Planning and implementing a federated searching system: An examination of the crucial roles of technical, functional, and usability testing

Internet Reference Services Quarterly

Volumn 12, Issue 1-2, 2007, Pages 179-194

  Avery, Susan ^a   Ward, David ^a   Hinchliffe, Lisa Janicke ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b University Library

^c 122 Gregory Hall

Author keywords

Federated searching; Implementation; Metasearching; Usability

Indexed keywords

EID: 34948849091     PISSN: 10875301     EISSN: 15404749     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J136v12n01_09     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. ARL Scholars Portal Working Group. 2002. ARL Scholars Portal Working Group Final Report. http://www.arl.org/access/scholarsportal/final.html (accessed May 30, 2006).
2. Baer, William. 2004. Federated searching: Friend, or foe? College & Research Libraries News 65(9): 518-519.
3. Boss, Richard W. 2005. Library Web Portals. Tech Notes. http://www.ala.org/ala/pla/plapubs/technotes/librarywebportals.htm. (accessed May 30, 2006).
4. Cervone, Frank. 2005. What we've learned from doing usability testing on OpenURL resolvera and federated search engines. Computers in Libraries 25(9): 10-14.
5. Cobus, Laura, Valeda Frances Dent, and Anita Ondrusek. 2005. How twenty-eight users helped redesign an academic library Web site. Reference & User Services Quarterly 44(3): 232-246.
6. Curtis, AnneMarie, and Daniel G. Dorner. 2005. Why federated search? Knowledge Quest 33(3): 35-37.
7. Fichter, Darlene. 2001. Testing the Web site usability waters. Online (Weston, Conn.) 25(2): 78-80.
8. Elliott, Susan A. 2004. Metasearch and usability: Toward a seamless interface to library resources. http://www.lib.uaa.alaska.edu/tundra/msuse1.pdf (accessed May 30, 2006).
9. Fryer, Donna. 2004. Federated search engines. Online (Weston, Conn.) 28(2): 16-19.
10. Guenther, Kim. 2003. Assessing Web site usability. Online (Weston, Conn.) 27(2): 65-68.
11. Head, Alison J. 1999. Web redemption and the promise of usability. Online (Weston, Conn.) 23(6): 20-3 + .
12. Helfer, Doris Small and Jina Choi Wakimoto. 2005. Metasearching: The good, the bad, and the ugly of making it work in your library." Searcher 13(2): 40-41.
13. Jackson, Mary. 2005. Looking ahead: The future of portals. Journal of Library Administration 43(1/2): 205-220.
14. King, Steve. 2006. Don't make me think. Berkely, CA: New Riders Publishing.
15. McGillis, Louise, and Elaine G. Toms. 2001. Usability of the academic library Web site: Implications for design. College & Research Libraries 62(4): 355-367.
16. Nielsen, Jakob. 2005. Sixty guidelines from 1986 revisited. http://www.useit.com/ alertbox/20050117_guidelines.html (accessed May 19, 2006).
17. Nielsen, Jakob. 2000. Why you only need to test with 5 users. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html (accessed February 13, 2006).
18. RLG. 2005. Report on RLG metasearch survey. http://www.rlg.org/en/ page.php7Page_ID=20750 (access November 10, 2005).
19. Solomon, Marc. 2004. A confederacy of databases: Federated search flying under many flags. Searcher 12(7): 24-29.
20. Tallent, Ed. 2004. Metasearching in Boston College libraries-a case study of user reactions. New Library World 105(1196/1197): 69-75.
21. Tennant, Roy. 2003. The right solution: Federated search tools. Library Journal 128(11): 28, 30.
22. Webster, Peter. 2004. Metasearching in an academic environment. Online (Weston, Conn.) 28(2): 20-23.