Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/95663
標題: 從查詢、辨識、選擇探討數位典藏內容後設資料之可用性
Usability of Metadata of Digital Archives from Perspectives of Finding, Identifying and Selecting
作者: 曹嘉怡
KA I CHOU
關鍵字: 數位典藏內容
後設資料
可用性評估
Digital Archives
Metadata
Usability Study
引用: 一、 中文部分 王雅萍、陳美智(2010)。數位化工作流程指南:整合性工作流程。臺北市:數位典藏拓展臺灣數位典藏計畫。檢自:http://ebook.teldap.tw/ebook_detail.jsp? id=494 余顯強(2007)。以資訊處理觀點論Metadata之本質與意涵。教育資料與圖書館學,45(2),249-266。 吳樹華(2009)。圖書館異質資源整合檢索系統之使用者介面評估研究(未出版碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺北市。 林巧敏(2013)。檔案檢索系統有無經驗使用者檢索歷程分析。大學圖書館,17(2),44-65。 林巧敏(2014)。檔案檢索工具易用性評估實例分析。國家圖書館館刊,103(1),35-62。doi: 10.6146/univj.17-2.03 林佳穎(2010)。圖書館電子資源整合查詢系統之好用性評估:以臺灣大學圖書館Muse電子資源整合查詢系統為例(未出版碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學系,臺北市。 姜義臺(2009)。圖書館電子資源整合檢索系統優使性之研究-以SmartWeaver為例(未出版碩士論文)。國立中興大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺中市。 後設資料工作組(2003a)。史語所傅斯年圖書館藏善本圖籍數位典藏計畫 善本圖籍後設資料需求規格書(version 0.6)。檢自:http://metadata.teldap.tw/project/filebox/shanben/requirement/ 20030328.pdf 後設資料工作組(2003b)。檔案核心元素與各計畫元素比對。檢自數位典藏國家型科技計畫後設資料工作組:http://metadata.teldap.tw/project/filebox/archive group/analysis_files/AG030807.pdf 後設資料工作組(2008a)。FAQ。檢自數位典藏國家型科技計畫後設資料工作組:http://metadata.teldap.tw/share/share-frame.html 後設資料工作組(2008b)。計畫簡介。檢自數位典藏國家型科技計畫後設資料工作組:http://metadata.teldap.tw/introduction/introduction-frame.html 後設資料工作組(2012)。工作計畫。檢自數位典藏國家型科技計畫後設資料工作組:http://metadata.teldap.tw/project/project-frame.html 後設資料工作組(2013)。參考規範。檢自數位典藏國家型科技計畫後設資料工作組:http://metadata.teldap.tw/standard/standard-frame.html 張淑貞(2010)。以使用者為中心之電子商務網站使用性評估研究(未出版碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺北市。 陳百薰、項潔、姜宗模、洪政欣(2002)。數位博物館探討。博物館學季刊,16(3),15-37。 陳亞寧、陳淑君(1999)。Metadata 初探。中央研究院計算中心通訊,15(5),36-43。檢自:http://metadata.teldap.tw/bibliography/journal/jp990301.pdf 陳亞寧、陳淑君(2005)。Metadata在圖書資訊學的研究發展。圖書與資訊學刊,55,51-77。 陳亞寧、江惠英、陳淑君、劉嘉慧(1999)。中央研究院Metadata工作小組第一、二階段報告。中央研究院計算中心通訊,15(8),70-73。檢自:http://metadata.teldap.tw/bibliography/journal/jp990401.pdf 陳亞寧(2004)。後設資料註冊中心現況發展之研究。教育資料與圖書館學,41(3),351-371。 陳姿均(2010)。兒童繪本網站使用性研究(未出版碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺北市。 陳昭珍、陳雪華、陳光華(2000)。數位圖書館與博物館metadata管理系統─Metalogy之設計。TANET2000:臺灣區網際網路研討會論文集。臺南市:國立成功大學計算機與網路中心。檢自:http://ir.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/ir/handle/ 309250000Q/21605 陳淑君(2013)。詮釋資料標準。檢自國家教育研究院雙語詞彙、學術名詞暨辭書資訊網:http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1954748/ 陳雪華(1999)。博物館典藏品數位化資訊組織之探討。大學圖書館,3(1),4-16。 黃寬重(2012)。數位時代人文研究的衝擊與蛻變。漢學研究通訊,31(1),1-6。 楊朝涵(2002)。國外數位典藏的發展?國家數位典藏通訊,3,檢自:http://www2.ndap.org.tw/newsletter06/news/read_news.php?nid=966 廖彩惠、陳泰穎(2009)。從文明科技發展看數位典藏的時代意義-本質、迷思與發展趨勢。國家圖書館館刊,98(2),85-108。 劉至逢(2009)。大學圖書館網站使用性評估之探討(未出版碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺北市。 數位典藏與數位學習計畫百科(2013a)。數位典藏國家型科技計畫第二期。檢自:http://wiki.teldap.tw/index.php?title=%E6%95%B8%E4%BD%8D%E5%85 %B8%E8%97%8F%E5%9C%8B%E5%AE%B6%E5%9E%8B%E7%A7%91%E6%8A%80%E8%A8%88%E7%95%AB%E7%AC%AC%E4%BA%8C%E6%9C%9F 數位典藏與數位學習計畫百科(2013b)。數位典藏與數位學習國家型科技計畫。檢自:http://wiki.teldap.tw/index.php?title=%E6%95%B8%E4%BD%8D%E5%8 5%B8%E8%97%8F%E8%88%87%E6%95%B8%E4%BD%8D%E5%AD%B8%E7%BF%92%E5%9C%8B%E5%AE%B6%E5%9E%8B%E7%A7%91%E6%8A%80%E8%A8%88%E7%95%AB 蔡永橙、黃國倫、邱志義(2007)。數位典藏技術導論。臺北市:臺大出版中心。檢自:http://ebook.iis.sinica.edu.tw/pdf/ch1_Introduction.pdf 蔡佩珊(2011)。醫學校院圖書館網站可用性之研究-以陽明大學圖書館為例(未出版碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學圖書資訊學研究所圖書資訊學在職專班,臺北市。 蔡維君(2006)。大學圖書館網站好用性評估-以臺灣大學圖書館網站為例(未出版碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學研究所,臺北市。 鄭伊廷(2012)。檔案目錄整合檢索系統之優使性研究-以ACROSS為例(未出版碩士論文)。國立政治大學圖書資訊與檔案學研究所,臺北市。 鄭嘉雯(2012)。視障電子圖書館網站好用性評估之研究:以臺北市立圖書館視障電子圖書館為例。國立臺灣大學圖書資訊學系,臺北市。 錢善華(2012)。南島語音樂數位博物館-南島語族音樂數位典藏計畫。人文與社會科學簡訊,13(3),121-133。 顏瑞瑩、謝寶煖(2014)。官方旅遊網站好用性研究。圖書與資訊學刊,6(1),24-50。 魏澤群(2005)。使用者最大-從優使性(Usability)出發的網站設計原則。臺北市:網奕資訊科技。 羅思嘉、陳雪華(1990)。資源組織與檢索規範:蝴蝶詮釋資料格式的發展。圖書資訊學刊,14,93-114。 二、 西文部分 ALCTS. (1999). Task Force on Metadata: Summary Report. Retrieved from http://www.libraries.psu.edu/tas/jca/ccda/tf-meta3.html Beck, S. E., & Manuel, K. (2008). Practical Research Methods for Librarians and Information Professionals. New York, NY: Neal-Schuman. Bennett, J. L. (1972). The user interface in interactive systems. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 7, 159-196. Bennett, J. L. (1979). The commercial impact of usability in interactive systems. In Shackel, B. (ed.), Man/computer communication: Infotech state of the art report, 2 (pp. 1-17). Maidenhead, UK: Infotech International. Bevan, N., Kirakowski, J., & Maissel, J. (1991). What is usability? Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on HCI. Stuttgart: Elsevier. Retrieved from http://www.nigelbevan.com/papers/whatis92.pdf Booth, P. A. (1989). An Introduction to Human-Computer Interaction. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Brink, T., Gergle, D., & Wood, S. D. (2002). Usability for the Web: Designing Web Sites that Work. San Francisco, CA: Academic Press. Bruce, T. R., & Hillmann, D. I. (2004). The continuum of metadata quality: Defining, expressing, exploiting. In D. I. Hillmann, & E. L. Westbrooks (ed.), Metadata in Practice (pp. 238-256). Chcago, IL: American Library Association. Buchanan, S., & Salako, A. (2009). Evaluating the usability and usefulness of a digital library. Library Review, 58(9), 638-651. doi: 10.1108/00242530910997928 Caplan, P. (2003). Metadata Fundamentals for All Librarians. Chicago, IL: American Library Association. de Carvalho Moura, A. M., Machado Campos, M. L., & Barreto, C. M. (1998). A survey on metadata for describing and retrieving internet resources. World Wide Web, 1, 221-240. doi: 10.1023/A:1019228117935 Chuttur, M. Y. (2011). An analysis of problems in metadata records. Journal of Library Metadata, 11, 51-62. doi: 10.1080/19386389.2011.570654 Chuttur, M. Y. (2012). An experimental study of metadata training effectiveness on errors in metadata records. Journal of Library Metadata, 12, 372-395. doi: 10.1080/19386389.2012.735573 Crystal, A., & Greenberg, J. (2005). Usability of a metadata creation application for resource authors. Library & Information Science Research, 27, 177-189. doi: 10.1016/J.LISR.2005.01.012 Date, C. J. (2003). An Introduction to Database Systems (8th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.125books.com/inc/pt4321/pt4322/pt4323/pt4324/pt4325/data_all/books/A/An%20Introduction%20to%20Database%20Systems%208Ed%20%20C%20J%20Date%20%20%20Solutions%20Manual.pdf Dempsey, L., & Heery, R. (1997). Specification for Resource Description Methods. Part 1. A Review of Metadata: A Survey of Current Resource Description Formats. Retrieved from http://opus.bath.ac.uk/23579/1/overview.pdf Dumas, J. S., & Redish, J. C. (1999). A Practical Guide to Usability Testing. Exeter, UK: Intellect. Eason, K. D. (1984). Towards the experimental study of usability. Behaviour and Information Technology, 3(2), 133-143. Fagan, J. C., Mandernach, M., Nelson, C. S., Paulo, J. R., & Saunders, G. (2012). Usability test results for a discovery tool in an academic library. Information Technology and Libraries, 31(1), 83-112. doi: 10.6017/ital.v31i1.1855 Fear, K. (2010). User understanding of metadata in digital image collections: Or, what exactly do you measn by “coverage”? The American Archivist, 73, 26-60. doi: 10.17723/aarc.73.1.j00044lr77415551 Fraser, B., & Gluck, M. (1999). Usability of geospatial metadata or space-time matters. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 25(6), 24-28. doi: 10.1002/bult.134 Genuis, S. K. (2004). Web site usability testing: A critical tool for libraries. Feliciter, 4, 161-164. Gilliland-Swetland, A. J. (1998). Defining metadata. In M. Baca, Introduction to Metadata: Pathways to Digital Information (pp. 1-8). Los Angeles, CA: Getty Information. Gilliand-Swetland, A. J. (2008). Setting the stage. In M. Baca (ed.), Introduction to Metadata (2nd ed., pp. 1-19). Los Angeles, CA: Getty Publications. Greenberg, J. (2001). A quantitative categorical analysis of metadata elements in image-applicable metadata schemas. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(11), 917-924. doi: 10.1002/asi.1170 Guillemette, R. A. (1995). The evaluation of usability in interactive information systems. In J. M. Carey (ed.), Human Factors in Information Systems (pp. 207-221). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Pub. Corp. Haynes, D. (2004). Metadata for Information Management and Retrieval. London, UK: Facet Publishing. Hider, P. (2012). Information Resource Description: Creating and Managing Metadata. London, UK: Facet Publishing. Hirwade, M. A. (2011). A study of metadata standards. Library Hi Tech News, 7, 18-25. doi: 10.1108/07419051111184052 Hix, D., & Hartson, H. R. (1993). Developing User Interfaces: Ensuring Usability Through Product & Process. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Hodgson, K. (1998). Metadata: Foundation, Potential and Applications. Retrieved from http://web.archive.org/web/20020814115740re_/www.slis.ualberta.ca/538/khodgson/metadata.htm IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (2008). Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records Final Report. Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf Intner, S. S., Lazinger, S. S., & Weihs, J. (2006). Metadata and Its Impact on Libraries. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. ISO 9241-11. (1998). Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) -- Part 11: Guidance on usability. Jeng, J. (2005). Usability assessment of academic digital libraries: Effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction, and learnability. Libi, 55, 96-121. Johnson, M. (2013). Usability test results for Encore in an academic library. Information Technology and Libraries, 32(3), 59-85. doi: 10.6017/ital.v32i3.4635 Lim, S., & Liew, C. L. (2011). Metadata quality and interoperability of GLAM digial images. Aslib Proceedings: New Information Perspectives, 63(5), 484-498. doi: 10.1108/00012531111164978 Liu, J. (2007). Metadata and Its Applications in the Digital Library: Approaches and Practices. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited. Miller, S. J. (2011). Metadata for Digital Collections: A How-To-Do-It Manual. London, UK: Facet Publishing. Moreira, B. L., Goncalves, M. A., Laender, A. H., & Fox, E. A. (2009). Automatic evaluation of digital libraries with 5SQual. Journal of Informetrics, 3, 102-123. doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2008.12.003 Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. San Francisco, CA: Academic Press. Nielsen, J. (2000). Why You Only Need to Test with 5 Users. Retrieved from http://www.nngroup.com/articles/why-you-only-need-to-test-with-5-users/ NISO. (2004). Understanding Metadata. Bethesda, MD: NISO Press. Retrieved from http://www.niso.org/publications/press/UnderstandingMetadata.pdf Noh, Y. (2011). A study on metadata elements for web-based reference resources system developed through usability testing. Library Hi Tech, 29(2), 242-265. doi: 10.1108/07378831111138161 Norlin, E., & Winters, C. (2002). Usability Testing for Library Websites: A Hands-On Guide. Chicago, IL: American Library Association. Ochoa, X., & Duval, E. (2009). Automatic evaluation of metadata quality in digital repositories. Int J Digit Libr, 10, 67-91. doi: 10.1007/s00799-009-0054-4 Oulanov, A. (2008). Business administration students'' perception of usability of the Business Source Premier database. The Electronic Library, 26(4), 505-519. doi: 10.1108/02640470810893756 Palavitsinis, N., Manouselis, N., & Sanchez-Alonso, S. (2014). Metadata quality in learning object repositories: A case study. The Electronic Library, 32(1), 62-82. doi: 10.1108/EL-12-2011-0175 Park, J. -R. (2009). Metadata quality in digital repositories: A survey of the current state of the art. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 47, 213-228. doi: 10.1080/01639370902737240 Pickard, A. J. (2007). Research Methods in Information. London, UK: Facet Publishing. Preece, J. (1993). A Guide to Usability: Human Factors in Computing. Wokingham, UK: The Open University. Quam, E. (2001). Informing and evaluating a metadata initiative: Usability and metadata studies in Minnesota’s Foundations Prjoect. Government Information Quartetly, 18, 181-194. Quesenbery, W. (2003). Dimensions of usability: Defining the conversation, driving the process. Proceedings of the UPA 2003 Conference. Retrieved from http://www.wqusability.com/articles/5es-upa2003.pdf Quesenbery, W. (2004). Balancing the 5Es: Usability. Cutter IT Journal, 17(2), 4-11. RLG. (2005). Descriptive Metadata Guidelines for RGL Cultural Materials. Retrieved from http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/activities/culturalmaterials/RLG descmetadata.pdf?urlm=161424 Rubin, J., & Chisnell, D. (2008). Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests (2nd ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Wiley. Shackel, B. (2009). Usability - Context, framework, definition, design and evaluation. Interacting with Computers, 21, 399-346. doi: 10.1016/j.intcom.2009.04.007 Skinner, J. (2014). Metadata in archival and cultural heritage settings: A review of the literature. Journal of Library Metadata, 14, 52-68. doi: 10.1080/19386389.2014.891892 Sonsteby, A., & DeJonghe, J. (2013). Usability testing, user-centered design, and LibGuides subject guides: A case study. Journal of Web Librarianship, 7(1), 83-94. doi: 10.1080/19322909.2013.747366 Steele, T., & Sump-Crethar, N. (2016). Metadata for Electronic Theses and Dissertations: A survey of institutional repositories. Journal of Library Metadata, 16, 53-68. doi: 10.1080/19386389.2016.1161462 Sutton, S. A. (2008). Metadata quality, utility and the semantic web: The case of learning resources and achievement standards. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 46(1), 81-107. doi: 10.1080/01639370802183065 Tennant, R. (1998). 21st-century cataloging. Library Journal, 123(7), 30-31. Theimer, S. H. (2013). All metadata politics is local: Developing meaningful quality standards. In J.-R. Park, & L. C. Howarth (ed.), New Directions in Information Organization (Library and Information Science, Volume 7) (pp. 229-250). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. doi: 10.1108/S1876-0562(2013)0000007015 Tidal, J. (2012). Creating a user-centered library homepage: A case study. OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectives, 28(2), 90-100. doi: 10.1108/10650751211236631 VandeCreek, L. M. (2005). Usability analysis of Northern Illinois University Libraries'' website: A case study. OCLC Systems & Services, 21(3), 181-192. doi: 10.1108/10650750510612380 Vellucci, S. L. (1998). Metadata. In M. E. Williams, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (Vol. 33, pp. 187-222). Medford, NJ: Information Today. Weagley, J., Gelches, E., & Park, J. -R. (2010). Interoperability and metadata quality in digital video repositories: A study of Dublin Core. Journal of Library Metadata, 10, 37-57. doi: 10.1080/19386380903546984 Weibel, S., Godby, J., Miller, E., & Daniel, R. (1995). OCLC/NCSA Metadata Workshop Report. Retrieved from http://dublincore.org/workshops/dc1/report.shtml Williams, S. J. (2013). Data Standards FAQs. Retrieved from Visual Resources Association:http://vraweb.org/resources/cataloging-metadata-and-data-management/data-standards-faqs/ Windnagel, A. (2014). The usage of simple Dublin Core metadata in digital math and science repositories. Journal of Library Metadata, 14, 77-102. doi: 10.1080/19386389.2014.909677 Zhang, T., Maron, D. J., & Charles, C. C. (2013). Usability evaluation of a research repository and collaboration web site. Journal of Web Librarianship, 7(1), 58-82. doi: 10.1080/19322909.2013.739041 Zhang, Y., & Li, Y. (2008). A user-centered functional metadata evaluation of moving image collections. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(8), 1331-1346. doi: 10.1002/asi.20839
摘要: 資訊科技的發展和網際網路的普及,讓既有的知識表現形式透過數位化得以匯聚和保存,並能即時傳至世界各地,達到知識共享的目的。為強化網際網路可乘載資訊的內涵,世界各國紛紛投注資源發展數位典藏、數位圖書館或數位博物館等計畫。相關計畫除將典藏內容數位化,另一項重要的工作為建置典藏內容的後設資料,以協助使用者有效地搜尋所需資源、辨識資源的合適性、區別相似屬性的資源、選擇符合需求的資源,以及取得資源;而後設資料品質是影響滿足前述需求的關鍵因素。過去相關研究多從後設資料的紀錄著眼,討論後設資料著錄內容的完整性、準確性與一致性,但使用者對後設資料著錄內容的想法為何、是否能夠滿足其需求,以及後設資料可否協助使用者有效檢索數位內容等則著墨不多。 本研究採以使用者為中心的可用性評估概念,從查詢、辨識與選擇等面向,針對數位典藏內容所對應的後設資料進行評估研究。研究邀請一般大眾、擁有藏品相關之先備知識的使用者,以及資訊檢索專家等三種不同類型使用者參與,實際利用數位典藏系統進行搜尋任務,再就其檢索經驗從效能、效率與滿意度等三項指標,分析後設資料支援查詢、辨識與選擇數位典藏內容之可用性。 研究發現數位典藏內容不只限於二維概念的文字資料,還包括三維概念的立體形式資料,因此數位化過程中會產生大量圖像資料顯示典藏內容的特質與樣貌,也會以文字式描述其視覺表徵。當使用者以文字或視覺圖像檢索典藏內容時,雖然後設資料內容完整性和著錄一致性,仍是影響參與者對後設資料滿意度的重要因素,但研究亦發現文字與圖像轉譯,對後設資料支援檢索數位典藏內容的效能與效率產生影響,可能因素包括視覺內容轉譯落差、索引詞與檢索詞的一致性、圖像控制詞彙與查詢結果的精確性、圖像資料品質、後設資料著錄內容的專業程度,以及圖像資料與文字資料間相互作用等。綜合研究結果,研究者提出以下建議,典藏單位可利用可用性評估揭露後設資料的使用問題,找出可提升後設資料品質的關鍵因素,建構具更豐富視覺內容元素的後設資料,降低視覺內容轉譯差距;增加查詢條件組合多元性,提升結果精確度;以及強化圖文資料並列的顯示設計,提高辨識效能與效率。
The developments of information technologies and Internet have let the knowledge be able presented in various formats and could be spread around the world in an instant manner. The initiative of digital archives have drawn a lot of attention from various communities and sectors, fruitful resources have been invested into significant amount of project. Besides digitizing collections, creating metadata to be surrogates, which present the collections, to support the needs of finding, identifying, selecting and obtaining the materials needed, is one of the major tasks. The quality of metadata is crucial to accomplish the tasks mentioned aboves. Related studies have been conducted to determin the quality of metadata and most of the studies mainly focused on the completeness, accuracy and consistency of metadata, but took approach from users’ point of view, if the metadata could provide supports to fulfill information needs effectively and efficiently. This study applied the ideas from usability study to evaluate the level of usability of metadata, from users’ perspectives. This researcher invited the general public, the users who have prior knowledge relates to the collection, as well as information retrieval experts to take parts in this study. Through observing how the participants carried out the retrieval tasks via, the research was able to measure the effectiveness, efficiency and user satisfaction of the level of supportiveness of metadata on information retrieval. The results show that the completeness and consistency of metadata remain essential factors that influence users satisfaction, the constancy, fruitness and correctness of textual description on graphic image have greater impact on effectiveness, efficiency and user satisfaction of information retrieval when participants searched the contents via text or pictorial components, since digital archives contain major amount of three-dimensional objects. Besides the challenge of describing graphic images via textual data, the consistency of index and search terms, the precision of search results, the quality of images, the degree of specifics of metadata, as well as the interactive display of texts and images also interfere the performance of metadata. Based on the research results the researcher makes the following suggestions, usability study could be seen as a token to expose the quality of metadata, and the technique to identify the details that could improve the performance of metadata. It is suggested that more diversification visual elements of metadata added could decrease the gap of image translation ladder the precision, advanced search functions could enhance the accuracy of results, as well as display text and image at the same time to increase effectiveness and efficiency of identification.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/95663
文章公開時間: 2018-02-09
Appears in Collections:圖書資訊學研究所

文件中的檔案:

取得全文請前往華藝線上圖書館



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.