User expectations in the time of Google: Usability testing of federated searching

Internet Reference Services Quarterly

Volumn 12, Issue 1-2, 2007, Pages 159-178

  Ponsford, Bennett Claire ^a   VanDuinkerken, Wyoma ^a  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Federated searching; Interface design; MetaLib; Usability; User expectations; User testing

Indexed keywords

EID: 34948864332     PISSN: 10875301     EISSN: 15404749     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J136v12n01_08     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Baer, William. 2004. Federated searching: Friend or foe. C&RL News 65(9): 518-519.
2. Bowen, Jennifer et al. 2004. Serial failure. The Charleston Advisor 5(3): 48-51. http://www.charlestonco.com/features.cfm.?id= 146&type=ed (accessed May 22, 2006).
3. Cervone, Frank. 2005. What we've learned from doing usability testing on OpenURL resolvers and federated search engines. Computers in Libraries 25(9): 10-14.
4. Cockrell, Barbara J. and Elaine Anderson Jayne. 2002. How do I find an article? Insights from a Web usability study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship 28(3): 122-132. doi:10.1016/S0099-1333(02)00279-3.
5. Crawford, Walt. 2004. Meta, federated, distributed: Search solutions. American Libraries 35(7): 80.
6. Curtis, AnneMarie and Daniel G. Dorner. 2005. Why federated search? Knowledge Quest 33(3): 35-37.
7. Dorner, Daniel G. and Anne Marie Curtis. 2003. A comparative review of common interface software products for libraries: Report commissioned by the National Library of New Zealand. Te Puna Matauranga o Aotearoa. Wellington, New Zealand: School of Information Management, Victoria University. http://www.natlib.govt.nz/files/CUI_Report_Final.pdf (accessed. February 25, 2006).
8. ExLibris. 2004. MetaLib version 3.12+ search syntax, http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/docportal/ (accessed May 17, 2006, access restricted to customers).
9. Lindahl, David and Stanley J. Wilder. 2003. Brave new MetaSearch. Charleston Advisor 5(2). http://www.charlestonco.com/features.cfm?id= 139&type=np (accessed May 22, 2006).
10. Luther, Judy. 2003. Trumping Google: Metasearching's Promise. Library Journal, 1228(16): 36-39.
11. Miller, Todd. 2004. Federated searching: Put it in its place. Library Journal netConnect, 2004 (Spring).
12. Nielsen, Jakob. 1999. Designing Web Usability: The Practice of Simplicity. Thousand Oaks, CA: New Riders Publishing.
13. Norlin, Elaina and CM Winters. 2002. Usability Testing for Library Web Sites: A Hands-On Guide. Chicago, Ill.: American Library Association.
14. Novotny, Erik. 2004.1 don't think, I click: A protocol analysis study of use of a library catalog in the Internet age. College and Research Libraries 65(6): 525-537.
15. Rubin, Jeffrey. 1994. Handbook of Usability Testing: How to plan, design, and conduct effective tests. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
16. Sadeh, Tamar. 2004. The challenge of metasearching. New Library World 105 (1189/ 1190): 104-112.
17. Schwartz, Ezra. 2004. Getting to Know U: Vendor perspectives on MetaSearch UI design. Presentation to LITA Human-Computer Interface Interest Group pre-conference on Usability Issues in MetaSearch Interface Design, June 25, 2004. http://www.ala.org/ala/lita/litamembership/litaigs/humanmachine/ schwartz.pdf (accessed February 25, 2006).
18. Tallent, Ed. 2004. Metasearching in Boston College Libraries-a case study of user reactions. New Library World 105 (1196/1197): 69-75. DOI:10.1108/03074800410515282.
19. Tennant, Roy. 2001. Cross-database search: One-stop shopping. Library Journal 126(17) 29-30.
20. Tennant, Roy. 2003. The Right Solution: Federated Search Tools. Library Journal, 128(11): 28-29.
21. Webster, Peter. 2004. Metasearching in an academic environment. Online 28(2): 20-23.