Comparison and evaluation of the user interfaces of e‐journals II: perceptions of the users

Author:

Vilar Polona,Žumer Maja

Abstract

PurposeThe paper aims to present a part of a wider study, performed at the Department of LIS&BS at the University of Ljubljana (UL). The study investigated the perceptions of user friendliness of information retrieval (IR) systems.Design/methodology/approachAn expert study and a user study were performed. The user study was based on the results of the previous expert study, which surveyed the interfaces of four e‐journal IR systems (Science Direct, Proquest Direct, Ebsco Host and Emerald) and has been published separately. In the user study three of these interfaces were used: Science Direct, Proquest Direct, and Ebsco Host. A pilot study with ten subjects and a main study with 61 subjects, all postgraduate students of the UL, was performed. Questionnaires and observation were used for data collection. The users' perceptions of user interfaces were investigated and compared to the findings of the expert study.FindingsIt was found that users do not show high appreciation of auxiliary functions (such as search history, indexes, etc.) and do not use them to a great extent. They also do not prefer to have available different full‐text formats. Perceptions of user friendliness of elements and functions were different in each interface. For each interface it was also established that different functions and elements were influential in the overall perceptions of the interface friendliness. In comparison of the findings of the expert and user study it was found that the expert study was in some cases too detailed and investigated aspects not perceived by the users. For this reason, certain findings of both studies were not appropriate for comparison.Research limitations/implicationsThe methodology of data collection was rather demanding and lengthy, and influenced the type and size of sample. Because of that it may not be possible to generalise the result to all users of e‐journals. Also, large quantities of data were collected which could be studied further.Practical implicationsThe results of the study are relevant for the design of the user interfaces of IR systems. They also have implications for other areas, e.g. user education and training.Originality/valueThe study investigates the users' own perceptions of user friendliness of the e‐journal interfaces and also compares them to the findings of the expert study. This gives a valuable insight and provides many different viewpoints in regard to user friendliness, which in itself is a demanding concept.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Library and Information Sciences,Information Systems

Reference30 articles.

1. Anderson, J. (1995), “Have users changed their style? A survey of CD‐ROM vs OPAC product usage”, Reference Quarterly, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 362‐8.

2. Backlund, J. (2001), Web Interfaces and Usability: [Masters Project], Centre for User Oriented IT Design, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.

3. Borgman, C.L. (1986), “Why are online catalogues hard to use? Lessons learned from information retrieval studies”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 387‐400.

4. Borgman, C.L. (1987), “Toward a definition of user friendly: a psychological perspective”, What is User Friendly?, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois, Urbana‐Champaign, IL, pp. 29‐44.

5. Borgman, C.L. (1996), “Why are online catalogues still hard to use?”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 47 No. 7, pp. 493‐503.

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Cybrarians at Last?;Library Science and Administration;2018

2. Information searching behaviour of young Slovenian researchers;Program;2011-07-26

3. Cybrarians at Last?;Advances in Library and Information Science

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3