faculty researchers

[Jody DeRidder]

Recently, we completed a qualitative study of faculty researchers at UA using primary source materials online. We asked them to identify 1-3 interfaces about which they could contribute feedback, either positive or negative.   Then we met with each researcher in his/her office, asking them to walk us through how they use the interface, talking about each step:  we wanted to know what works for them, and what doesn't.  We also watched what they did with what they found:  how they extracted information and what they did with it then.  

The results were eye-opening, if difficult to organize.  We began by organizing the information by steps in the process:  locating a database, accessing it, performing a search and/or browse, reviewing result lists, accessing items, extracting information, and so forth.  However, in analyzing the comments we gathered, we found ourselves organizing it by how we would use the information, since use it we must.  

For example, we separated out what was a comment about information on the interface versus how the search engine worked, or what was item-level metadata.   And then, when we went to write an article about it, we found we needed to reformulate the results again by the flow of tasks experienced by the researcher. 

Has anyone else had experience with this sort of thing?  How did you organize and sift your information?

--jody

[Jody DeRidder]

The results of this study of faculty researchers have just been published open access in D-Lib:  "What do researchers need?  Feedback on use of online primary source materials."

We are hoping what we uncovered will help inform future digital library development, and modifications of existing interfaces and services.

--jody