digital libraries
and
human information behavior
Tefko Saracevic, Ph.D.
School of Communication, Information and
Library Studies
Rutgers University
http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~tefko
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
1
digital libraries
• global phenomenon
– many institutions & fields involved
– many research efforts & programs
– many practical developments in and beyond
libraries
– large expenditures in research & practice
– applications & use growing exponentially
– huge effects, some unpredictable
– but study of human aspects relatively
neglected
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
2
what are digital libraries?
• no neat answer - a number of
conceptions with varying emphasis on:
– digital content, objects
• creation, management, representation,
organization, preservation
– access
• availability, services, interfaces
– use, users, communities
– technical infrastructure, networks,
– institutional context, policies, cooperation
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
3
where do humans fit?
• digital libraries support users in
informational tasks and needs
– what are people doing?
– how are people engaging with d-library
• as yet, we are not sure
• what processes & variables to observe
• what context & effects to include
• what models, criteria, measures,
methodologies to use
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
4
dl research
• most done on
– technical aspects, content handling,
organization, operations, access tools …
• in comparison human information
behavior was investigated much less
– still there are a number of studies in a variety
of countries
• here we surveyed some 50 studies
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
5
context of studies
• some studies indeed concentrated on
human information behavior in d-libraries
• but, most were a part of d-lib evaluation
– users used various features/processes
– i.e. evaluation was goal and findings on
human information behavior were a byproduct
• d-library evaluation & studies of human
information behavior are mixed together
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
6
methods used
•
•
•
•
•
•
surveys
interviews
observations
think aloud
focus groups
ethnographic
analysis
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
•
•
•
•
log analysis
record analysis
experiments
given task
accomplishments
• economic
preferences
• you named it!
7
classes of variables
studied
• users – who uses a d-library?
• features – what features are used?
• access – how is it used?
• use – what content is used? for what?
• usability – ease? effectiveness?
• outcomes – with what results?
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
8
users
• population, reasons
– who uses a given d-library and why?
• tasks, queries
– what is their nature?
• knowledge, understanding
– what knowledge & learning needed?
• preferences, expectations
– what is preferred? expected?
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
9
features
• features
– what available features in a d-library are
being used?
• frequency & amount
– how much are they used? distribution?
• patterns
– what may be patterns in use of any feature?
• individual differences
– how do individuals differ in use of features?
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
10
access
• access
– how? from where? how often?
repeated?
• discovery
– how searched, navigated, browsed,
retrieved?
• time, effort
– what does it take to use & find?
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
11
use
• distribution
– how many items in collection used?
• application
– for what were the items actually used?
• social
– what are social practices associated
with digital library use?
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
12
usability
• effectiveness
– how well are given user tasks accomplished?
• efficiency
– at what cost, effort, time?
• ease
– how easy are interfaces & features to use?
• barriers
– what hindrances? frustrations? lost?
• learning effort
– how much needs to be learned? how? errors?
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
13
outcomes
• downloads
– what & how much is downloaded?
• assessments
– what value? relevance? usefulness?
satisfaction?
• effects
– what impact on activities?
• e.g. education, scholarly communication
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
14
some interesting results
• users
– half are repeated users
• features
– many not used
• access
– varies by nature of desired materials
– users vary in skills & understanding
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
15
results …
• use
– 80 – 20 rule seems valid – a small
proportion of collection is used
– downloads are significant
• usability
– many barriers to use
– effectiveness varies greatly
– frustration is easily triggered
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
16
results …
• outcomes
– many queries do not lead to viewing
– text materials not appealing
– valuing varies with age
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
17
studying inf behavior in
d-library context
• impossible? not really
• hard? very
• mostly subsumed under d-library
evaluation
• could not generalize yet
• no theories
• no general models emerged yet,
although some proposed
– here is one
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
18
model for studying human inf
behavior in digital libraries
users, tasks, contexts
features
access
use
seeking inf
usability
outcomes
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
19
users and digital libraries
• a number of studies reported various
versions of the same result:
users have many difficulties with DLs
– usually do not fully understand them
– they hold different conception of a DL from
operators or designers
– they lack familiarity with the range of
capabilities, content and interactions
– they often engage in blind alley interactions
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
20
but is it:
user AND digital library
or
user VERSUS digital library
• why VERSUS?
– users and d libraries see each other
differently
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
21
analogy
• perceptions of users and
perceptions of designers and
operators of a DL are generally not
very close
• users are from Venus and DLs are
from Mars
• leads to the versus hypothesis
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
22
user AND digital library
model
digital library
model of user
context
task
cognitive
digital
library
user
affective
competence
context
content
representation
organization
services
user model of
digital library
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
23
how close are they?
user VERSUS digital library model
user model of digital
library
what user
assumes about
digital library:
how it works?
what to expect?
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
digital library model
of user
what digital
library assumes
about user:
- behavior?
- needs?
24
the versus hypothesis
in use, more often than not, digital
library users and digital libraries are in
an adversarial position
• hypothesis does not apportion blame
– does not say that DL are poorly designed
– or that users are poorly prepared
• adversarial relation may be a natural
order of things
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
25
technological imperative
• human information behavior in dlibraries quite different then in
traditional libraries
• behavior related more to
technology side then library side
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
26
conclusions
• research on human information
behavior in d-libraries still in
infancy
• not funded much, if at all
• but necessary for understanding
how to build better d-libraries and
services
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
27
How to do it?
inf
behavior
digital
library
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
28
sources
• URLs for the mentioned and other
literature dealing with studies on:
– evaluation of digital libraries
– human information behavior in DL
– evaluation of metadata
– usability tests
can be found on:
http://scils.rutgers.edu/~miceval
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
29
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
30
© Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University
31