Digital libraries, e-journal platforms, portals, e-prints and other web-based information systems provide services supporting users to perform intense work tasks that require complex interaction activities. The main components of such services are the users, the offered content and the system on which they are performed. This paper presents a model, which analyses the attributes of the electronic information services' components that affect user interaction and correlates them in the usefulness and usability evaluation process. An experimental study traces the relations between usefulness and usability, indicating that these evaluation parameters are interconnected and users do not find discriminating differences between them. The analysis of the content and system attributes suggests that user interaction is affected equally by content and system characteristics. Finally, the study illustrates users' preference for the attributes that constitute a useful system in contrast to those that support usability.
F.D. Davis , Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology , MIS Quarterly13(3) (1989) 319–340 .
2.
J.Y.L. Thong , W. Hong and K. Tam , Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: what are the roles of interface characteristics, organizational context, and individual differences?International Journal of Human Computer Studies (57) (2002) 215–242 .
3.
Z. Yang , S. Cai , Z. Zhou and N. Zhou , Development and validation of an instrument to measure user perceived service quality of information presenting web portals , Information & Management42(4)(2004) 575–589 .
4.
H. Shih , Extended technology acceptance model of internet utilization behavior , Information & Management41(6) (2004) 719–729 .
5.
W.H. Delone and E.R. McLean , Information systems success: the quest for the depending variable , Information Systems Research3(1) (1992) 60–95 .
6.
A. Dillon and M. Morris , Power, perception and performance: from usability engineering to technology acceptance with the P3 model of user response . In: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Conference of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica, CA (HFES, 1999) 1017–1021 . Available cached at: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/650038.html (accessed 28 December 2005).
7.
N. Fuhr , P. Hansen , M. Mabe , A. Micsik and I. Sølvberg , Digital libraries: a generic classification and evaluation scheme . In: P. Constantopoulos and I.T. Sølveberg (eds), Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Digital Libraries 2001, Darmstadt, Germany, September 4–9(Springer, Berlin, 2002) 187–199 .
8.
K. Järvelin and P. Ingwersen , Information seeking research needs extension towards tasks and technology , Information Research10(1) (2004). Available at: http://InformationR.net/ir/10–1/paper212.html (accessed 24 December 2005).
9.
N. Bryan-Kinns , A. Blandford and H. Thimbleby , Interaction modelling for digital libraries . In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Evaluation of Information Management Systems, London, September 15 (2000). Available at: www.uclic.ucl.ac.uk/annb/DLUsability/MNAIF.html (accessed: 24 December 2005).
10.
C.C. Kuhthau , Inside the search process: information seeking from the user's perspective , Journal of the American Society for Information Science42(5) (1991) 361–371 .
11.
A. Foster and N. Ford , Serendipity and information seeking: an empirical study , Journal of Documentation59(3) (2003) 321–340 .
12.
A. Foster , A nonlinear model of information-seeking behavior , Journal of the American Society of Information Science55(3) (2004) 228–237 .
13.
G.G. Chowdhury and S. Chowdhury , An overview of the information retrieval features of twenty digital libraries , Program34(4) (2000) 341–373 .
14.
P. Vilar and M. Z <caron>umer , Comparison and evaluation of the user interfaces of e-journals , Journal of Documentation61(2) (2005) 203–227 .
15.
J. Holmström , Managing a paradigm shift: aligning management, privacy policy, technology and standards . In: R. Hery and L. Lyon (eds), Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Digital Libraries 2004, Bath, UK, September 12–17 (Springer, Berlin, 2004) 442–451 .
16.
H. Krottmaier , Current and future features of digital journals . In: M.H. Shafazand and A.M. Tjoa (eds), Information and Communication Technology: Proceedings of the First EurAsian Conference, Shiraz, Iran, October 29–31 (Springer, Berlin, 2002) 495–502 .
17.
T.D. Wilson , Models in information behaviour research , Journal of Documentation55(3) (1999) 249–270 .
18.
P. Hansen , Evaluation of IR user interface: implications for user interface design , Human IT (2) (1998). Available at: www.hb.se/bhs/ith/2–98/ph.htm (accessed 24 December 2005)
19.
E.G. Toms , Information interaction: providing a framework for information architecture , Journal of the American Society of Information Science53(10) (2002) 855–862 .
20.
M. Beaulieu , Interaction in information searching and retrieval , Journal of Documentation56(4) (2000) 431–439 .
21.
T.D. Wilson , On user studies and information needs , Journal of Documentation37(1) (1981) 3–15 .
22.
D. Rusch-Feja and U. Siebeky , Evaluation of usage and acceptance of electronic journals: results of an electronic survey of Max Planck Society researchers including usage statistics from Elsevier, Springer and Academic Press (full report) , D-Lib Magazine5(10) (1999). Available at: www.dlib.org/dlib/october99/rusch-feja/10rusch-feja-full-report.html (accessed 24 December 2005).
23.
S. Majid and A. Tee Tan , Usage of information resources by computer engineering students: a case study of Nanyang Technological University, Singapore , Online Information Review26(5) (2002) 318–325 .
24.
M. Monopoli , D. Nicholas , P. Georgiou and M. Korfiati , A user-oriented evaluation of digital libraries: case study the “electronic journals” service of the library and information service of the University of Patras, Greece , Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives54(2) (2002) 103–117 .
25.
P. Vakkari and P. Hakala , Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in task performance , Journal of Documentation56(5) (2000) 540–562 .
26.
Z. Liu , Perceptions of credibility of scholarly information on the web , Information Processing & Management40(6) (2004) 1027–1038 .
27.
R. Fidel and M. Green , The many faces of accessibility: engineers' perceptions of information sources , Information Processing & Management40(3) (2004) 563–581 .
28.
A. Dix , G. Abowd and J. Finlay , Human-Computer Interaction ( Prentice Hall, New York , 1993).
29.
D.T. Covey , Usage and Usability Assessment: Library Practices and Concerns ( Council on Library and Information Resources, Washington, DC , 2002).
30.
C. Ebenezer , Usability evaluation of an NHS library website , Health Information and Libraries Journal (20) (2003) 134–142 .
31.
S. McMullen , Usability testing in a library Web site redesign project , Reference Services Review29(1) (2001) 7–22 .
32.
M. Allen , A case study of the usability testing of the University of South Florida's virtual library interface design , Online Information Review26 (1) (2002) 40–53 .
33.
B.J. Cockrell and E.A. Jayne , How do I find an article? Insights from a web usability study , Journal of Academic Librarianship28(3) (2002) 122–132 .
34.
D.M. Fuller and P.G. Hinegardner , Ensuring quality website redesign: the University of Maryland's experience , Bulletin of the Medical Library Association89(4) (2001) 339–345 .
35.
R.H. Hartson , P. Shivakumar and M.A. Pérez-Quiñones , Usability inspection of digital libraries: a case study , International Journal on Digital Libraries4(2) (2004) 108–123 .
36.
M.J. van den Haak , M.D.T. De Jong and P.J. Schellens , Employing think-aloud protocols and constructive interaction to test the usability of online library catalogues: a methodological comparison , Interacting with Computers (16) (2004) 1153–1170 .
37.
J. Jeng , What is usability in the context of digital library and how it can be measured?Information Technology and Libraries24(2) (2005) 47–56 .
38.
E.G. Abels , M.D. White and K. Hahn , Identifying userbased criteria for Web pages , Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy7(4) (1997) 252–262 .
39.
C. Marton , Quality of health information on the web: user perceptions of relevance and reliability, The New Review of Information Behaviour Research (2003) 195–205.
40.
C.N. Wathen and J. Burkell , Believe it or not: factors influencing credibility on the web , Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology53(2) (2002) 134–144 .
41.
R.V. Hauck and S. Weisband , When a better interface and easy navigation aren't enough: examining the information architecture in a law enforcement agency , Journal of the American Society for Information Science53(10) (2002) 846–854 .
42.
A. Weiler , Information-seeking behavior in generation Y students: motivation, critical thinking, and learning theory , Journal of Academic Librarianship31(1) (2005) 46–53 .
43.
D. Nicholas , P. Huntington , M. Monopoli and A. Watkinson , Engaging with scholarly digital libraries (publisher platforms): the extent to which ‘added value’ functions are used , Information Processing & Management42(3) (2006) 826–842 (to be published).
44.
A. Mahé , C. Andrys and G. Chartron , How French research scientists are making use of electronic journals: a case study conducted at Pierre et Marie Curie University and Denis Diderot University , Journal of Information Science26(5) (2000) 291–302 .
