SUMMARY
This site is intended to help library web developers decide how to label key resources and services in such a way that most users can understand them well enough to make productive choices. It compiles data from usability studies evaluating terminology on library websites, and suggests test methods and best practices for reducing cognitive barriers caused by terminology.
Key findings from the 51 usability studies examined:
- The average user success rate for finding journal articles or article databases is 52% (in 20 tests at 14 libraries reporting this information). Narrative descriptions suggest that terminology is a major factor.
- Terms most often cited as being misunderstood or not understood by users:
Acronyms & brand names
Database
Library Catalog
E-journals
Index
Interlibrary Loan
|
Periodical or Serial
Reference
Resource
Subject categories
such as Humanities
or Social Sciences
|
- Terms most often cited as being understood well enough to foster correct choices by users:
Find books, Find articles, and other combinations
using natural language "target words"
Terms accompanied by additional words or mouseovers
that expand on their meaning.
See also: Presentation at Internet Librarian 2005
BEST PRACTICES
The data revealed by usability studies show some definite patterns. While these don't resolve all ambiguities, they do point to some best practices in this area:
- Test to see what users do and don't understand, and what terms they most strongly relate to. Use test data from other libraries whose user populations resemble your own. Share your own data with others.
» Test methods
- Avoid - or use with caution - terms that users often misunderstand. If you must use terms frequently cited as problematic in usability studies, such as acronyms, brand names, Catalog, or Database, expect that significant number of users will not interpret them correctly.
» More data
- Use natural language equivalents on top-level pages, such as Borrowing from Other Libraries instead of Interlibrary Loan, or a Find Books option in addition to the library catalog name. Whenever possible, include "target words", such as Book or Article, that correspond to the end product the user is seeking. When needed, introduce more precise technical terms on lower-level pages.
- Enhance or explain potentially confusing terms. Use additional words and/or graphics to provide a meaningful context. Where appropriate, use mouseovers or tooltips -- but don't count on users pausing to read them. Provide glossaries of library terms, or "What's this?" explanations of individual terms.
» Sample glossaries
- Provide intermediate pages when a top-level menu choice presents ambiguities that can't be resolved in the space available. For example, have your Find Books link lead to a page offering the local catalog, system or consortium catalog, e-books, WorldCat, etc.
» Example
- Provide alternative paths where users are likely to make predictable "wrong" choices. For example, put links to article databases in your online catalog and on your "Find Journals" page.
» Example
- Be consistent to reduce cognitive dissonance and encourage learning through repetition. Use terms consistently throughout your website, and if possible in printed materials, signage, and the actual names of facilities and services.
TEST METHODS
- Capturing terminology-related comments from focus groups
- ADVANTAGES: Doesn't require a separate activity; may generate group consensus
or differing opinions.
- ISSUES: Not systematic; captures opinions not behavior.
- Capturing terminology-related behavior and comments from user observation
tests
- ADVANTAGES: Doesn't require a separate activity; captures actual user behavior.
- ISSUES: May be difficult to separate terminology-related problems from
other design issues.
- Capturing terminology from web site search logs
- ADVANTAGES: Captures actual terms users have in mind when using a site.
- ISSUES: Many such terms may reflect searches intended for the library catalog, article databases, etc. (which in itself tells us something significant).
- Link choice survey (preference test)
- Participants are given a series of task scenarios and asked which of several possible, approximately synonymous links they would choose to accomplish each task. Options include asking for their first and second choices, and asking them what they think the link names mean.
- » Online survey example from West Texas A&M University
- » Online survey form and results from UC Berkeley
- » Results of a paper survey from UC Berkeley
- ADVANTAGES: Directly addresses issues about alternative names for any given link.
- ISSUES: Presents link alternatives without web page context; subject to bias based on the scenario wording and the link names currently in use.
- Link choice test (in web page context)
- Participants are given a set of task scenarios and a list or mockup showing all the links they would see on the page in question.
- » Example using a mockup from UC Berkeley
- ADVANTAGES: Yields data on participants' likely link choices given the full array of options on the web page.
- ISSUES: Results may be affected by whether participant is looking at a list or a mockup.
- Link naming test
- Participants are given a list of current or proposed link names, and asked to state their expectation for what each link would lead to. If the test is done with participants viewing the web page, they are then asked to follow the link, comment on what they find there, and suggest alternative names.
- ADVANTAGES: Yields more in-depth data on participants' understanding of terminology.
- ISSUES: Users may simply paraphrase or embellish the link name in question. Results may be affected by whether participant is looking at links with or without web page context.
- Card sorting test
- Participants are given cards representing all items on the page/site
and asked to sort them and name the categories.
- » Example from MIT
- ADVANTAGES: Minimum constraints; participants can choose their own categories
and labels; yields data on site structure.
- ISSUES: Card set must represent all items; participants must understand the items as named/described the cards;
may be difficult to get high degree of consensus; time-consuming to process results.
- Category membership test
- Participants are given a list of all items on the page/site and a list
of the categories to be used, and asked to indicate which items should
be in each category.
- ADVANTAGES: More focused than the card sorting test.
- ISSUES: May miss some possibilities that would surface in an unconstrained card sort; participants must understand the items as named/described the cards.
DATA
Library terms evaluated in usability tests and
other studies
For more, see Resources below.
|
Source
For more complete information,
see the published studies listed below |
What didn’t work:
Terms reported as
being misunderstood, not understood,
or not preferred |
What did work:
Terms reported as being
understood or preferred;
Successful strategies for presenting
or explaining terms |
|
Appalachian
State University Library and Georgia
Southern University Library
This test compared the sites of these two libraries and that of the University
of Arizona Library.
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 32 freshmen
See:
W. Bede Mitchell et al., "Testing the Design of a Library Information Gateway" (PDF), ACRL Tenth National Conference (Denver, 2001); also published in Southeastern Librarian 49 (2001), 4-10.
|
Periodical
Databases ('without referring to magazines, periodicals, or articles")
Databases and Periodical Article Indexes [for finding a newspaper
article]; "If the precise term, such as Newspaper … did
not appear in the description of an option, many students thought it was
probably not to be found there."
------
Special Collections "did not convey to the freshmen anything other
than … catalogs of materials besides books. … [It] was also chosen
in desperation for other searches as well, indicating that this is not
a good term to use on an opening library Web site screen if it is not
further defined."
|
"The Arizona site's icon clearly represented magazines and newspapers
with the word articles prominently displayed, making it easy for
students to find the best search option."
------
Library Catalog "led to more correct responses [on finding
a book] than … a prominent icon which featured a book [or] … Books
and more"
|
|
Bucknell University Information Services & Resources
Pathfinders Usability Study (2000)
Test method: Questionnaire.
Test participants: 21
Information provided by Isabella O'Neill, Bucknell University.
|
Pathfinders
[as a generic term for subject guides]
|
Research by Subject
[now used on production site]
Other terms suggested by participants:
ResearchFinder
Research Home
Research Source
Getting Started
Research Pathfinders
Beginning Research Page
Where to Start
Researching? Start Here
|
|
California State University,
Long Beach Library
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 9 students at the University of Arizona.
See:
Tiffini Anne Travis and Elaina Norlin, "Testing the Competition: Usability of Commercial Information Sites Compared with Academic Library Web Sites," College & Research Libraries 63 (2002), 433-448.
|
COAST [library catalog]
" … the annotation beneath the link to COAST did not mention the word 'books'. In fact, nothing on the home page or the secondary electronic resources page ever said the word 'book.' Instead, ambiguous terms such as 'items' and 'resources' were used."
|
"By contrast, students did read the descriptions under the Research Databases link. They noticed the words 'articles' and 'research.' As a result, students did not encounter the same difficulties finding articles as they did finding books …"
[Since this test, this section of the home page now reads as follows:
Electronic Resources
Find books (COAST), articles (Research Databases), Course Reserves, Research Guides to help you with your research, links to other libraries, & more!]
|
|
College of Charleston Libraries
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 15 students.
See:
Debbie Vaughn and Burton Callicott, "Broccoli Librarianship and Google-Bred Patrons, or What's Wrong with Usability Testing?", College & Undergraduate Libraries 10 (2003), 1-18.
DISCLAIMER: The fact that I am quoting data from this article does not imply agreement with the authors' expressed views on library terminology, web site usability, or test methods. In this case, the characterization of Databases as an unsuccessful link label is my interpretation only.
|
Databases
"Several participants experienced difficulty when asked to find a magazine or journal article about The Great Gatsby. Eight of the 15 participants were unable to complete the task and many who eventually completed the task indicated that they were not confident that they had been successful. … By watching and listening to the participants, it was clear that when the terms magazine, journal, or article did not appear on the libraries' home page, their confidence and success in their ability to complete this task was lowered."
|
|
|
Hunter College Libraries
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 24 undergraduates, 2 graduate students, 2 others.
See:
Laura Cobus, Valeda Frances Dent, and Anita Ondrusek, "How Twenty-Eight Users Helped Redesign an Academic Library Web Site", Reference & User Services Quarterly 44 (Spring 2005), 232-46.
|
Databases
(described by one student as "the base that holds the data")
Electronic Journals
("I would go to [that link] just because it says 'journals.")
Reference Shelf
" … very general. You don't know what to expect as it could be anything.")
Web Guides
Archives
FAQs
|
Finding an Article
Finding a Book
Library Instruction
Tutorials
Subject Directories (Websites reviewed by librarians)
|
|
MIT Libraries
"Big Test" usability test, November 2002
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 21 students (9 undergrads + 12 graduate students)
For detailed reports on these and other tests, plus useful guidelines
and policies, see the MIT
Web Advisory Group site.
|
Database
Serial
Copy Options
vs. Copy Services
BookPage (delivery service)
Retrospective Collection (storage facility)
MIT research:
Dspace (repository)
|
|
MIT Libraries
Usability test results, March-April 2001
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 3 undergrad students, 4 grad students, 1 faculty member.
|
|
Accompanying the name Barton
with MIT Libraries' online catalog
Accompanying the name VERA
with A listing of our databases and e-journals
In the VERA electronic resources
system, use Display List instead of Search to show a list
of resources whose titles contain certain words.
For MIT users only (to replace MIT only)
|
MIT Libraries
Barton catalog test, February 2001
Test method: user observation.
Test participants:7 undergrad students, 3 library staff |
Browse vs. Keyword
No of recs
(for "number of records)
Words adjacent
Subject - Cutter
Library holdings |
Label browse searches as:
title
begins with …
subject begins with …
[etc.]
Journal title (to distinguish from
article titles)
# of titles (to replace no of recs)
Phrase (to replace Words adjacent)
|
MIT Libraries
Card-sorting exercise, Summer 1999
Test method: manual card sorting
Test participants: 9 volunteers
Card sorting exercise results
|
Databases
"people used this word to mean many different things, a much broader
definition of it than we usually think of (no clear trend other than this)"
Resources
"No one used the term, resources, to describe anything."
|
Major categories created by more than one participant:
Thesis information
Information by Course
New materials & library news
Ordering materials
Access policies for our library and other libraries
About the MIT Libraries
Services
Reference
Materials/Content/Collections
|
MIT Libraries
Category Identification Test, Fall 1999
Test method: survey
Test participants: 21 library users
Category identification results
|
|
Particpants associated:
New Books with Library News & Updates
Electronic Journals with Searchable Resources
Hours with About the Libraries
Barton: Online Catalog of the MIT Libraries with Searchable
Resources
Locations of MIT Libraries with About the Libraries
Specifications for Thesis Preparation with Subject/Course-related
Information
Databases on the Web with Searchable Resources
Interlibrary Borrowing with Services
Library Course Page for 6.763 with Subject/Course-related
Information
Research Assistance with Services
|
MIT Libraries
Web Site Usability Test, March 1999
|
Top 5 observed problems included:
1. Unclear link names: Barton, RSC, ILB, virtual
reference
2. Vague and unclear category names: resources, services,
subjects
|
|
|
Memorial University of Newfoundland
Libraries
Test methods: user task performance with some automated data collection;
questionnaire.
Test participants: 17 undergraduates, 2 graduate students, 14 faculty
members.
See:
Louise McGillis and Elaine G. Toms, "Usability of the Academic Library
Web Site: Implications for Design," College & Research Libraries (July
2001), 355-367.
|
Journal article
Internet Resources vs. Databases
Internet Resources by Subject vs. Internet Search Engines
vs. Electronic Books vs. Internet Reference Sites
Research Help vs. Request Forms
Local terms:
Webcat (library catalog)
Unicorn (library catalog)
Do-it-Yourself in Unicorn
|
Brief descriptions under main menu items on the home page. "[T]hese annotations … were the most effective aid in assisting participants to havigate the menus because they provided hints
about what might be found on the next menu level. These were much more
specific than the menu choice and able to add discriminating power".
“Some participants suggested it would be more helpful if each category’s
annotation contained all subsequent choices”. |
|
Library Website Terminology; Interim Minnesota Guidelines
Minitex/Minnesota State Library Standards Review Task Force, [2006]
Test method: Online survey on more than 50 library websites.
Test participants
(by type of library):
Public 5021
Academic 2196
K-12 232
Other 202
Total 7651
|
See posted report for terms with low preference scores
|
Recommended terms:
Library Catalog *
Find a magazine or newspaper article *
eBooks *
Online Reference Tools
Library Favorites
Ask a Librarian *
Interlibrary Loan *
Using the Library from Your Home or Office
My Account *
Request an Item
* indicates strong pattern in responses
|
|
Minnesota Library Information Network (MnLINK)
Test method: Task-based questionnaire using paper prototypes.
Test participants: 101 students enrolled in writing courses at Minnesota State University, Mankato.
See:
Joan Roca and Roland Nord, "Usability Study of the MnLINK Gateway," OCLC Systems & Services 17 (2001), 26-33.
|
Library Catalogs
Databases
Basic search
Advanced search
Help
"More than 90 per cent of the subjects identified the help button and its purpose; however … only 1 per cent of the subjects stated that they would use the help button."
|
|
|
North Carolina State University Libraries
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 6 undergraduates in each of 3 trials.
See:
Find Articles Usability Tests, 2005.
This report includes videos, viewable by special arrangement. Thanks to Amanda French for posting this information.
|
"Many of the users are choosing E-journal Finder when they should be choosing Database Finder … This indicates that neither page is clearly titled. The term database is often unfamiliar, so that users who are looking for a journal article tend to click on E-journal Finder rather than on Database Finder."
"The term journal, used to refer to periodicals in general, is not sufficiently explained nor exemplified in the text on the site. The term's use in the brand E-journal Finder obscures the fact that this collection of tools encompasses other kinds of periodicals, most especially newspapers and magazines. The term articles, which usefully applies to items in most kinds of periodicals, appears only in underemphasized, unhyperlinked descriptive text on the home page. Users don't see it, especially if they're in the catalog, where there is nothing to point them to articles."
|
" … the Find Articles term and structure is indeed successful."
User success rate went from 53% on the original site to 61% and 89% on two different redesigns. The report cited at left includes screenshots of all three. Terminology, graphic design, and information architecture may all contribute to the varying rates.
|
|
Norwich University Library
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 7 undergraduates (freshmen and sophomores).
Data provided by Meredith Farkas; selected results are posted on her blog as "Website redesign at MPOW: What I'm Learning," 2005.
|
Looking for journal articles on a specific subject, most participants did not first choose the correct link, Databases and Indexes. Unsuccessful choices included Periodicals, Library Catalog, Internet Resources, and Special Collections.
"No student knew what a Reference Desk was."
"Only one of them knew what [Interlibrary Loan] was called."
"Only one person knew that Circulation had anything to do with borrowing."
Student comment: "I couldn't find a few sites due to the fact that they were under different names, or I was never taught how to find them."
|
Internet Resources to find websites on a specific subject.
Student suggestion: "To make the site better, you can perhaps give examples of what each category deals with."
|
|
Pennsylvania State University Libraries
Test method: user observation in "focus groups"; participants were asked to complete tasks using the Penn State website and those of 20 other academic libraries.
Test participants: "Freshmen with limited experience in library use" (number unknown).
See:
Lesley Moyo and Ashley Robinson, "Library Jargon as a Factor in Information Design for Web Usability: Survey Report (Summary)," 16th Annual Computers in Libraries 2001 (Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc., 2001), pp.157-165.
|
"professional terms"
|
"natural terms"
"Pages that worked best were those with explanatory notes below each library term used and those sites which popped up explanatory information on mouseover."
|
|
Pennsylvania State University Libraries
Usability study for website redesign (2004)
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: Not specified.
|
The CAT
ILLIAD
database
E-resources
research guide
location
General subject terms, e.g., Life sciences
|
Specific subject terms, e.g., Biology
Recommendations on terminology:
"Short term - use patron-friendly terminology in place of library or vendor specific terminology when possible. When this isn't possible, provide a brief explanation of the terms in-place.
"Long term - determine a way to address the needs of the novice user and experienced user while providing learning opportunities for the novice user. This could include creating multiple sites or allowing patrons to set preferences."
|
|
Roger Williams University Library
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 19 students in two rounds of testing.
See:
Susan McMullen, "Usability Testing in a Library Web Site Redesign
Project", Reference Services Review 29 (2001), 7-22.
|
“… users do not perceive the link, Online Databases and
Indexes, as the resource choice to make [for] periodical articles.”
“Students do not understand basic library terms, such as database
or index.”
”… one remarked that she thought of databases as spreadsheets.”
|
”Users can quickly identify the online library catalog.”
“Placement of links, color, and size does make a difference. Links
should be easy to identify. It is easier to spot links when they are not
embedded in text.”
”Built-in redundancy works.”
|
|
Texas A&M University Libraries
Test method: focus groups.
Test participants: 26 people, including undergraduates, graduate students,
faculty, librarians, and university staff.
See:
Gwyneth H. Crowley et al., "User Perceptions of the Library's Web Pages:
A Focus Group Study at Texas A&M University," Journal of Academic
Librarianship 28 (July 2002), 205-210.
|
Find titles by keyword - participants thought this meant article
titles rather than e-journal or database titles.
Information
Reserves
Reference
Database
Remote Access
Forms
Online Help
TN3270
VT100
Database subject categories:
Humanities
Social Sciences
Science & Engineering
Local or vendor terms:
PAM (Public Access Menu system for electronic resources)
Citrix
|
Participants suggested:
Using ALT text for mouseover explanations of graphical buttons.
FAQ page.
Glossary of terms. |
|
University at Buffalo
Libraries
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 11 undergraduates
See:
Brenda Battleson, Austin Booth, and Jane Weintrop, ”Usability Testing
of an Academic Library Web Site: A Case Study,” Journal of Academic
Librarianship 27 (May 2001), 188-198.
|
Web Search ("students erroneously assumed [this] led only to Web search engines and the Internet, when, in fact, it included links to site-specific search features …").
Need Help (participants were not satisfied with help pages provided).
Online Resources (most chose “Libraries Catalog”
for non-catalog research tasks such as finding articles).
Databases by Title
Reference Resources
Quick Start
|
Libraries Catalog (most chose this correctly for normal catalog
functions)
"Although not always appropriate, Databases by Subject was selected most often, while virtually every other link on the 'Online Resources' screen was ignored."
|
|
University at Buffalo
Libraries
Test method: manual card sorting
Test participants: 9, including 2 graduate students and 6 undergraduates
See:
Website Nomenclature Test [RTF]
Posted by permission of the authors, Brenda Battleson and Jane Weintrop.
|
Catalog
Course Reserve
Reference
Electronic Resources
" … there was little or no consensus when it came to terminology related to library tasks. Subjects could find few terms that could easily be linked to tasks. They really had no idea what to 'call things.' … Surprisingly, what librarians considered to be the most basic of terms … were not identified by the subjects as such. They seemed to grasp the concepts, but were 'hung up' on the terminology."
|
Find
Search[ing]
Internet
Professor
Class[es]
|
|
University of Arizona Library, SABIO Information Gateway
Test methods: heuristic evaluation, design walk-through, card sorting,
user observation.
Test participants: 8-12 students per round of tests.
See:
Ruth Dickstein and Vicki Mills, “Usability Testing at the University
of Arizona Library: How to Let the Users in on the Design”, Information
Technology and Libraries 19 (September 2000).
|
Catalog
Index
Resources
Databases
Reference
”We learned that if students have no idea why or when they should
use an index, they will not choose a link labeled Index, no matter
how well designed the Web page is.”
”… an Indexes page with twelve broad categories, such as social
science, humanities, life sciences, etc. -- words supplied by librarians
rather than students”.
|
(1) Graphical buttons
incorporating additional wording:
CATALOGS of Books & More/What We Own
Indexes to ARTICLES & More/Electronic Journals
Web SEARCH
Online REFERENCE/Ency/Dictionary
Multi-SEARCH
Research by SUBJECT
(2) “How to Find” pop-up menu.
Items include:
How to find MAGAZINES owned by the library
How to find MAGAZINE articles
(3) “Tips pages located at the point of need”
(4) “Research by Subject” page
(5) Subject menu using “a scroll box that allowed as many specific
subjects to be listed as needed. … The scroll box also enabled synonyms
to be included for some subjects, such as both Health and Medicine.”
|
|
University of California, Berkeley
Library
Survey of users of Pathfinder online catalog, November 2004
Test method: online survey.
Test participants: 254 responses, including 47 undergraduates, 119
graduate students, 22 faculty and 25 staff members.
Margin of error: +/- 6%
Survey
form
Survey
report
|
Title words (28.3%)
Title (6.3%)
------
Title phrase (15.7%)
Title (exact) (9.1%)
------
Text-only
Text-based
(though most did not think these meant the system contained full text).
Terminal-style
|
Title keyword(s) (62.2%)
------
Title begins with … (70.9%)
------
Command-line
Telnet
------
"Both Journal Title and Title of Journal searches were
understood correctly (as covering journal titles) by almost all respondents.
About one quarter of respondents and slightly over one third of undergraduates
incorrectly assumed these searches would cover article titles, and a smaller
number thought they would include full text. Differences between the two
alternative names were within the margin of error for this question." |
|
University of California, Berkeley
Library
Usability test of library home page, April 2004. [PDF]
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 4 undergraduates.
|
"No participant successfully found journal articles. … Participants were confused by the distinction between journals and articles, and they used the terms interchangeably. As in previous usability testing, some participants were drawn to the Journals (by title) link when searching for journal articles."
"Participants were unclear on the differences between GLADIS and Pathfinder [and] between Pathfinder and Melvyl."
"Participants were confused by the distinction between GLADIS and ERes [the library's electronic reserves system]."
"Participants were confused by the term telnet."
"Half of the participants understood the Search function, while the other half thought it would retrieve library resources (books, articles and more)."
"Participants seemed uncertain about the More... link, describing it as vague, unimportant and easy to miss."
|
"All four participants … seemed to understand that they would find [online dictionaries, encyclopedias, atlases, statistics, etc.] through the Electronic resources link under the Find Information tab."
Participants gravitated toward Services when looking for course reserves, library workshops, and privileges for undergraduates.
Student comment: "I would try to have something that said Employment Opportunities." Each participant, though, mentioned a different term; the others said they were looking for Join Our Team, Apply Here, and Work For Us.
|
|
University of California, Berkeley
Library
Link
Choice Test on Prototype Home Page, November 2003
Test method: paper questionnaire.
Test participants: 18 responses, including
9 undergraduates, 3 graduate students, 4 staff members, 2 visiting scholars.
|
Indexes and Abstracts (2 responses)
------
Research Tools (2 responses)
Reference Sources (2 responses)
|
Article Databases (12 responses)
4 participants suggested terms including "Journal" (note
that the question specifically referred to "journal articles").
------
Electronic Resources (14 responses)
A follow-up test, with 15 participants, showed Electronic Resources
getting 6 responses and Reference Tools getting 5. The results
in the first round may have been skewed by the test design.
|
|
University of California, Berkeley
Library
Unpublished usability study of prototype Electronic
Resources Database interface, March 2002.
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 3 undergraduates; 2 graduate students; 1 reference
librarian.
|
Article Indexes – some student participants didn’t
understand this term. One commented: “Article index doesn’t
mean ‘journals’ to me. Professors say ‘journal articles’”.
Library Catalogs
Gateway site
|
|
|
Doe/Moffitt Libraries,
University of California, Berkeley
Usability studies of draft Doe-Moffitt Libraries web page:
Round
1: August 2003
Round
2: October 2003
Round
3: November 2003
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 5 undergraduates; 3 graduate students; 1 visiting faculty
member. |
Journals (by Title) - most thought this “would lead [directly]
to scholarly journal articles”.
Articles – most thought this “would lead … to
a more global search of articles … in magazines, journals, newspapers
and popular level materials”.
Library Catalogs
Instruction
Liaison
Telnet
Proxy
Reference
Text only
Contacts by subject
Units
Local or vendor terms:
Pathfinder (library catalog system)
CDL (California Digital Library)
WorldCat
|
Find Books, Articles, Etc. - participants chose this over Library
catalogs.
Library Services – most gravitated to this term when given
tasks requiring them to find:
Loan periods, Renewing books online, Copiers, Tours, Reserves, Laptop,
Word processing, Connecting from off campus, Ask a reference question
online, Contacts by subject. |
|
University
of California, San Diego Libraries
Test methods: link choice test using paper form.
Test participants: 10 staff, 10 undergraduates and 8 graduate students
These tests, done in 1999-2000, generated data on what terms were
most successful as link names. The reports are no longer posted on the UCSD Libraries website, but are accessible through the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
See the script, instrument, and two reports labeled "terminology
test." The examples at right show the "aggregate preference" as
a percentage of respondents choosing each link option.
|
[To find a book]
Library Catalog (preferred by 18.4%)
[To find an article]
CDL/MELVYL (preferred by 7.8%)
Browse by Subject/Type of Material (7.8%)
|
[To find a book]
Find Books and more … (preferred by 34.7%)
ROGER (Library catalog) (30.6%)
[To find an article]
Find Articles and more … (preferred by 33.3%)
Choosing Article Databases (27.5%)
|
|
University
of Illinois at Chicago Library
Test methods: user observation.
Test participants: 12 students.
See:
Susan Augustine and Courtney Greene, “Discovering How Students Search
a Library Web Site: a Usability Case Study,” College & Research
Libraries 63 (2002), 354-65.
|
Article indexes
Pathfinders
Workshops
|
" … all participants but one used the internal Web site search
engine to complete tasks rather than navigating through the pages by following
links. … These search habits … indicate that more attention should
be paid to metadata and a strong internal search engine …"
|
|
University
of Illinois at Chicago Library
Test methods: card sorting.
Test participants: 15, mostly graduate students.
See:
Peter Hepburn and Krystal M. Lewis, "What's in a Name? Using Card Sorting to Evaluate Branding in an Academic Library's Web Site," College & Research Libraries 69 (2008), 242-250.
|
Cards most often discarded as having no meaning to participants:
ERes@UIC
InfoqUIC
MyILL@UIC
qUICsearch
Resources
UICCAT *
* "The 'CAT' part is not especially well understood either. Users do not necessarily make the link between the three letters and the word 'catalog.'"
|
"Use descriptive language. Use of generic terms and library jargon within brand names is not helpful. … Naming a service with explicit descriptive language that the user will also understand - even if brevity is lost - helps the user identify a library service."
"Use distinct names. Use of the same term ('UIC' in this case) within multiple brand names muddles the distinctions between the various resources and services."
"Provide marketing and instruction" to increase awareness and understanding of brand names.
|
|
University of Mississippi Libraries
Test method: "usability survey" (i.e., user observation).
Test participants: 12 undergraduate students.
See:
Elizabeth Stephan, Daisy T. Cheng, and Lauren M. Young, "A Usability Survey at the University of Mississippi Libraries for the Improvement of the Library Home Page," Journal of Academic Librarianship 32 (2006), 35-51.
|
Journal Finder
|
Catalog
Library Search Engine
Library Quick Links
Subject Guide
My Library Account
Hours
|
|
University of Rochester, River Campus Libraries
Test method: not specified.
Test participants: not specified.
See:
Jennifer Bowen et al., "Serial Failure," The Charleston Advisor 5 (2004)
|
Databases
|
Find Articles
"On the new home page, the word Databases was replaced with Find Articles, which resulted in a dramatically reduced failure rate in getting to the list of databases. … From a serial failure rate of nearly 100 percent in 1997, we now can claim some success in actual task completion."
|
|
University of Rochester, River
Campus Libraries
Test method: not specified.
Test participants: not specified.
See:
Brenda Reeb and Susan Gibbons, "Students, Librarians, and Subject Guides: Improving a Poor Rate of Return," portal: Libraries and the Academy 4 (2004), 123-130.
|
Subject discipline names
"At the University of Rochester, librarians repeatedly observed in usability testing that undergraduates lack an understanding of an academic discipline. … Some never grasp the concept of a 'discipline.' Others may gain an understanding in their majors, but do not transfer this comprehension to other academic domains. The concept of disciplines is not usually part of a student's mental model; therefore, the collocation of resources by discipline is not recognized."
|
Course-specific guides are suggested as a solution.
|
|
University of Saskatchewan, Health Sciences Library
Test methods: "preference test" using paper questionnaire (20 participants); user observation (5 participants).
See:
Vicky Duncan and Darlene Fichter, "What words and where? Applying usability testing techniques to name a new live reference service," JMLA: Journal of the Medical Library Assocation 92 (2004), 218?225.
|
Invitations to chat:
Don't give up!
Ask us and we'll help!
Invitations to click:
LiveHelp
Ask me!
Questions Online
Answers Online
Combined phrases:
Questions Online
Click Here
Answers Online
Click Here
Other terms found to be problematic in usability testing:
Database
Interlibrary Loan
E-journals
|
Invitations to chat:
Need help finding information?
Chat online with a librarian
Got a question?
Chat with a librarian NOW!
Invitations to click:
Ask a Librarian
Click Here
Combined phrases:
LiveHelp
Ask a Librarian
Term adopted for production site:
Ask a Librarian
|
|
University of South Florida Virtual Library
Test methods: user task performance and survey with automated data
collection.
Test participants: 32 undergraduates.
See:
Maryellen Allen, “A Case Study of the Usability Testing of the University
of South Florida’s Virtual Library Design,” Online Information
Review 26 (2002), 40-53.
|
E-Journals
Databases
100% of participants chose E-Journals instead of Databases in order to “research
journal or magazine articles”.
" … few users were familiar with the term 'interlibrary loan' request, even though they were familiar with the service itself."
Local terms:
WebLUIS (library catalog)
|
Online renewal (92.3% chose this correctly).
How do I find an article? (76.9% chose this correctly in the second
round of testing. This link combined E-Journals and Databases,
and led to an “intermediate page where the option for choosing direct
subscriptions to e-journals and those articles found in databases were
offered and explained”).
“… the simple, straightforward approach as seen in the ‘how
do I’ questions invariably produced more successful participant
behaviours than those using jargon.” |
|
University of Southern California, Norris Medical Library
Test method: user observation.
Test #1 participants: 5 medical school faculty, 1 student, 1 staff member (medical library)
Teat #2 participants: 2 faculty, 4 staff members.
See:
Candice Benjes and Janis F. Brown, "Test, Revise, Retest: Usability Testing and Library Web Sites," Internet Reference Services Quarterly 5 (2001), 37-54.
|
HELIX [name of online catalog]
Call number
Some users thought Journals and Books [under Electronic Resources] "encompassed all our holdings, print and otherwise. We modified the titles to Electronic Journals and Electronic Books and added a link to HELIX [catalog] for print resources."
Coverage ["they thought about it in insurance and HMO terms"]
More info [as a way to find access information for databases]
"When attempting to find the date of the next MEDLINE class, users did not recognize a link entitled class schedules as a possible answer; they wanted to find a link with the word MEDLINE."
|
"For the redesign, the text was rewritten in a more colloquial style, replacing "library speak" such as document delivery with the more commonly known phrase interlibrary loan."
After a "successful publicity campaign … students, staff, and faculty began asking for Ovid - not MEDLINE, CINAHL, [etc.]. In our setting, Ovid is shorthand for 'I want to find articles' … "
|
|
University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Libraries
Test method: user observation.
Test participants: 13 graduate students and faculty, most having experience with both the library web site and research in their subject areas.
See:
Thura Mack et al., "Designing for Experts: How Scholars Approach an Academic Library Web Site," Information Technology and Libraries (2004), 16-22.
|
Databases
"Five participants went to Databases on their first click, and three more eventually discovered the correct path to an article, for a success rate of 62 percent."
Subject Guides
[as a way to find a word definition]
"Only one of the participants went first to Subject Guides, and seven went to Internet Search Engines."
Kudzu [local brand name for OPAC]
AskUs.Now [local brand name for electronic reference service]
|
"The authors discovered that most participants were not confused by terms used on the library Web pages, with a few notable exceptions."
|
|
University of Virginia Libraries
Article Finder/OpenURL Resolver Usability Test
September-October, 2004
Test method: user observation
Test participants: 3 undergraduates; 2 Library staff; 2 faculty
Data provided by Leslie Johnston, 2/3/05
|
86% did not initially use the Find at UVa button in Web of Science
to invoke the Resolver. In a following question, 71% successfully used
it.
"The label Find@UVa on our Resolver button that appears in
vendor databases fails to communicate anything meaningful to the uninitiated,
or may even be misleading. Alternatives were suggested, however each had
problems of its own. Given the constraints on the size of the button,
and the difficulty of clearly explaining its function in 10 characters
or fewer, this is a problem that cannot be effectively addressed by button
design or labeling; if users don't know what a button does, they still
won't click it."
The eventual success of most testers suggests that once a user perceives
and understands the function of the "Find@UVa" button, s/he
will use it, regardless of the labeling.
|
|
|
University of Virginia Libraries
VIRGO OPAC Usability Test
May-October, 2002
Test method: user observation
Test participants: 3 faculty, 2 graduate students, 4 undergraduates, 4
library staff
Data provided by Leslie Johnston, 2/3/05
|
Serials
Periodicals
------
Ask VIRGO (inquire about services or ask for help)
------
31% were unsure what about the difference between Ejournals and
Journal and Newspaper Articles as navigation options.
------
"There was much confusion and a good deal of incomprehension about
the difference between a journal and an index to a journal."
|
Navigation now consistently uses Journals (although the others
terms do additionally appear in some page content).
------
Contact Us instead of Ask VIRGO
------
Navigation now reads:
Ejournal lists
Journal articles
Newspaper articles
|
University of Washington Libraries
Website redesign (2004)
Test methods: online survey, focus groups, prototyping, card sorting, user observation
Test participants: 238 survey responses; 11 user observation subjects.
See:
Jennifer L. Ward, "Web Site Redesign: The University of Washington Libraries' Experience",
OCLC Systems & Services 22 (2006), 207-216.
For more information on UW's test results, see their Usability Reports
|
UWorld Express (brand name for interlibrary loan services)
------
Contact Us
------
Browse by Subject
------
Information Gateway (website name)
|
Interlibrary Loan
------
Ask Us
|
University of Washington Libraries
Usability Study of the Subject Pages (2004)
Test method: user observation
Test participants: 8 undergraduates, 2 graduate students, 1 faculty
|
Core Resources to designate recommended databases.
------
By Subject |
"Users are more likely to use Best Bets than Core Resources".
------
"Users slightly preferred Browse Subjects to By Subject"
|
University of Washington Libraries
Card Sorting Usability Study (2001)
Test method: card sorting
Test participants: 1 undergraduate, 1 graduate student, 1 faculty member,
2 staff members
|
Starting Points (users didn't know what to expect)
Connecting (unclear that this referred to a proxy server)
Cascade (brand name of a service).
|
Users suggested FAQ's instead of Starting Points
|
University of Washington Libraries
Willow (text-based interface, no longer in use)
Test method: link choice questionnaire
Test participants: 145 undergraduates
See:
Karen Eliasen et al., "Navigating Online Menus: A Quantitative Experiment", College & Research Libraries (1997), 509-517.
|
UW Libraries Catalog
------
Databases … Arts & Humanities
[and other similar subject categories] |
Books, Periodicals, & Other Resources at the UW Libraries
------
Arts & Humanities: Indexes of Articles & Other Sources
[etc.]
|
|
Washington State University Libraries
Test methods: user observation.
OPAC test participants: 3 undergraduates, 3 graduate students, 1 "other".
Web site test participants: 6 students.
See:
Janet Chisman, Karen Diller, and Sharon Walbridge, "Usability Testing: A Case Study," College & Research Libraries 60 (November 1999), 552-69.
|
WebPac
"MARC format terminology in drop-down lists", e.g., Proj medium
Other Library Catalogs [many thought this could be any library on campus other than the one they normally use]
Dates of coverage [of article databases]
|
4 of 6 participants correctly chose Article Indexes, Full Text, and More to "find information … in periodicals (also known as serials or journals)"
|
|
Western Michigan University
Libraries
Test method: user observation
Test participants: 29 undergraduates, 10 graduate students, 10 faculty.
See:
Barbara J. Cockrell and Elaine Anderson Jayne, "How Do I Find an Article?
Insights from a Web Usability Study," Journal of Academic Librarianship
28 (May 2002), 122-132.
This article contains an excellent discussion of terminology issues.
|
Electronic Journals vs.Databases and Indexes
"At least one participant, who chose Electronic Journals rather than a database when looking for a journal article … indicated he made this choice because the associated annotation included both of the words 'journals' and 'articles'."
"Several participants said they did not understand the term database [which] was coupled with indexes … because some of these databases were not only indexes. Unfortunately, this may be a case where an attempt to give precise and complete information actually confuses users trying to distinguish among options."
Serials vs.Periodicals vs.Magazines vs.
Journals
”Almost half the participants thought the OPAC was the
source to use for magazine and journal articles.”
”Users were not very discriminating in their choice of indexes.
… [they often] selected the first item on any given list ..”
|
Changes made as a result of the study:
Placed links on the home page leading to “mini-tutorials”
for:
Find an Article
Find a Book
Placed a “Find Articles” link in the online catalog, leading
to a page providing more guidance and links to databases.
”… links were made more descriptive and readily distinguishable,
specialized terminology was simplified as much as possible, and a glossary
of library terms … is being developed.”
|
|
Western Wyoming Community
College Library
Test method: user observation
Unpublished study, 2003
(per Usability4Lib listserv posting, "how do we measure success?"
by Robert Kalabus, 1/27/2005, quoted by permission)
|
Interlibrary Loan
Periodical
New Acquisitions
Database
Webliography
Search Engine
|
|
|
Other Studies
|
|
Joseph Barker, "'Now Which Buttons Do I Press to Make These Articles Appear
on the Screen?", Serials Review 25 (November 1999), 49-54.
|
“Most undergraduates do not come to Cal knowing what a journal article
is, what a journal is, what an index is, or what is scholarly and reputable.”
”Only about 25 percent understand journal index citations and the
difference between a journal title and an article title.”
|
“If we seriously expect undergraduates to find e-journals, we must
unify bibliographic control and make links to them stand out like giant
billboards along the research paths undergraduates routinely travel.”
|
|
Abdus Sattar Chaudhry and Meng Choo, "Understanding of Library Jargon in the Information Seeking Process," Journal of Information Science 27 (2001), 343-349.
Test method: Questionnaire given to 40 clients of the National Reference Library of Singapore and "acquaintances of the staff" of the Library Support Services, National Library Board of Singapore, to test their understanding of "technical terms commonly used by librarians during reference interviews."
Overall correct answer rate: 76.9%
Note: Division into "what didn't work" and "what did work" is my own, based on an arbitary cutoff point of 66%.
|
Resource file (45% correct)
Holdings (47.5%)
Citation (55%)
ILL (interlibrary loan) (55%)
|
Book drop (97.5% correct)
OPAC (Online Public Access Catalogue) (95%)
Self-check terminal (95%)
User education (90%)
Call number (85%)
Keyword (85%)
Title/subject search (85%)
Free text (85%)
Bibliographical list/bibliography (85%)
Author catalogue (85%)
Full text (75%)
Bibliographic/catalogue record (75%)
Search term (72.5%)
DDC (Dewey Decimal Classification (72.5%)
Document delivery service (70%)
Microfilm (67.5%)
|
|
Norman B. Hutcherson, "Library Jargon: Student Recognition of Terms and Concepts Commonly Used by Librarians in the Classroom," College & Research Libraries 65 (2004), 349-354.
Test method: Questionnaire given to 297 first- and second-year undergraduates at California State University, Bakersfield who had completed a "seven-week library skills lab," to test their understanding of "terms derived from library literature, reference desk experience, and classroom observation."
Overall correct answer rate: 62.31%
Note: Division into "what didn't work" and "what did work" is my own, based on an arbitary cutoff point of 66%.
|
Boolean logic (8.1% correct)
Bibliography (14.9%)
Controlled vocabulary (18.1%)
Truncation (27.7%)
Precision (31.8%)
Information need (34.9%)
Descriptors (35.8%)
Abstract (36.2%)
Article (47%)
Citation (51.7%)
Bibliographic information (54.73%)
Authority (57.7%)
Collection (59.7%)
Catalog (61.62%)
Search statement (63.8%)
|
Plagiarism (100% correct)
Reference services (94.6%)
Research (94%)
Copyright (91.58%)
Table of contents (90.5%)
Synonym (89.9%)
Audiovisual materials (89.2%)
Editor (86.5%)
Call number (81.48%)
Reference books (75%)
Journal (74.5%)
Edition (72.3%)
Fair use (67.6%)
|
|
Rachael Naismith and Joan Stein, "Library Jargon: Student Comprehension of Technical Language Used by Librarians," College & Research Libraries 50 (Sept. 1989), 545.
Test method: Questionnaire given to 100 freshman English students at Carnegie Mellon University, to test their understanding of terms "derived from actual reference interviews and library handouts."
Overall correct answer rate: 51.3%
Note: Division into "what didn't work" and "what did work" is my own, based on an arbitary cutoff point of 66%.
|
Multi-volume set (11% correct)
Proceedings (20%)
Command search (25%)
Citation (35%)
Clearinghouse (38%)
Nonprint materials (40%)
University archives (41%)
Viewing carrel area (45%)
Primary source (45%)
Library rep (47%)
Pre-search (52%)
Online database searches (53%)
Search statement (53%)
|
Call number (83% correct)
Bound journals (82%)
Interlibrary loan (75%)
Microform (74%)
Search terms (71%)
Catalog screen (68%)
Online catalog (68%)
|
|
Mark A. Spivey, "The Vocabulary of Library Home Pages: An Influence on
Diverse and Remote End-Users," Information Technology and Libraries
19 (September 2000), 152-156.
Test methods:
Evaluations of terms appear to result from the author’s experience
in public service work.
Article also reports a year-long survey of terminology used on 60 library
home pages. |
Reference
Reserves
Periodicals
Periodical indexes
Indexes
Special collections
Citation
Library acronyms:
BI, ILL, OPAC etc.
Vendor acronyms:
CINAHL, CARL, JSTOR etc.
|
Author advises using:
(1) “Embedded explanations [such as] appositives, prepositional
phrases, parenthetical examples or descriptions, and categorical headers.”
Examples:
BI (library instruction)
ILL (interlibrary loan of books not held [here]
Reference for information assistance
Reserves for checking out class material
Special Collections for local material
Archives (university records)
WildCat, Lagoon University's catalog
(2) "glossary of library idioms and examples of local use,
available as links from the home page."
|
RESOURCES
Click on 
to see data in the table above.
 indicates recent items of unusual interest, not included in the table.
Maryellen Allen, "A Case Study of the Usability Testing of the University
of South Florida's Virtual Library Design," Online Information
Review 26 (2002), 40-53.
Susan Augustine and Courtney Greene, "Discovering How Students
Search a Library Web Site: a Usability Case Study", College &
Research Libraries 63 (2002), 354-365.
Joseph Barker, "'Now Which Buttons Do I Press to Make These Articles Appear on the Screen?", Serials Review 25 (November 1999), 49-54.
Brenda Battleson, Austin Booth, and Jane Weintrop, "Usability Testing of an Academic Library Web Site: A Case Study," Journal of Academic Librarianship 27 (May 2001), 188-198.
Candice Benjes and Janis F. Brown, "Test, Revise, Retest: Usability
Testing and Library Web Sites," Internet Reference Services Quarterly
5 (2001), 37-54.
Jennifer Bowen et al., "Serial Failure," The Charleston Advisor 5 (2004)
" … serial failure is . …. the failure of academic libraries to facilitate students' access to articles, and it is without a doubt the most important access-related problem in academic librarianship."
Mercy B. Caña, Quiza Lynn Grace G. Cueto, Allan B. De Guzman, Kaori B. Fuchigami, Leona Rica T. Manalo, and Jake Cathleen U. Yu, "Clientele recognition of library terms and concepts used by librarians: A case of an academic library in the Philippines", Journal of
Librarianship and Information Science, 37 (2005), 195-204.
Abdus Sattar Chaudhry and Meng Choo, "Understanding of Library
Jargon in the Information Seeking Process," Journal of Information
Science 27 (2001), 343-349.
This study, conducted in Singapore, used a survey method similar to that of Naismith and Stein (below), focused on technical terms used in e-mail reference interactions. Participants chose correct definitions 76.9% of the time.
Janet Chisman, Karen Diller, and Sharon Walbridge, "Usability
Testing: A Case Study," College & Research Libraries 60 (November
1999), 552-69.
Laura Cobus, Valeda Frances Dent, and Anita Ondrusek, "How Twenty-Eight Users Helped Redesign an Academic Library Web Site", Reference & User Services Quarterly 44 (Spring 2005), 232-46.
Barbara J. Cockrell and Elaine Anderson Jayne, "How Do I Find an Article? Insights from a Web Usability Study," Journal of Academic Librarianship 28 (May 2002), 122-132.
Unusually detailed coverage of terminology issues.
Denise Troll Covey, Usage and Usability Assessment: Library Practices and Concerns (Digital Library Federation and Council on Library and Information Resources, 2002)
Gwyneth H. Crowley et al., "User Perceptions of the Library's Web Pages: A Focus Group Study at Texas A&M University," Journal of Academic Librarianship 28 (July 2002), 205-210.
Ruth Dickstein and Vicki Mills, "Usability Testing at the University of Arizona Library: How to Let the Users in on the Design," Information Technology and Libraries 19 (September 2000).
Kirstin Dougan and Camilla Fulton, "Side by Side: What a Comparative Usability Study Told Us about a Web Site Redesign," Journal of Web Librarianship, 3 (2009), 217-237.
Includes a list of terms test participants found confusing, and a thoughtful discussion of terminology and categorization on library websites.
Vicky Duncan and Darlene Fichter, "What words and where? Applying usability testing techniques to name a new live reference service," JMLA: Journal of the Medical Library Assocation 92 (2004), 218-225.
Catherine Ebenezer, "Usability evaluation of an NHS library website," Health Information and Libraries Journal 20 (2003), 134Ð142.
Used focus groups, user observation, and a "label intuitiveness/category membership questionnaire" to evaluate usability of a National Health Service library in London.
Karen Eliasen et al., "Navigating Online Menus: A Quantitative
Experiment", College & Research Libraries (1997), 509-517.
"The results of the study [showed] that grouping resources and assigning concrete, descriptive labels help undergraduates, especially those with basic library instruction, to make more efficient navigation decisions. Concretely, this means that … more descriptive text is necessary."
Pat Ensor, "Knowledge level of users and nonusers of keyword/Boolean searching on an online public access catalog", RQ 32 (Fall 1992), 60-75.
Deborah Jane Fitchett. Students' Natural Use of Language for Academic Library Concepts,
MLIS project, School of Information Management, Victoria University of Wellington, 2006.
Surveyed university students in New Zealand, using an open-ended, sentence completion question format (e.g., "A computer system you can use to find articles about your area of study is a …"). "Concepts that were central to students' library experiences were labelled with as few as 4 different terms, while less central concepts were labelled with more than 30. Library jargon was an important influence on students' choice of terminology. For many concepts, however, students used terms that had not been found on library websites." Extensive literature review and discussion of students' preferred terms.
Jesse James Garrett, "The Psychology of Navigation," DigitalWeb Magazine, December 17, 2002.
"Every link makes a promise, but the creators of the link have little control over what that is. The promise exists entirely in the mind of the user. … The most important factor in evaluating the link is its language. First and foremost, users will look for specific words that they would use to describe what they're looking for. They aren't mulling over interpretation and connotation. They're looking for particular words, and finding those particular words will overwhelmingly cause them to click links. If they don't see their own words, they'll keep an eye out for words they would expect other people to use."
Abby A. Goodrum, "I can't tell you what I want, but I'll know it when I see it: terminological disconnects in digital image reference", Reference & User Services Quarterly 45 (Fall 2005).
"When users request an image, they tend to describe the image itself rather than the meaning or emotive content of the image; their indexing vocabulary largely reflects what they expect to see in the image. This is in contrast with image indexing vocabulary derived by a system where indexing terms are derived from text surrounding the image. … System vocabulary may describe higher-level concepts such as industrial pollution rather than smoke or smoke stacks."
Peter Hepburn and Krystal M. Lewis, "What's in a Name? Using Card Sorting to Evaluate Branding in an Academic Library's Web Site," College & Research Libraries 69 (2008), 242-250.
"The study found that users do not recognize or comprehend library brand names in the absence of a consistent approach to branding even if they do use the services that have been branded."
Norman B. Hutcherson, "Library Jargon: Student Recognition
of Terms and Concepts Commonly Used by Librarians in the Classroom,"
College & Research Libraries 65 (2004), 349-354.
This study used a questionnaire to test students' understanding of "terms derived from library literature, reference desk experience, and classroom observation."
Judy Jeng, "Usability Assessment of Academic Digital Libraries: Effectiveness, Efficiency, Satisfaction, and Learnability", Libri 55 (2005), 96-121.
Surveyed students at Rutgers University and Queens College about several aspects of their libraries' websites, including terminology and labeling.
Odin Jurkowski, "School library website terminology", Library Hi Tech 25 (2007), 387-395.
Surveyed librarians and students in elementary, middle, and high schools. "There were three main findings from this research. The first is the wide variety of use and opinion. … Librarians used many different terms … Second, students disagreed with librarians. … students preferred 'books' 58 percent of the time compared to the top choice among librarians being 'OPAC' … Third, there was a lack of support for images, explanatory text, or the use of natural language descriptions."
Amy Kearns, "STEP ONE: STOP CALLING THEM DATABASES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!", posted on LibraryGarden blog, July 13, 2007.
Recounts a Twitter conversation about alternative terms for "Database". This, plus the comments added to it, will seem strangely familiar to anyone who has discussed this topic in a design meeting. No silver bullet here, but plenty of options and insights.
Leo Robert Klein, "The Web Is Not Your Library," Library
Journal NetConnect (Winter 2001), 36-37.
Draft version: "The
Utilitarian Web"
- - - - - , "The Expert User Is Dead," Library Journal NetConnect (Fall 2003).
Steve Krug, Don't Make Me Think! A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability, Indianapolis: Que, 2000.
John Kupersmith, "Library Terms That Users Understand", presentation at Internet Librarian 2005.
- - - - - , "Terms actually used for "database" etc."" - Web4Lib post, 8/2/00
Krystal M. Lewis and Peter Hepburn, "Open card sorting and factor analysis: a usability case study", The Electronic Library 28 (2010), 401-416.
Detailed, thoughtful reporting and analysis of a card sorting project.
Thura Mack et al., "Designing for Experts: How Scholars Approach
an Academic Library Web Site," Information Technology and Libraries
(2004), 16-22.
Louise McGillis and Elaine G. Toms, "Usability of the Academic Library Web Site: Implications for Design," College & Research Libraries (July 2001), 355-367.
Susan McMullen, "Usability Testing in a Library Web Site Redesign Project," Reference Services Review 29 (2001), 7-22
Constance A. Mellon, "Library anxiety: a grounded theory and its development", College & Research Libraries 47 (1986), 160-165.
This classic study quotes a student: "When I first entered the library, I was terrified. … It was like being in a foreign country and unable to speak the language."
Minitex/Minnesota State Library Standards Review Task Force, "Library Website Terminology; Interim Minnesota Guidelines" [2006]
Extensive survey aimed at finding terms for major library website activities or services that were preferred by users of public, academic, and K-12 libraries, with an impressive total of 7651 responses. Worth noting that "In most cases, the two major response groups (academic and public library users) agreed on their preferred answer." The authors note that some of the results may have been influenced by question wording, but others evidently were not. Posted on the web as "a work in progress."
W. Bede Mitchell et al., "Testing
the Design of a Library Information Gateway", ACRL Tenth National
Conference (Denver, 2001); also published in Southeastern Librarian
49 (2001), 4-10.
Keith A. Morgan and Tripp Reade, "Competing Vocabularies and 'Research
Stuff'", co-published simultaneously in Journal of Internet Cataloging
5 (2002), 81-95; and in Judith R. Ahronheim, ed., High-Level Subject
Access Tools and Techniques in Internet Cataloging, Binghamton,
NY: Haworth Information Press, 2002, pp. 81-95.
Lesley Moyo and Ashley Robinson, "Library Jargon as a Factor
in Information Design for Web Usability: Survey Report (Summary),"
16th Annual Computers in Libraries 2001 (Medford, NJ: Information
Today, Inc., 2001), pp.157-165.
Multilingual Glossary - "a professionally generated signage tool designed for libraries … common library phrases in 49 languages." From the State Library of New South Wales, Australia
Multilingual Glossary - library terms in 6 languages, compiled and tested by ACRL.
Rachael Naismith and Joan Stein, "Library Jargon: Student Comprehension of Technical Language Used by Librarians," College & Research Libraries 50 (Sept. 1989), 545.
This study, done several years before the advent of the web, found that "patrons only understand 50 percent of what librarians say or write." It includes a useful analysis of "how people arrive at a definition when they do not know the term," e.g. by breaking a word into segments, "unpacking" multiword phrases and analyzing them, or thinking of contexts for the term.
"Naming Conventions",
article in LISWiki.
National Cancer Institute, Research-Based Web Design & Usability Guidelines
Jakob Nielsen, "Outliers and Luck in User Performance," Alertbox, March 6, 2006.
"Users can waste significant time scouring a site for a term that the site doesn't use and doesn't cross-reference to its own preferred term."
- - - - - , "Use Old Words When Writing for Findability," Alertbox, August 28, 2006.
"'Speak the user's language' has been a primary usability guideline for more than 20 years. The fact that the Web is a linguistic environment further increases the importance of using the right vocabulary. … Call a spade a spade, not a digging implement. Certainly not an excavation solution."
North Carolina State University Libraries, Recommended Resources
Kimberly Parker and Daniel Dollar, "E-Terminology: Why Do I Need to Know What You Mean?," portal: Libraries and the Academy 5 (2005), 421-426.
Deals mainly with librarians' need to communicate clearly among themselves about electronic subscriptions, aggregators, bundles, etc., noting that "Our profession needs to strike a balance between what we know versus what readers need to know -- the goal being to provide just what is absolutely necessary for readers to navigate successfully."
Pearce-Moses, Richard. A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology, Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2005.
Anne Pemberton and Peter Fritzler, "The language barrier: don't let library lingo get in the way of learning", C&RL News, 65 (2004), 154-155.
Plain Language Action & Information Network - U.S. government site with guidelines and examples for writing plain English prose.
Mark Aaron Polger, "Student Preferences in Library Website Vocabulary", Library Philosophy and Practice, June 2011.
Surveyed 300 students to determine their preferred terms for top-level links commonly found on library websites, and compared these to terms reported by librarians as actually used. "It is evident that Librarians prefer terms that contain 'databases' (68%) while students prefer terms that contain 'articles'. ... The data illustrates students' preference to natural language, like 'Find Books' (40%), 'Find Articles' (47%), and 'Research Guides' (36%). As presumed, library jargon such as Inter-library Loan was not popular among students (12%). 'Find/get materials' was preferred over the term Inter-library Loan (65% and 12% respectively)."
Victoria Redfern, "Natural language thesaurus: a survey of student research skills
and research tool preferences", Australian Academic and Research Libraries 35 (2004),
137-150.
Surveyed students at the University of Canberra. focusing mainly on subject vocabulary issues but also asking participants to "identify the terms 'search term', 'subject heading', 'descriptor' and 'keyword'. … 52 per cent understood the terms and 48 per cent did not understand the terms."
Brenda Reeb and Susan Gibbons, "Students, Librarians, and Subject Guides: Improving a Poor Rate of Return," portal: Libraries and the Academy 4 (2004), 123-130.
Erica Reynolds, "The Secret to Patron-Centered Web Design: Cheap, Easy, and Powerful Usability Techniques", Computers in Libraries (June 2008), 6-8,44-47.
Describes the website redesign process at the Johnson County (Kansas) public library. Card sorting, paper prototyping, and user observation were used. One result was that "Readers' Corner" was changed to "Find a Good Book."
Joan Roca and Roland Nord, "Usability Study of the MnLINK Gateway,"
OCLC Systems & Services 17 (2001), 26-33.
Louis Rosenfeld, "Is Less Really More? [designing tables of contents for websites]," Dr. Dobb's Journal, January 01, 2002.
Louis Rosenfeld and Peter Morville, Information Architecture for the World Wide Web, Sebastopol CA: O'Reilly, 1998, pp. 72-98.
Karen Schneider, "Death to Library Jargon", OPAL online program, October 11, 2007.
Streaming audio and PowerPoint slides are available on OPAL's archive page.
Irene Sever, "Electronic Information Retrieval as Culture Shock: An Anthropological Exploration," RQ 33 (Spring 1994): 336-41.
"Today's library, and even more that of tomorrow, has many characteristics of an exotic, alien environment: its
language is unfamiliar and specialized and evokes incorrect associations. … An electronic library cannot be 'learned' through instant coaching on which keys to press or even through the diligent perusal of a manual. What is necessary is to grow into an electronic library environment gradually through socialization as well as through education."
Mark A. Spivey, "The Vocabulary of Library Home Pages: An Influence on Diverse and Remote End-Users," Information Technology and Libraries 19 (September 2000), 152-156.
Elizabeth Stephan, Daisy T. Cheng, and Lauren M. Young, "A Usability Survey at the University of Mississippi Libraries for the Improvement of the Library Home Page," Journal of Academic Librarianship 32 (2006), 35-51.
Mark Stover and Steven D. Zink, "World Wide Web Home Page Design: Patterns and Anomalies of Higher Education Library Home Pages," Reference Services Review 24 (Fall 1996), 7-20.
Steve Toub, Evaluating Information Architecture: A Practical Guide to Assessing Web Site Organization, [Ann Arbor]: Argus Associates, 2000, pp. 18-23.
Tiffini Anne Travis and Elaina Norlin, "Testing the Competition:
Usability of Commercial Information Sites Compared with Academic Library
Web Sites," College & Research Libraries 63 (2002), 433-448.
Dominique Turnbow, Kris Kasianovitz, Lise Snyder, David Gilbert, David Yamamoto, "Usability testing for web redesign: a UCLA case study", OCLC Systems & Services, 21 (2005), 26 - 234.
University of Michigan Library, Guerrilla Test Usability Reports.
Includes reports on terminology such as "Available Online", "Research Guides", "Get Books, Articles, and More", etc.
Debbie Vaughn and Burton Callicott, "Broccoli Librarianship
and Google-Bred Patrons, or What's Wrong with Usability Testing?",
College & Undergraduate Libraries 10 (2003), 1-18.
Jerilyn R. Veldof, Michael J. Prasse, and Victoria A. Mills, "Chauffeured
by the User: Usability in the Electronic Library," Journal of Library
Administration 26 (1999), 115-140.
Visual Thesaurus, an interesting creativity tool for seeing relationships among words.
Gunter Waibel, "Letting Users Show the Way", RLG Focus, Issue 64, October 2003.
Reports on usability testing for RLG systems including RedLightGreen.
"After trying hard to meet the undergraduates on their own turf, we were astonished by how many disconnects we still uncovered in terminology. An option to limit searches to maps was perceived as a possible link to online roadmaps; a reference to scores found the students thinking about sports rather than music; [we had to explain] language such as "most widely held" or "edition" … . And since the user is always right, we'll try to find clearer words."
Jennifer L. Ward, "Web Site Redesign: The University of Washington Libraries' Experience",
OCLC Systems & Services 22 (2006), 207-216.
Web4Lib Electronic Discussion includes a number of terminology-related threads such as "Database in your face" (April 2002)
Lesley Williams, "Making 'E' Visible", Library Journal, June 15, 2006.
Carol A. Wright, "The Academic Library as a Gateway to the Internet: An Analysis of the Extent and Nature of Search Engine Access from Academic Library Home Pages," College & Research Libraries 65 (2004), 276-286.
ABOUT THIS SITE
This site began in 2002, as a way to help librarians resolve disagreements over link labeling, using an evidence-based approach. Its initial statement of purpose described the context: "The current and long-overdue wave of usability testing in libraries is confirming what we have known for years: our users frequently do not understand the terms we use to describe library resources, particularly those in electronic form. Librarians' discussions of potential labels frequently spiral into inconclusive sparring over minor points of definition; these are often technically valid but seldom lead to a design breakthrough."
Since then, it has been used as a resource in website redesigns, usability projects, and library/information school courses, and selected by the Librarians' Internet Index (now ipl2), the UNESCO Libraries Portal, the Law Library Resource Xchange, and the BUBL Link Catalogue of Internet Resources.
John Kupersmith is a Reference Librarian at the University of California, Berkeley Library. He previously served as Service Design Analyst, California Digital Library; Internet Services Librarian, Washoe County Library System (Reno, Nevada); Networked Information Services Coordinator, University of Texas at Austin General Libraries; and Reference Librarian, Van Pelt Library, University of Pennsylvania.
© 2012 John Kupersmith
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License
|
