[Web4lib] How to label the OPAC (was: Role of the OPAC)

[John Kupersmith]

Regarding the issue of whether to label the OPAC as "library catalog" or 
"find books" (or some variations on those), there are some patterns in 
results taken from 28 usability studies:
< http://www.jkup.net/terms-studies.html >

"Catalog", like other traditional library tool names, tends to be cited 
more often as problematic, but some studies report success with it.  When 
modified by additional terms (e.g., "Books and more", "What we own") it 
tends to do better.

"Find books" and other target-oriented terms tend to do quite well for 
leading users to the types of material mentioned in the label.

Of course, much depends on what user population was involved, how the 
questions were phrased, and what terminology was currently used on the site 
being tested.  As David Walker points out, terms like "catalog" may work 
better with experienced users, but natural language terms such as "find 
books" may work for a broader spectrum of users.

Librarians' discussions of traditional vs. popular terminology tend to get 
polarized, but in fact it's not an either/or situation.  Possibilities include:

* Combining "catalog" with other terms and/or graphics that amplify its 
meaning.
Examples:
University of Arizona < http://www.library.arizona.edu/ >
Cal State San Marcos < http://library.csusm.edu/ >
UC Berkeley Music Library < http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MUSI/ >

* Including both "catalog" and "find" links to provide both convenient 
links for experts and a learning path for novice users.  "Find books" can 
also lead to a selection of options other than the catalog.
Example:
UC Berkeley < http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/ >.

All this assumes the existence of the catalog in its present form.  To 
those looking forward to more inclusive metasearch systems, I say "bring 
'em on!" (though we will still be talking about terminology to help users 
sort out the results).

--jk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   John Kupersmith        jkup at jkup.net        http://www.jkup.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Reference Librarian                 http://www.lib.berkeley.edu
   Doe/Moffitt Libraries
   University of California, Berkeley
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Not speaking for UCB in this message~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



At 09:00 AM 7/23/2005, you wrote:
>Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 15:02:45 -0700
>From: "David Walker" <dwalker at csusm.edu>
>Subject: RE: [Web4lib] Role of the OPAC (was: library automation
>         vendors)
>To: "Elena OMalley" <Elena_OMalley at emerson.edu>,
>         <web4lib at webjunction.org>
>Message-ID: <86BF48E0F11BE44D99952F9FB349BC4B07E0B01F at priority>
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hi Elena,
>
>This is probably a good point for me to clarify.
>
>I'm not suggesting that we simply replace the link to the "library
>catalog" with the word "books."  I'm suggesting that we need to get away
>from having only one link to the catalog -- in fact, we should stop
>thinking of the catalog as something that needs a single label or
>description.
>
>I think we should have several links -- one that says "books" another
>that says "music", "libretos," and so on.  Many of those links will go
>to the catalog, or perhaps just some part of it.  Or perhaps they will
>go to resources that include the catalog and other databases.  Two
>different links might even go to the exact same place.
>
>It doesn't really matter.  The important thing in providing navigation
>is to give users terminology they recognize, since users tend to scan
>pages and don't want to have to think about what a rather vague and
>jargony label like "library catalog" might or might not contain.
>
>
> >> Ours, year after year on usability tests,
> >> immediately clicked on "library catalog"
> >> when asked "find a book about blah."
>
>Interesting.  Who do you use in your user tests?  Students who have
>already used the library?  Would they be as certain to pick or not pick
>the catalog when you ask them to find other formats?
>
>I ask because when we test juniors and seniors we see these same
>results.  When we test freshmen who have never even stepped foot in our
>library, however, they immediately gravitate toward terminology that is
>more familiar, like 'books' and 'journals'.
>
>Actually, when we present our users with interfaces that don't use
>library terminology like "library catalog" at all, all of users do just
>fine, which makes me think that we don't really need the jargon in the
>first place, even if some have adapted to it.
>
>--Dave
>
>=================
>David Walker
>Web Development Librarian
>Library
>Cal State San Marcos
>760-750-4379
>=================