Re: Browsing percentages / analytics (Revisited)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
> [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Stephens, Owen
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 10:30 AM
> To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Browsing percentages / analytics (Revisited)
>
> > Originally, since these numbers are so far off what others
> > had, I thought
> > these statistics were incorrect so I checked and rechecked
> > them. But they
> > are correct. They also demonstrate what I mentioned above, since I can
> > assume that nobody will be able to put in a subject heading/subject
> > subdivision search, so I conclude that my users are searching
> > originally by
> > keyword, then clicking on the subjects or authors that they
> > see. (Titles are
> > only series, so this is minimal)
>
> As I think others have said - stats are not the full story. Although the
> stats you have are interesting, you then draw a conclusion based on an
> assumed explanation for the stats. There are two major issues (as I see
> it):

Thanks for the comments. Of course, these are tentative conclusions, just
trying to make sense of something that didn't seem to mesh with others'
results.

> You assume that 'subject' searching is somehow more desirable - but
> there is no evidence to support this conclusion - do users more often
> get what they want and/or need when they use a subject search?

For undergraduate users, subject searching has long been known to be far
more important than the various types of name searching. What I am
interested in (and perhaps I should have made this more clear in my original
message) is: are people using this tool, i.e. the catalog, as it is supposed
to be used? Whether the results of using this tool correctly is satisfactory
is another question, but are they at least using it as they are supposed to?
In the other analyses, it seemed that users are not using the catalog as it
was designed, and this is what "dismayed" me.
In my case, I think that my people are using my catalog as it was designed
to be used--but the question of whether they find the materials they want is
another matter. I offered some ideas as to why they use it correctly.

> You assume that the 'subject' searches are done using appropriate
> subject headings - but there is no evidence (that you quote) to say that
> they aren't just putting keywords into the subject search box

By this I meant that a search that I find in the log file as "Political
violence -- History -- Italy-- 21st century." is not typed in. I think
that's a safe assumption.

> Also, I note from your construction of your Advanced search page that
> the 'subject browse' isn't actually a direct search of the catalogue -
> presumably the stats count a 'subject browse' each time a user clicks
> this 'browse' option, rather than actually carrying out the search?

This is a good point that I will have to look at more closely. This is one
of the things that is not developed very well in my version of Koha.

> That said, I'm not trying to write off your results, which are
> interesting - it's just that I don't really trust statistics to give us
> the detailed information we need to make the kind of analysis you are
> attempting here.

Yes, statistics are just one part of the story, but they can often point us
in the right direction and give us some ideas.

Thanks again,
Jim Weinheimer