23
Alyona Medelyan joint work with Anna Divoli (University of Chicago) Search interface feature evaluation in biosciences HCIR-2011 20.10.2011

Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Presentation at the HCIR-2011 workshop by Anna Divoli (University of Chicago) and Alyona Medelyan (Pingar). Title: Search interface feature evaluation in biosciences

Citation preview

Page 1: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Alyona Medelyanjoint work

with Anna Divoli(University of Chicago)

Search interface feature evaluation in biosciences

HCIR-2011

20.10.2011

Page 2: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Search interfaces and their features

Search tasks on the web and in bioscience

Experiment description

Side-by-side evaluation example

Data collected

Results

Talk Overview

Page 3: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

autocomplete

results preview

facetted refinement

searchexpansions

related searches

Page 4: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Search interfaces and their features

Search tasks on the web and in bioscience

Experiment description

Side-by-side evaluation example

Data collected

Results

Talk Overview

Page 5: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Search Tasks and their Types in Web Search (Kellar et al. 2007)

Fact finding

Information gathering

Browsing

Transactions

Other

weatherexchange rate…

emailbanking

shopping…

grad schoolstravel plans…

blogsnews…

Page 6: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

I need to collect publications by others on connexins & how they relate to our studies

I want to find out whether there are any new publications on the mechanism that underlies Golgi cisternal maturation in yeast

I’d like to find out what kind of animal models of huntington’s diseaseare out there

Search Tasks and their Types in Bioscience

Fact Finding

Information Gathering

Browsing

Page 7: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Which approaches to facetted navigation work best for this domain?

Which search interface features are useful for searching the biomedical literature?

Users prefer different interface features depending on the search task

Research Questions and Hypotheses

1

2

Hypothesis

It’s better to display dynamically computed sets of facets than a complete hierarchical list

Hypothesis

Page 8: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Search interfaces and their features

Search tasks on the web and in bioscience

Experiment description

Side-by-side evaluation example

Data collected

Results

Talk Overview

Page 9: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

The Study

Exploratory short study with 6 bioscientists

2 faculty, 2 postdocs, 2 PhD students

Q&A on 3 search types in their work, queries, resources, systems

10-15min in person sessions

Main study with 10 bioscientists

2 faculty, 7 postdocs, 1 PhD student

Email & 1-2hr in person sessions

Side-by-side comparison of anonymysed search interface features

Per participant: 1 baseline and 1 own query

Page 10: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Search interfaces and their features

Search tasks on the web and in bioscience

Experiment description

Side-by-side evaluation example

Data collected

Results

Talk Overview

Baseline query

connexin

Page 11: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

1. Autocomplete

A

D

B

E

C

F

F

G

G

Page 12: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

2. Search Expansions

A B

Page 13: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

3. Faceted Refinement - links

A B C

D

E

Page 14: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

3. Faceted Refinement - checkboxes

F G

H

I

Page 15: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

4. Related Searches

A B C

D

E F

G

Page 16: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

5. Search Results Preview

A C

Page 17: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Search interfaces and their features

Search tasks on the web and in bioscience

Experiment description

Side-by-side evaluation example

Data collected

Results

Talk Overview

Page 18: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation
Page 19: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation
Page 20: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Search interfaces and their features

Search tasks on the web and in bioscience

Experiment description

Side-by-side evaluation example

Data collected

Results

Talk Overview

Page 21: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Autocompletion

Query expansions

Facetted refinement

Related searches

Search results preview

brffig

brffig

brffig

brffig

brffig

PositiveNeutralNegative1 participant

Usefulness ratings for interface features & search tasks

Page 22: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Summary of Findings, Participants’ Comments

Autocomplete is less important: “we feel pigeonholed by suggestions”

Facets are useful: “we focus and refine the search all the time”

Choose facets wisely: “a large number of facets is overwhelming”

Checkboxes are better than links: “we want to select multiple values”

Aesthetics are important but what really matters is the content

Page 23: Divoli & Medelyan: HCIR-2011 Presentation

Few, query-oriented facets with specific values, in checkboxes!

Facets and results preview are useful for any search task

Conclusions

1

2

Other features are more useful for browsing

Which approaches to facetted navigation work best for this domain?

Which search interface features are useful for searching the biomedical literature?

[email protected]@pingar.com