Metalib and Google Scholar: a user study
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520710764122 |
| Pages | 365-375 |
| Date | 26 June 2007 |
| Published date | 26 June 2007 |
| Author | Glenn Haya,Else Nygren,Wilhelm Widmark |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
Metalib and Google Scholar:
a user study
Glenn Haya
Stockholm University Library, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Else Nygren
Human Computer Interaction, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, and
Wilhelm Widmark
Stockholm University Library, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to understand how students experience the search tools Google Scholar
and Metalib and the role of prior instruction.
Design/methodology/approach – A total of 32 undergraduate students searched academic articles
for their thesis work. Searches were recorded using Morae software and were analysed along with the
number of articles saved and responses to a questionnaire. All searched with both tools. Half of the
students received training before searching.
Findings – Google Scholar performed better in almost all measures. Training had a positive effect on
the amount and quality of articles saved. Responses to Google Scholar were more positive than to
Metalib. However, the students were not overwhelmingly enthusiastic about either of the tools.
Research limitations/implications – Each Metalib implementation is to some extent unique,
which limits the extent to which results can be generalised to other implementations.
Practical implications – Training is valuable for both tools. The user interface to Metalib does not
conform with students’ expectations and needs further improvement. Both tools strive to be a first
alternative search tool for academic literature but neither performed well enough in this study to
recommend it to be used in that role in an academic library setting.
Originality/value – These tools are important to academic libraries but few user studies have been
published, particularly on Google Scholar. To one’s knowledge no other user study on these tools has
looked at the effects of instruction.
Keywords Search engines,Students, Research methods, Userinterfaces, Customer satisfaction
Paper type General review
Introduction
Gaining a better understanding of the user experience can help libraries in making
crucial decisions such as how to integrate tools in library instruction programmes and
how to present them to users on library web pages. This is particularly true of complex
tools such as Google Scholar and Metalib, which clearly have tremendous potential but
also various kinds of problems.
Google Scholar and Metalib are tools that attempt to provide a single access point
for searching academic literature. Large academic libraries typically subscribe to
hundreds of online resources so a single interface can be a time saving alternative to
searching individual sources. For this reason, the potential value of these tools is very
high.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1468-4527.htm
Metalib and
Google Scholar
365
Refereed article received
29 October 2006
Approved for publication
27 November 2006
Online Information Review
Vol. 31 No. 3, 2007
pp. 365-375
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1468-4527
DOI 10.1108/14684520710764122
To continue reading
Request your trial