Evidence Summary
User Experience Research
Techniques Facilitate Improvements for Access and Discovery Tools Managed by
Technical Services Librarians
A Review of:
Hill, K. (2020). Usability beyond the home page: Bringing
usability into the technical services workflow. The Serials Librarian, 78 (1–4),
173–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2020.1702857
Reviewed by:
Abbey Lewis
STEM Engagement Librarian
University of Colorado Boulder
Boulder, Colorado, United States
of America
Email: Abbey.B.Lewis@Colorado.edu
Received: 17 Aug. 2023 Accepted: 4
Sept. 2023
2023 Lewis.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 4.0
International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.
DOI: 10.18438/eblip30416
Abstract
Objective – To demonstrate how
user experience research techniques can be incorporated into technical services
work. As proof of this concept, the author describes a case wherein a team of
librarians, including one in a technical services role, deployed a user
experience study to determine if students were able to successfully use
LibGuides and the A-Z Database List to find subject-specific resources. The
study also aimed to gauge the potential for several A-Z Database List interface
redesign options.
Design – A case study of
user experience techniques applied to technical services projects, including a
classic usability test of existing tools and an A/B/C comparison of potential
interface redesigns.
Setting – The library at the University of North Carolina Greensboro
(UNCG), a public R2 university (doctoral university with high research
activity).
Subjects – Eleven student
participants recruited through convenience sampling.
Methods – The research team
recruited study participants who were in the library at the time of the study,
deselecting students from UNCG’s library school and those who were not
currently affiliated with the university through an initial questionnaire.
Eleven student participants were ultimately selected and led through a series
of tasks related to finding subject-specific databases using the A-Z Database
List and LibGuides. After the tasks for the A-Z Database List were completed,
students were asked for their impression of two additional database list
interfaces. Students were recorded throughout the tasks using the “talk aloud”
method to provide researchers with insights on their thought processes and
preferences. Following the study, researchers listened to the recordings,
coding them as successful or incomplete and noting their observations for use
in generalized findings.
Main Results – Eight of eleven
participants used the library’s main search box to locate a general resource
for their major on the library’s homepage. When shown the A-Z Database List,
ten out of eleven participants used the list to find a database for their
major, while one used the link to “Research guides by subject” from that page.
Comparisons of three A-Z Database List interfaces showed that most students
preferred the Springshare Content Management System that allowed for filtering
by subject area. When asked to find a research guide for their subject or major
from the library’s homepage, nine out of eleven students clicked on the link
labeled “Research guides by subject.” Starting from their subject guide, ten
out of eleven could find a tab listing article databases. Nine participants
noted that the number of databases listed on the guides was daunting.
Conclusion – Results from the
user experience study were used to support a redesign of the A-Z Database List
using the Springshare Content Management System. The author regarded the
experience as a whole as demonstrating how technical
services librarians can become involved in user experience work and incorporate
findings from usability studies into their management and design of tools that
promote access and discoverability.
Commentary
As the author of the current study notes, “The idea of
bringing usability into technical services is not unique to this paper” (Hill,
2020, p. 174). In performing their work, technical services librarians shape
users’ routes to resources. Greater direct knowledge of users’
information-seeking behaviours and perceptions can inform improvements to
access and discovery tools (Cross & Gullikson, 2020). This creates an
opportunity to bridge “two seemingly disparate areas of library work… when
staff expertise is recognized and valued” (Madden, 2020, p. 145). This case
study demonstrates a pathway for technical services librarians to engage in
usability research in ways that positively influence the library’s ability to
meet user needs through the tools and resources that technical services
librarians already manage.
The CRiSTaL Checklist for Appraising a User Study
(n.d.) is used to assess the current study. As part of the consideration of a
study’s validity, the checklist asks if researchers collecting data are also
those responsible for delivering the service under examination. While this can
create a conflict of interest, it can also allow those with the best technical
knowledge of a service to rethink its delivery in light of
user needs and experiences. This mirrors a point made by the author throughout
the study: technical services librarians, as those responsible for the
maintenance and development of access and discovery tools, are best positioned
to resolve issues with those tools that are identified through user experience
research (Hill, 2020). Also, regarding the CRiSTaL Checklist’s
assessment of a study’s validity, the author makes a strong justification for
undertaking this research, noting a previous survey that uncovered difficulties
in discovering subject-specific resources among distance education students.
However, this marks a disconnect between the population
where the issue was first identified (distance education students) and the
population under study. Recruiting students passing through the library is
ostensibly unlikely to yield participants from that population. Still, the use
of these tools extends beyond distance education students, making the findings
from a more general and convenient population of students in the library still
useful for determining common information-seeking behaviours and pitfalls.
Pre-screening questions were used to filter out those unaffiliated with the
university or students in UNCG’s library and information science graduate
program, appropriately balancing considerations for convenience and relevant
representation of the user population.
The author provides the success rates for students who
were able to complete the tasks and adequately details the difficulties they
encountered that led to failed tasks. Students were sometimes able to complete
tasks, albeit inefficiently, by using tools in manners other than those
intended (i.e., using an A-Z Database List for subject browsing). These
situations are described as well, illuminating the decisions behind some of the
interface redesign choices that were influenced by the study. Finally, the script
used for guiding students through the tasks is provided as an appendix, showing
clear, simple tasks that are good representations of the ways librarians expect
subject-specific resource needs to be filled. The tasks can ultimately point to
discrepancies in the ways that librarians and users view resource discovery.
The author helpfully points out that while students might be able to find a
link to subject-specific guides when asked directly, seeking out those guides
does not always occur to students when they are presented with a less precise
request, such as finding a general resource for their major.
While the user experience study itself yielded helpful
findings for improving the ways that students discover subject-specific
databases, it is important to note that the study’s greatest contribution is
through recommendations for technical services librarians who wish to
incorporate these techniques into their own practice. In addition to relating
the findings back to the reconfiguration of technical services tools, the
author provides a helpful and concise primer on usability methodology and
offers best practices for collaborating with other teams within the library.
This extends the applicability of the study far beyond the exact methods,
tools, and user populations explored here and presents a broader view for
technical services librarians to consider the scope of their work.
References
CRiSTaL
checklist for appraising a user study.
(n.d.). Netting the Evidence. http://nettingtheevidence.pbwiki.com/f/use.doc
Cross,
E., & Gullikson, S. (2020). Making a case for user experience research to
drive technical services priorities. Library Resources & Technical
Services, 64(2), 89–98. https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.64n2.89
Hill,
K. (2020). Usability beyond the home page: Bringing usability into the
technical services workflow. The Serials Librarian, 78(1–4), 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2020.1702857
Madden,
L. (2020). A new direction for library technical services: Using metadata
skills to improve user accessibility. Serials Review, 46(2), 143–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2020.1782648