MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1925473938 · doi:10.18438/b8tg82

Library Users Attempt to Access a Wide Range of Information Beyond Books and Articles through a Single Search Box

2014· article· en· W1925473938 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sara Sharun

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperlinkComputer scienceTransaction logWorld Wide WebInformation retrievalDatabase transactionInterface (matter)Library catalogWeb pageDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Review of:
 Lown, C., Sierra, T., & Boyer, J. (2013). How users search the library from a single search box. College & Research Libraries, 74(3), 227-241. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/crl-321
 
 Abstract
 
 Objective – To identify how users use a single search box.
 
 Design – Transaction log analysis.
 
 Setting – A large research university in North Carolina, United States of America.
 
 Subjects – Search results from a customized single search box on the library’s home page, consisting of 739,180 searches and 655,388 hyperlink selections.
 
 Methods – The authors used custom logging software to generate transaction logs of all searches that took place over two semesters (August to December 2010 and January to May 2011) in QuickSearch, a custom-made, combined search application. The study tracked search queries and hyperlink selections, noting which modules in the discovery interface (articles, catalogue, databases, and others) were selected and, from these modules, which hyperlinks were clicked. 
 
 Main Results – Transaction log analysis was conducted on over 739,000 searches during the two semesters and over 655,000 hyperlink selections from the results interface. The 20 most frequent queries made in QuickSearch were primarily for specific resources (database titles or journal titles), administrative information, and library services. The 153 most popular searches made up 10% of all searches. Hyperlinks to full-text articles (41.5%) and the catalogue (35.2%) accounted for about 76% of the links selected. About 23% of links selected were for other modules (e.g., FAQs, “best bets,” and journal titles). Hyperlinks that led directly to specific items were selected more frequently than hyperlinks to a full list of results.
 
 Conclusion – Analysis of user transaction logs suggests that users do not understand what is being searched in a combined search box and that search applications need to direct users more effectively to resources beyond the catalogue and article databases. Users attempt to access a wide range of information from a single search box, and the most commonly used modules in QuickSearch do not serve many of the most frequent queries. Many of the most common queries can be defined and addressed with a predefined list of results, improving the quality of results and the search experience for users. Ongoing evaluation and analysis of the search interface and subsequent optimization for the most frequent queries can improve user experience.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.535
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeSame topicInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorFrench-language works237,207