Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.037393916 = product of:
  0.112181745 = sum of:
    0.04816959 = weight(_text_:wide in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04816959 = score(doc=5229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19679762 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
    0.064012155 = weight(_text_:web in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.064012155 = score(doc=5229,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Thirty-one patrons, who were selected by Slone to provide a range of age and experience, agreed when approached while using the catalog of the Wake County library system to try searching via the Internet. Fifteen searched the Wake County online catalog in this manner and 16 searched the World Wide Web, including that catalog. They were subjected to brief pre-structured taped interviews before and after their searches and observed during the searching process resulting in a log of behaviors, comments, pages accessed, and time spent. Data were analyzed across participants and categories. Web searches were characterized as linking, URL, search engine, within a site domain, and searching a web catalog; and participants by the number of these techniques used. Four used only one, 13 used two, 11 used three, two used four, and one all five. Participant experience was characterized as never used, used search engines, browsing experience, email experience, URL experience, catalog experience, and finally chat room/newsgroup experience. Sixteen percent of the participants had never used the Internet, 71% had used search engines, 65% had browsed, 58% had used email, 39% had used URLs, 39% had used online catalogs, and 32% had used chat rooms. The catalog was normally consulted before the web, where both were used, and experience with an online catalog assists in web use. Scrolling was found to be unpopular and practiced halfheartedly.

0.013066426 = product of:
  0.078398556 = sum of:
    0.078398556 = weight(_text_:web in 4535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.078398556 = score(doc=4535,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.14495286 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044416238 = queryNorm
        0.5408555 = fieldWeight in 4535, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4535)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Purpose - This exploratory study sets out to describe the ways in which end-users exchanged information between the web and a web online catalog, how they searched one device based on what they knew about the other, and their experiences in navigating between the two devices. Design/methodology/approach - Thirty-one participants were observed searching the web or a web online catalog. After the observations, an interview guide was used to ask targeted questions. Findings - The findings suggest that people familiar with the use of traditional online catalogs were more comfortable using web tools than those who lacked online catalog experience. People who had recent web experience expected online catalog searching to be similar to web searching. However, drawing too close an association between the two systems sometimes caused difficulties when the searching protocols varied, like keyword searching versus selecting an index. Research limitations/implications - Some limitations of the study include a small sampling size, varied responses to interview questions, obtrusive procedures, and lack of generalizability to groups or settings dissimilar from the one in this study. Originality/value - This study provides a rare look into the challenges faced by a diverse group of public library users on the web. It is instructive for practicing librarians and researchers.