Library catalogues and search engines

Essentially, libraries choose one of two possible strategies in their reactions to the user behaviour described (cf. Kohl-Frey 2011, p. 6 et seq.): the teaching of information literacy and the reorganisation of the library search tools used when seeking academic information. Whilst the teaching of information literacy aims to clarify problems and challenges for users in the search for academic information, and to indicate strategies to overcome them, the reorganisation

1 With regard to the information search convenience can best be translated by the expression „Informations-leichtigkeit‟ (cf. Kohl-Frey 2011).

of the search tools strives towards an approximation of the web search engines favoured by the users to facilitate the search itself. Or put another way: teaching information literacy aims to make users aware of and therefore change their search behaviour, whereas the reorganisation of the search tools aims to adapt these tools to the actual user behaviour. The focus of what follows is on the description of the latter strategy, i.e. the development of library search tools². In this regard however, it must not be overlooked that only a combination of both strategies can be evaluated as an appropriate reaction to the results described, as the library users concerned must be taught how to use the „new generation‟ of search tools.

The library OPAC serves as a collection of as many media as possible, which the library provides for the users. The library holdings are described using metadata, which in turn is drawn up by librarians in accordance with specific rules and can be searched through. Problems are evident here in particular with regard to the constantly growing proportion of electronic items:

On the one hand (electronic) essays and eBooks are as a rule not entered in the OPAC. In order to search for these the users usually have to use additional search tools such as databases. On the other hand it is usually not possible to search any of the full texts with the OPAC, which would be useful for a thematic search. Subject headings are provided in the metadata, which aim to describe the content more clearly, but the users are often not aware of these. Instead of using them for a search, frequently only a keyword search is used, as the users are accustomed to doing when they use the prevalent web search engines.

To counteract these problems, catalogue enrichment and federated search systems are for example used in libraries (cf. Kostädt 2008, p. 102 et seq.). OPACs are enriched primarily by scanned tables of contents, which are rendered searchable by means of optical character recognition (= OCR) programmes. They also have the advantage for the user that they are directly available as a file through a link in the OPAC. Federated search systems on the other hand make it possible to simultaneously search different information sources with a single search request. So for example several catalogues, but also academic databases may be searched, in which essays and eBooks are indexed. However the response time of these systems is relatively long in contrast to the web search engines. In addition, sometimes no duplicate control is performed, so that a result is shown several times in the list of results, if it is indexed in different sources. Just as with sorting by date instead of by relevance this does not correspond with the expectations and search behaviour of the users, who usually take note only of the first results in a list.

In order to combat these problems, more and more libraries are now relying on search engine technologies (cf. ibid., p. 105 et seq.). Here the basic aim is to provide the user with a search tool that is just as easy to use as web search engines (only one search field) and provides

2 Köstadt 2008 gives a good summary of this.

quality search results in the shortest time. This is achieved by combining the different data in a single index prior to searching, rather than waiting until during the search of the different sources. Moreover, options are provided to include full texts in the search as well as a ranking of the results according to relevance. The outcome of a search therefore usually consists of a very large number of results, which is produced in a short time by the system. Then the results can be reduced by a refinement of the search using specific search facets (= selection criteria).

Kostädt names FAST Data Search, Lucene and Xapian as the most important search engines, on which these library proposals are based (cf. ibid., p. 105 et seq.). By means of these search engine technologies,new search tools have been developed by libraries themselves, such as in the case of BASE (Bielefeld), HEIDI (Heidelberg) or KUG (Cologne). However, libraries increasingly tend nowadays to buy finished products³ together with index, which are sometimes hosted not by the library itself but by the search engine provider. This is for example also the case with the Konstanz literature search engine.

Each individual case must be examined to see whether the measures described to adapt the library search tools to the changed expectations and behaviours of the users are actually successful. User research also plays a large part in this respect however. Very frequently, for example, evaluations of search tools by library users are used to assess their quality. In addition to the many satisfaction surveys conducted with the online catalogue or the search engine (cf.

e.g. Nienerza/Sunckel 2011 or Regensburg University library 2009), it is usability studies that can be applied here as well. One such study was conducted in the course of the introduction of the literature search engine KonSearch in the University of Konstanz library, and is reported in the following sections.

3 For a summary of the different products, see the reviews in SerialsBlenkle/Ellis/Haake 2009, Mayfield et al.

2008 and Stevenson et al. 2009 as well as the Ekins/Koster home page 2011.