>I agree with Jim. Telling a user "0" is like telling him to get lost. We
>should never leave the user hanging with no options available. To a
>user, zero hits means that the catalog is broken, and that the library
>isn't interested in helping.
I agree with this part - I may have been confusing earlier as I was agreeing with Bernhard about the "do you mean?" in our catalog tool, which I think is different than a "DID you mean?" type of function. For predictive type results - I, personally really like what Google is doing by showing phrases users have searched for and how many results those phrases will produce. I also like what I have seen in other's opacs on this list, where they show things like subjects - very cool.
Specifically for DID you mean - or after a user fully executes a search that is not a perfect match against the catalog - I think you always need to try to show something other than "0" results. Especially for public library patrons. Isn't that the entire point of the "reference interview" that we are trying in some ways to mimic in the opac?
--Matt
Mike Berger did studies of the search logs in MELVYL for a doctoral
disseration (and unfortunately never published his results elsewhere),
but he found that the vast majority of zero hits were mis-matches
between the user's search terms and the catalog record contents. Meaning
that there WAS something in the catalog that the user would have found
interesting, based on the search. We have to bridge that gap -- and do
it without overwhelming the user, a' la Google Book Search.
kc
Weinheimer Jim wrote:
> Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
>
>
>> This bending over backwards to spare the user the "zero hits"
>> experience is, I think, counterproductive in an insidious way.
>> All to easily, timid souls are apt to turn over their judgement
>> to the machine instead of working on it.
>>
>
> Interesting points, but I don't think it is necessarily "sparing the user from zero hits." It is one attempt to try to show people what is available to them. As I mentioned in my previous post, in today's world, it is almost inconceivable today that there really is a "zero hit" since there is probably something worthwhile on almost every topic that is more or less readily available to our users.
>
> I am interested in giving our users as truthful results as possible, so it is also vital that we think outside our own limited catalogs, and include journal articles, government documents materials on the web, and all sorts of other resources.
>
> Leaving a user with a zero hit *without any help* is the wrong thing to do, in my opinion. And since so many of our readers (and probably many, many more in the future) will be using our materials remotely, they will get less and less help from reference librarians. The computer system itself must pick up the slack somehow to keep user frustration down. Otherwise, they'll come back to our tools less and less since Google and other tools are easier to use, and in this economic climate, I don't think that's wise.
>
> Jim Weinheimer
>
>
>
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
Received on Fri Feb 20 2009 - 11:25:43 EST