Transcript Document

How Do People Get Back to
Information on the Web?
How Can They Do It Better?
William Jones, Harry Bruce
The Information School
University of Washington
Susan Dumais
Microsoft Research
The Problem


Finding things is a well-studied
problem.
Keeping things found is not so wellstudied but arises in many domains:




Everyday objects in our lives
Personal files – paper and electronic
Email
The Web
Related Work

Organizing personal files




Files & “piles”, (Malone, 1983)
Location memory is limited, (Jones & Dumais,
1986)
Preference for browsing, (Barreau & Nardi,
1995); but see Fertig, Freeman & Gelernter
(1996) for a rebuttal.
Organizing email

Similar use patterns, similar problems as for
personal files, (Whittaker & Sidner, 1996)
Related Work (cont.)

Organizing the Web




Widespread use of “Bookmarks”, (Pitkow &
Kehoe, 1996)
Steady increase in number with time, (Abrams
Baecker & Chignell, 1998)
Increasing use of folders, (Abrams et al., 1998)
Frequent use of “Back” button within a session;
infrequent use of “History”, (Tauscher &
Greenberg, 1997)
Overall Research Objectives
We’re looking for answers to the following questions:



How do people manage information for
re-access and re-use? How do people
“keep found things found”?
What problems do people encounter?
What can be done to help?
The Research Project

Study 1: Observe “keeping” activities as participants
complete work-related, web-intensive tasks in their
workplace.


Study 2: Observe efforts to “re-find” web information
for a subset of these same participants.


13 participants in all
Survey a larger group.


25 participants in all.
Initiated.
Prototype selectively.
Study 1: The Participants

6 Researchers.
10 Information professionals --

9 Managers.

including
librarians and corporate information specialists.
Study 1: The Procedure

Prior to the observation




Participants completed an email questionnaire…
and listed at least three work-related, web-intensive “freetime” tasks.
One task was selected for the observation.
During the observation




Participants were observed in their own workplace.
Sessions lasted about an hour.
An “over-the-shoulder” video recording was made of
participants as they “thought-aloud” while working on the
task.
Participants handled office interruptions (phone calls,
visitors, etc.) as they normally would.
Study 1: The Results
Many “keeping” methods were observed:









Send email to self.
Send email to others.
Print out the web page.
Save the web page as a file.
Paste URL into a document.
Add hyperlink to a web site.
Do nothing (and enter URL directly later, search for or
access from another web site).
Bookmark the page.
Write down the URL on paper.
Survey results (so far)
Keeping Method
Do nothing to keep; enter the URL directly.
Do nothing to keep; search again to re-access.
Do nothing to keep; access via another web site.
Make a Bookmark or Favorite
Print out the web page
Save the web page as a file
“Personal Toolbar” or “Links”
Send email to self
Send email to others
Paste the URL into a document
Add a hyperlink to a personal web page
Use Personal Information Management Software
Write down the web address (URL) on paper
At least once a
week
92.86%
78.57%
71.43%
57.14%
50.00%
35.71%
35.71%
28.57%
28.57%
21.43%
14.29%
7.14%
7.14%
A Researcher

MC is a part-time lecturer and researcher at the University of
Washington. Her task for the observation was to locate web
materials that might relate to a lecture she was preparing on
the use of Microsoft PowerPoint. MC made frequent use of
email. She mailed several URLs to herself – each in a
separate email along with comments. On two occasions
MC also emailed URLs to colleagues along with comments
regarding potential relevance. MC maintained an elaborate
organization of folders and subfolders in her email application
(Microsoft Outlook) and expressed confidence that she could
quickly locate an old email when needed. MC uses Favorites
from time to time but declared that “it is a mess” because it
hadn’t been organized recently.
A Manager

DH is a third-level manager at Boeing. He travels
frequently and is rarely in his office for an hour at a
time. DH was interviewed over the telephone. DH
rarely accesses the Web directly for workplace
matters. When he does use the Web, the task is
nearly always limited in time and scope. For example,
he may occasionally use the Web to look up contact
information for someone or to confirm a flight. DH
depends heavily on email – from colleagues,
his subordinates and other managers to whom
he is responsible in one way or another.
A Functional Analysis
Several functions appear to influence the choice
of method:
 Reminding
 Context
 Number of access points – home, work,
road…
 Ease of maintenance
 …
Portability
Number of
access points
Persistence
Preservation
Currency
Context
Reminding
Ease of
integration
Communication
Ease of
maintenance
A Functional Analysis (cont.)
Email to self
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
High
Med
Low
Med
Email to others
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
Low
Low?
High
High
Print-out
High
High
High
Low
Low
Low
High
Med
High
Med
Save as file
Med?
Low?
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Med?
Low
Med
Low
Low?
Low
Med
High
High
High?
High?
Low
High
Personal web site
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
High?
High
Med
High?
Search
Low
High
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
?
Low
High
Direct entry
Low
High
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
?
Low
High
Bookmarks
Low
Low
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
History
Low
Low
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
Low?
Low
?
Paste
URL
document
in
Portability
Number of
access points
Persistence
Preservation
Currency
Context
Reminding
Ease of
integration
Communication
Ease of
maintenance
A Functional Analysis (cont.)
Email to self
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
High
Med
Low
Med
Email to others
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
Low
Low?
High
High
Print-out
High
High
High
Low
Low
Low
High
Med
High
Med
Save as file
Med?
Low?
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Med?
Low
Med
Low
Low?
Low
Med
High
High
High?
High?
Low
High
Personal web site
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
High?
High
Med
High?
Search
Low
High
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
?
Low
High
Direct entry
Low
High
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
?
Low
High
Bookmarks
Low
Low
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
History
Low
Low
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
Low?
Low
?
Paste
URL
document
in
Portability
Number of
access points
Persistence
Preservation
Currency
Context
Reminding
Ease of
integration
Communication
Ease of
maintenance
A Functional Analysis (cont.)
Email to self
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
High
Med
Low
Med
Email to others
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
Low
Low?
High
High
Print-out
High
High
High
Low
Low
Low
High
Med
High
Med
Save as file
Med?
Low?
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Med?
Low
Med
Low
Low?
Low
Med
High
High
High?
High?
Low
High
Personal web site
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
High?
High
Med
High?
Search
Low
High
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
?
Low
High
Direct entry
Low
High
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
?
Low
High
Bookmarks
Low
Low
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
History
Low
Low
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
Low?
Low
?
Paste
URL
document
in
Other Notables

Participants seemed to distinguish
between three categories.



Web sites used repeatedly – make it easy
to access.
Web sites used infrequently but important
to be able to access.
Web sites to check out later to see if
useful.
Other Notables (cont.)

Some participants went to great lengths to
maintain a single hierarchy.




Print web pages to file with other papers.
Save email documents to filing system for e-docs.
Work with assistant to establish consistent
organizations across paper documents, e-docs,
email & favorites.
Keeping practices appear to vary with a
person’s job and relationship to information.
Study 2: Delayed Cued Recall

A second study looks at how/how well people
are able to get back to web sites.


Session 1: Participant describes each in a set of
web sites they have visited recently – without
including name or URL.
Session 2, 3-6 months later: Participants are cued
with these descriptions and told to get back to the
site as best they can. We observe methods used
and problems encountered.
Study 2 Methods


Focus on “useful” web sites – sites that a
participant is very likely to want to re-access
over the next 12 months (75% or greater).
Sample for different frequencies of access in
a typical week.




High – daily access in a typical week.
Medium – 1 to 3 times in a typical week.
Low – not accessed in a typical week.
Measure cue effectiveness. Does the
participant recall the task? The site?
Study 2 Results


Success rate is high – 90% or better.
Roughly 2/3 of the re-finding methods
require no “keeping” forethought.



Direct entry of URL
Access web site via another web site (such
as a “hub”)
Search again
When Participant Recalls Task
and Site
Access
Freq.
Low
Medium
High
# of
Part.
11
12
11
Obj.
Success
Subj.
Success
90%
98%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Trial # of
time Methods
Tried
1:42
1:07
0:47
1.2
1.2
1.0
1st Method
Requires
“Keeping”
30%
29%
36%
Last
Method
Requires
“Keeping”
23%
19%
36%
When Participant Recalls Task
Only
Access
Freq.
Low
Medium
High
# of
Part.
8
3
2
Obj.
Success
Subj.
Success
23%
33%
50%
86%
100%
100%
Trial # of
time Methods
Tried
2:59
1:14
1:59
1.7
1.0
1.0
1st Method
Requires
“Keeping”
42%
33%
50%
Last
Method
Requires
“Keeping”
52%
33%
50%
Prototyping
… as driven by the data. Simple extensions to
Add Favorites to support the following
options:
 Add a comment.
 Save Favorite to filing system.
 Email Favorite.
The Prototype
Conclusions


People use a diversity of methods to
organize web information for re-access
and re-use.
A functional analysis can help us to
understand the diversity of methods
observed and their relative popularity.
Conclusions (cont.)



Methods differ in the functions they
provide.
No single current method provides all
the functions a user may need.
The relative importance of functions
(and hence the choice of methods)
depends upon the task at hand.
Conclusions (cont.)

A “natural” study of people doing tasks
in their workplace can be very useful.
How Can We Do It Better?




Better reminding.
Better integration.
Fewer organizational schemes.
Further improvements in “do nothing”
methods.


In-line matching for suggested completions
Factor history into search results? “Stuff
I’ve Seen” searching.
For More Information

http://kftf.ischool.washington.edu/
Supplemental slides
A Functional Analysis (cont.)
Additional functions:






Persistence of information
Preservation of information in its current
state
Currency of information
Ease of integration
Communication and information sharing
Portability of information
Managers
Information
Specialists
Researchers
Use of keeping methods by
participant group
# of participants
4
Email to self
75%
25%
0%
Email to others
25%
0%
100%
Print-out
50%
13%
17%
Save as file
25%
0%
0%
Paste URL in document
75%
13%
0%
Personal web site
25%
0%
0%
Bookmark (Favorite)
50%
88%
33%
Notes on paper
0%
25%
0%
Links toolbar
0%
13%
17%
Outlook "Note"
0%
13%
0%
8
6
Portability
Number of
access points
Persistence
Preservation
Currency
Context
Reminding
Ease of
integration
Communication
Ease of
maintenance
A Functional Analysis (cont.)
Email to self
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
High
Med
Low
Med
Email to others
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
Low
Low?
High
High
Print-out
High
High
High
Low
Low
Low
High
Med
High
Med
Save as file
Med?
Low?
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Med?
Low
Med
Low
Low?
Low
Med
High
High
High?
High?
Low
High
Personal web site
Low
High
Low
Med
High
High
High?
High
Med
High?
Search
Low
High
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
?
Low
High
Direct entry
Low
High
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
?
Low
High
Bookmarks
Low
Low
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
History
Low
Low
Low
Med
High
Low
Low
Low?
Low
?
Paste
URL
document
in