Accounting for users' inflated assessments of on-line catalogue search performance and usefulness: An experimental study

Information Research

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2001, Pages

  Hildreth, Charles R ^a  

^a LONG ISLAND UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2942564172     PISSN: 13681613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Adams, Dennis A., Nelson, R. Ryan, and Todd, Peter A. (1992). Perceived usefulness, ease of use, and usage of information technology: a replication. MIS Quarterly, June 1992. 227-247.
2. Ankeny, Melvon L. (1991). Evaluating end-user services: success or satisfaction? The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 16(6): 352-356.
3. Applegate, Rachel. (1993). Models of user satisfaction: understanding false positives. RQ, 32(4): 525-539.
4. Ayres, F.H., Nielsen, L.P.S., and Ridley, M.J. (1998). The Bradford OPAC 2 (BOPAC2): managing and displaying retrievals from a distributed search in Z39.50. London, UK: British Library Research and Innovation Centre. (British Library Research and Innovation Report 103) [http://www.bopac2.comp.ac.uk/∼bopac2/report/]
5. Bates, Marcia J. (1990). Where should the person stop and the information search interface start? Information Processing and Management, 26: 575-591.
6. Beaulieu, Micheline, and Borgman, Christine L. (1996). A new era for OPAC research: introduction to special topic issue on current research in on-line public access systems. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(7): 491-492.
7. Belkin, Nicholas J. and Vickery, Alina. (1985). Interaction in information systems: a review of research from document retrieval to knowledge-based systems. London, UK: British Library. (Library and Information Research Report , no. 35).
8. Borgman, Christine L. (1996). Why are on-line catalogs still so hard to use? Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(7): 493-503.
9. Chen, Hsinchun and Dhar, Vasant. (1990). User misconceptions of information retrieval systems. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 32: 673-692.
10. Cherry, Joan M. (1997). Bibliographic displays in OPACs and Web catalogs: how well do they comply with display guidelines? Information Technology and Libraries, 17(3):
11. th Annual Conference of the Canadian Association for Information Science. Banff, Canada: Canadian Association for Information Science. 101-114.
12. Cleverdon, Cyril W. (1970). The effect of variations in relevance assessments in comparative experimental tests of index languages. Cranfield, UK: Cranfield Institute of Technology. (Cranfield Library Report No. 3)
13. Cleverdon, Cyril W., Mills, Jack, and Keen, E. Michael. (1966). Factors determining the performance of indexing systems. Cranfield, UK: Aslib Cranfield Research Project, College of Aeronautics. (Volume 1:Design; Volume 2: Results)
14. Cleverdon, Cyril W., Mills, Jack, and Keen, E. Michael. (1966). Factors determining the performance of indexing systems. Cranfield, UK: Aslib Cranfield Research Project, College of Aeronautics. (Volume 1:Design; Volume 2: Results)
15. Cooper, William S. (1973). On selecting a measure of retrieval effectiveness. Part I. The "subjective" philosophy of evaluation; Part II. Implementation of the philosophy. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24: 87-100; 413-424.
16. th Conference on Integrated on-line Library Systems, IOLS 1992: Integrated on-line Library Systems. New York, NY: Learned Information.
17. Davis, Fred D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, September 1989. 319-340.
18. Delone, William H, McLean, Ephraim R. (1992). Information systems success: the quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research, 3: 60-95.
19. Dervin, Brenda and Nilan, Michael S. (1986). Information needs and uses. In Williams, Martha E. ed. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), 21: 1986. White Plains, NY: Knowledge Industry Publications, Inc. 3-33.
20. Ellis, David. (1992). The physical and cognitive paradigms in information retrieval research. Journal of Documentation, 48: 45-64.
21. Ellis, David. (1994). Paradigms in information retrieval research. In Kent, Allen, ed. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, Volume 54: 275-291. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
22. nd edition. London, UK: Library Association Publishing.
23. Gatian, Amy W. (1994). Is user satisfaction a valid measure of system effectiveness? Information and Management, 26: 119-131.
24. Gluck, Myke. (1996). Exploring the relationship between user satisfaction and relevance in information systems. Information Processing and Management, 32(1): 89-104.
25. Harmon, Donna K. (1992). Evaluation issues in information retrieval. information processing and management, 28(4):439-440.
26. rd Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-3); November 2-4, 1994, Gaithersburg, MD. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. (NIST Special Publication 500-225).
27. Harmon, Donna K., ed. (1996). Overview of the 4th Text Retrieval Conference (TREC-4); November 1-3, 1995, Gaithersburg, MD. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. (NIST Special Publication 500-236).
28. Harter, Stephen P. and Hert, Carol A. (1997). Evaluation of information retrieval systems: approaches, issues, and methods. In Williams, Martha E. ed. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST), 32: 1997. Medford, NJ: Information Today. 3-94.
29. Hildreth, Charles R. (1995a). on-line catalog design models: are we moving in the right direction? A report commissioned by the Council on Library Resources, August 1995. http://phoenix.liunet.edu/∼hildreth/clr-opac.html.
30. Hildreth, Charles R. (1995b). The GUI OPAC: approach with caution. The Public Access Computer Systems Review, 6(5): 1995. (http://info.lib.uh.edu/pr/v6/n5/hild6n5.html)
31. Hildreth, Charles R. (1997). The use and understanding of keyword searching in a university on-line catalog. Information Technology and Libraries, 16(2): June 1997. 52-62.
32. Hiltz, Starr Roxanne and Johnson, Kenneth. (1989). Measuring acceptance of computer-mediated communications systems. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40 (6): 386-397.
33. Lancaster, F.W., Elzy, Cheryl, Zeter, Mary Jo, Metzler, Laura, and Low, Yuen-Man. (1994). Searching databases on CD-ROM: comparison of the results of end-user searching with results from two modes of searching by skilled intermediaries. RQ, 33(3): 370-386.
34. Large, Andrew and Beheshti, Jamshid. (1997). OPACs: A Research Review. Library & Information Science Research, 19(2): 111-133.
35. Mizzaro, S. (1997). Relevance: the whole history. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(9): 810-832.
36. th Annual Meeting: Volume 34; 1997. Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc. 89-97.
37. Nitecki, Danuta. (1993). User criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of the on-line catalog. In Murfin, Marjorie E. and Whitlatch, Jo Bell, eds., Research in Reference Effectiveness, RASD Occasional Papers, Number 16. Chicago: Reference and Adult Services Division, American Library Association, 1993. 8-28.
38. Ortiz-Repiso, Virginia, and Moscoso, Purificacion. (1999). Web-based OPACs: between tradition and innovation. Information Technology and Libraries, June 1999: 68-77.
39. Sandore, Beth (1990). on-line searching: what measure satisfaction? Library and Information Science Research, 12: 33-54.
40. Saracevic, Tefko, and Kantor, Paul. (1988). A study of information seeking and retrieving. II. users, questions, and effectiveness. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 39(5): 177-196.
41. nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
42. Sirkin, Mark R. (1995). Statistics for the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
43. Soergel, Dagobert. (1976). Is user satisfaction a hobgoblin? Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 27(July-August, 1976 ): 256-259.
44. Steffey, Ramona J. and Meyer, Nikki. (1989). Evaluating user success and satisfaction with CD-Rom. Laserdisk Professional, September 1989. 35-44.
45. Su, Louise T. (1992). Evaluation measures for interactive information retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 28: 503-516.
46. Su, Louise T. (1994). The relevance of recall and precision in user evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(3): 207-215.
47. th Annual Meeting: Volume 33; 1996 October 21-24. Baltimore, MD. Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc. 226-237.
48. Tessier, Judith A., Crouch, Wayne W., Atherton, Pauline. (1977). New measures of user satisfaction with computer-based literature searches. Special Libraries, 68(November 1977): 383-389.
49. Tinanoff, Susan. (1996).End-user searching with CD-ROM databases. The Katherine Sharp Review, 2 (Winter 1996). [http://edfu.lis.uiuc.edu/review/winter1996/tianoff.html]
50. Tonta, Yasar. (1992). Analysis of search failures in document retrieval systems: a review. The Public Access Computer Systems Review, 3(1): 4-53.