requires conceptual knowledge of the information retrieval process - translating an information need into a searchable query; semantic knowledge of how to implement a query in a given system - the how and when to use system features; and technical skills in executing the query - basic computing skills and the syntax of entering queries as specific search statements. In the short term, we can help make online catalogs easier to use through improved training and documentation that is based on information-seeking bahavior, with the caveat that good training is not a substitute for good system design. Our long term goal should be to design intuitive systems that require a minimum of instruction. Given the complexity of the information retrieval problem and the limited capabilities of today's systems, we are far from achieving that goal. If libraries are to provide primary information services for the networked world, they need to put research results on the information-seeking process into practice in designing the next generation of online public access information retrieval systems