Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
<snip>
Hmm, I'm not sure that with traditional library tools, a patron's
feelings are irrelevant to operationally/empirically measuring success
of search. Jim, how are you thinking of opertionally and empirically
measuring success of a patron's search with traditional library tools,
that is based on objective standards? I'm having trouble thinking of a
way, but maybe I'm not just creative enough in my research methods.
A patron wants to find something. They type something into a traditional
library search tool (or they go to the card catalog, if you want to get
really traditional!). They find some records. How do we measure,
whether in Google _or_ in a traditional library catalog, how well the
results gave them what they needed... without asking them?
</snip>
What I mean is what is discussed in the message from Mike Fizgerald https://listserv.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=NGC4LIB;e9oxhA;20091029080116-0400. "the inept and satisfied end user."
For example, if somebody searches "wwi" do they *really* want wwi or are they searching for that war that took place from 1914-1918. Or, am I happy with a BT when I really wanted an NT?
Can you do this without asking people? Perhaps if you can get session logs and find that somebody searched initially wwi, and then searched World War, 1914-1918--Aerial operations, American--Sources and then went to Aeronautics, Military--United States--History--Sources, but if they searched "wwi" then "world war i" then "first world war," or just gave up, we may be able to conclude that someone was floundering, although they may be quite satisfied.
James L. Weinheimer j.weinheimer_at_aur.edu
Director of Library and Information Services
The American University of Rome
Rome, Italy
Received on Thu Oct 29 2009 - 13:55:50 EDT