The Front End

Design of & Usability for ERM DataAmy Fry, Electronic Resources Coordinator

Bowling Green State Universityhttp://personal.bgsu.edu/~afry/

Goals for this presentation

• What best practices for databases webpages should we follow?

• How do libraries structure full resource records, and what do users look for in them?

• Usability testing: tips and resources

The Front End: Landing page

• Portal or landing page for all databases

• Databases A-Z list (separate from e-journals)

• Databases-by-subject pages (usually separate from other course and subject guides)

• Full resource records – information pages about each individual database BGSU

The Front End: A-Z list

• Portal or landing page for all databases

• Databases A-Z list (separate from e-journals)

• Databases-by-subject pages (usually separate from other course and subject guides)

• Full resource records – information pages about each individual database

Kent State University

The Front End: DBs by subject

• Portal or landing page for all databases

• Databases A-Z list (separate from e-journals)

• Databases-by-subject pages (usually separate from other course and subject guides)

• Full resource records – information pages about each individual database

Case Western Reserve

The Front End: Full records

• Portal or landing page for all databases

• Databases A-Z list (separate from e-journals)

• Databases-by-subject pages (usually separate from other course and subject guides)

• Full resource records – information pages about each individual database

OhioLINK

Wright State University

2010 survey of ARL library websites

• Databases A-Z list• Databases-by-subject lists• Full resource records• Software• Discovery layer or federated search• Link name• Order of databases-by-subject lists• Use of icons/graphics

Other surveys of ARL library sites

• Cohen and Calsada (2003)Found that 66 of 114 academic ARLs used database-driven webpages to present their e-resources in 2002.

• Shorten (2006)Found that 88.6% of ARL libraries had databases A-Z lists in 2003, and 10.5% also categorized them by type.

• Caudle and Schmitz (2007)Found that 97% of the 99 American academic libraries in ARL had a databases A-Z list, 96% had databases-by-subject lists and 27% had federated searching.

Type of system # of libraries %*

Homegrown 81 71.1%

Metalib 14 12.3%

Innovative 8 7%

LibGuides 4 3.5%

Xerxes 4 3.5%

WebFeat 2 1.75%

LibData 1 <1%

Type of system Homegrown: 71.1%

*Percentages are based on 114 libraries (excluding 7 national/special libraries

and 4 libraries whose databases pages were

behind a login)Kent State University

Types of access # of libraries %

Databases A-Z 111 97Databases-by-subject lists

91 80

Full resource records

83 73

All three 73 64

University of Missouri-Columbia

Subject list order # of libraries %By relevance 38 41.8%By format 7 7.7%Alphabetical only 46 50.5%

Order of subject lists

University of Connecticut

Icon # of libraries

Access restrictions 38

More information 27

Full text 9

Magnifying glass (Metalib: search in database)

5

Tutorials 4

Funding source 3

Format (audio, etc.) 3

Plus sign (Metalib: add to a set)

2

Social media 2

Metasearch 2

Logo/screenshot 2

RefWorks 1

New 1

Plus-star 1

SFX 1

Libraries using icons or graphics: 64 (56%)

Use of icons and graphics

University of Cincinnati

Name of LinkLink title begins with… # of libraries % Examples

“Databases” 47 41% Databases (30), Databases A-Z (8)

“Articles” 22 18.6% Article Databases (4)Articles & Databases (8)

“E” or “Electronic” 16 13.6% E-Resources (7), Electronic Resources (5)

“Find” 8 6.8% Find Articles (3)Find Articles & Databases (1)

“Research” 8 6.8% Research Databases (3)

“Search” 4 3.4% Search & Find (2), Search a Database (1)

“Indexes” 2 1.7% Indexes & Databases (1)Indexes & Databases (Articles) (1)

“Journal” 2 1.7% Journal Articles (2)

Branded names 2 1.7% Vera: E-Journals & Databases Galileo @ UGA

Other 4 < 1% each

Resource Gateway – ResourcesMore DatabasesAll Databases A-Z and Database FinderOnline Research Resources (Databases)

What’s in full records?

Wright State

OhioLINK

BGSU

Survey Question 9

What types of information are currently collected in your library's ERM system and to whom does that information display? Check all that apply.Answer Options In ERM?

Display to public?

Display to staff?

formatsDatabases 14 8 13Electronic journals 12 5 11Electronic books 8 4 7

“public” infoResource descriptions 14 7 12License information (permissions) 14 6 13Coverage dates 6 5 6Resource advisories 7 5 7Trial information 8 2 8Tutorials/user guides 5 2 5

“library” infoVendor/contact information 12 1 10License information for ILL/fair use

11 4 10

Login/passwords 10 0 8Renewal information 9 0 8Purchase approval information 4 0 4Payment history 4 0 4

a: authorb: resource formatc: tickler logd: subjecte: descriptionf: public noteg: user supporth: coveragei: incident logj: access informationk: resource advisoryl: usage statisticsm: administrationn: noteo: connect buttonp: resource idq: not usedr: local contacts: pricing and paymentt: resource nameu: trial or trial infov: resource typew: resource containsx: alt. resource namey: resource urlz: resource mgmt tickler

Resource records at BGSU

Student comments on a resource record from BGSU’s 2010 usability study

Fields in resource records Important Confusing Not needed

Most important fields

Description 14 0 1

Dates 10 1 0

Full text 7 1 0

Most confusing fields

Mobile access 0 10 3

Coverage load 2 6 1

On-campus access 1 4 0

Least important fields

User support 2 2 3

Mobile access 0 10 3

Local contact 4 1 2

BGSU usability study: steps and timeline1. Identify goals (December 2009)2. Complete Human Subjects Review Board (HSRB) training

(January 2010)3. Submit HSRB application, including script, recruitment

materials, consent form (January 2010)4. Obtain funding for incentives (January 2010)5. Test the instrument (February 2010)6. Recruit participants (February 2010)7. Complete the testing (February-March 2010)8. Analyze results (March-April 2010)9. Present findings and recommendations (April-May 2010)

Lehman & Nikkel, 2008

Foster & Gibbons, 2007

Krug, 2006

Other library usability studies

• Hammill (2003)Did common task testing with 52 users at Florida International University Libraries, including finding a named database.

• Krueger, Ray and Knight (2004)Did common task testing with 134 users at the University of the Pacific Library.

• Fuller, Livingston, Brown, Cowan, Wood and Porter (2009)Did three rounds of testing with five users each on the databases pages at the University of Connecticut Libraries.

change to Databases A-Z

change to Databases by subject

Remove search box

change to Videos & Images

add Film, Television & Media Studies

Database title

Contains

NotesAccess for mobile devices

Alternate on-campus linkTutorials & help

Add a connect button

Journal titles in this database Dates included

View this title

Guerrilla Testing

• July 2010• Twelve participants

– 4 graduate students– 4 incoming freshmen– 2 undergraduates– 1 staff member– 1 faculty member

It’s easier than you think!

• Ask your administrative office or Friends to fund the incentives

• Recruit with signs in the library or grab people as they go by

• Design for minimal prep and minimal analysis• Don’t worry about technology

It’s also harder than it should be.

• Make sure people are committed to change (both intellectually and with resources).

• Have a plan to assess the impact of your changes.

• Build time into your future schedule to do more testing.