Optimizing Explorative Search for the Needs of Media Professionals: The DIVE+ Use Case Justin Verhulst Oana Inel University of Amsterdam Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Amsterdam, The Netherlands Amsterdam, The Netherlands justinverhulst@gmail.com oana.inel@vu.nl Victor de Boer Lora Aroyo Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Amsterdam, The Netherlands Amsterdam, The Netherlands v.de.boer@vu.nl lora.aroyo@vu.nl more research on the relationship between narratives and the in- terpretation process is needed [3]. Also, as [2] argues, more user studies are needed to test the DIVE+ interface so that it can be im- proved. A potentially relevant user group that could be part of the DIVE+ user studies are media professionals, since they share a lot of the exploration practices of humanities scholars. Just as human- ities scholars, sense-making and contextualization are central in 1 INTRODUCTION the work practices of media professionals. Investigating the digital DIVE+1 has taken on the challenge to improve access to and under- exploration practices of media professionals and determining if, standing of cultural heritage. This is facilitated by DIVE+ through and how, events, narratives and serendipity are useful to them thus a web interface that allows users to interact with events and nar- perfectly fits as a DIVE+ research project and helps us to determine ratives. This research aimed to find out if this search browser is what aspects and features of a search tool media professionals value suitable for the user group of media professionals. By investigat- when they conduct exploratory searches. ing their research needs and search practices, we can determine if exploratory search and DIVE+ could be useful to them. A diverse 2 METHODS set of user testing methods was utilized to investigate this, and A range of methods was used to achieve the research goals. Specifi- we translated the search requirements of media professionals into cally, the following data collection methods were adopted: concrete recommendations for the interface of DIVE+, so that the • Usability testing of DIVE+ by means of simulated work tasks, tool can be further improved. in which think-aloud protocols were followed • Self-administrable questionnaires 1.1 Research problem • Focus group In the last 3 to 4 years, DIVE+ has undergone a number of transfor- • Poster session mations of both the interface and back-end data support, in order to • Log analysis provide the most optimal support for the users. Recommendations The methods were used in different compositions and in different from the numerous user studies provided the input for this. These settings in the period from May to July 2017. Four user studies were user studies mainly involved humanities scholars, as this group conducted, with four different user groups: humanities scholars, works a lot with historical material and archival collections. As media professionals, (digital) humanities students and computer such, search tools that support them in this are very useful to them, science students. This unique combination of user tests allowed us and they will remain an important focus of the DIVE+ research to retrieve in-depth insights on the exploratory search practices of community. However, the current research focuses on a new user media professionals and their use of DIVE+, while it also gave us the group: media professionals. While previous research has demon- possibility to determine how this group compares with students and strated that events and narratives within the DIVE+ browser indeed humanities scholars. The focus on the current research however help scholars to better contextualize and interpret the collection, is on media professionals; consult [1] for more detailed results 1 http://diveplus.frontwise.com/ concerning the scholars. 3 FINDINGS The findings can be summarized in two categories: (1) Search re- quirements of media professionals are influenced by work-related © 2017 Copyright held by the author/owner(s). constraints and (2) the DIVE+ user experience is not optimal due SEMANTiCS 2017 workshop proceedings: EVENTS to a lack of transparency and limited user control. September 11-14, 2017, Amsterdam, Netherlands 3.1 Work-related Constraints 4 RECOMMENDATIONS Media professionals argued that their search process is influenced The previous discussion shows that DIVE+ currently is limited in to a large extent by, most prominently, the following constraints: its ability to facilitate understanding and interpretation of archival time, budget, and target audience of a program. When making collections to its users. Regarding the media professionals, the re- a program, there is a limited amount of time as there often is a dead- quirements that they have for searching are not fully supported line, although this also depends on the type of program. Elaborate by the different features in DIVE+. Their requirements for an ex- (exploratory) searches are thus not always possible. Also, the type ploratory search tool can be summarized as follows: of material sought depends on the target audience of the program. • It should be time-efficient to use If a program has a younger audience, material that is recognizable is • There should be enough information available that describes suitable, while programs that have an older target audience rather collections and objects need material that is new and original. So there is a clear difference • The information should be transparent and verifiable between the material sought when the target audience is different. • There should be options to tailor the search to the specific Moreover, to do their jobs efficiently, media professionals are in (needs of the) media professional. need of transparency during search - they need to know where Some of these demands can easily be solved by implementing small sources come from and they need to be able to verify it. changes in the user interface of DIVE+. Other demands, such as that it should be time-efficient to use, are more difficult, or even 3.2 Limited DIVE+ User Experience undesirable, to meet. After all, the aim of DIVE+ is not to provide The DIVE+ user experience was not considered optimal. One of quick solutions to information problems, but rather to support users the most prominent issues in DIVE+ that was the cause of this, in their exploration of cultural heritage collections. In adapting the identified by the media professionals, was a lack of transparency search browser to new user groups, developers should keep this at different levels in the tool, mainly related to how events are in mind. Still, we think that a lot of the issues can, and should, be represented in DIVE+ and how they are presented to the user. This solved so that DIVE+ is better able to fulfill its potential. is where the problem lies: DIVE+ did not offer enough clues to the media professionals that allowed them to ‘check’ the information. It 5 CONCLUSION was not evident where the information was coming from and why In investigating the search practices of media professionals, we it was presented to them. Particularly, participants needed more found a set of requirements, relating to their work practices, that transparency on the following aspects: they have for searching: a tool should be time-efficient, there should • How are relationships between entities generated be enough information available in the tool and this should be trans- • What is the rationale behind the labels given to entities parent, and there should be enough options to tailor the search. • Metadata and information that describes individual entities These requirements could not be fulfilled by the exploratory search Another limitation of DIVE+ mentioned by the media professionals browser DIVE+. Particularly, the way in which events and event was the limited amount of control they could exercise to tailor the entities were presented provide users with too little means to un- search tool to their specific needs. Filtering options were missed and derstand and grasp why it was presented to them in this way. This more control was requested concerning the exploration path. Most results in a lack of trust and a skeptic attitude, which is problematic prominently, the fact that they could not filter on the type of media as it has negative consequences for the usefulness of the constructed and the collection was considered as a drawback. These filtering narratives and the serendipitous findings. All in all, this let us con- requirements also closely reflect the work-related constraints of clude that currently, narratives, events and serendipity in DIVE+ media professionals discussed previously. Particularly, the type of do not optimally support the exploratory search needs of media program (e.g. Youth news or Evening News) affects the type of professionals. Right now, the main challenge that lies ahead for the material that is sought for, and media professionals wanted to have DIVE+ research community is to increase the transparency of the more options in DIVE+ to tailor to these needs, even in this initial tool, so that users are better able to understand what is presented to stage of search. them, and why it is presented to them. Recommendations proposed in this research should be implemented and tested with users. This 3.3 Events, Narratives and Serendipity allows DIVE+ to better support users in their explorations through The previously described findings relate to the events, narratives, cultural heritage. and serendipity in DIVE+ in the following ways. First of all, how events and their interrelations are presented to the users is not clear, REFERENCES due to the transparency issues. This has negative consequences for [1] M. Cheng. 2017. DIVE+: User Interaction Design with Digital Humanities. In Master’s thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Amsterdam. the usefulness of narratives and events. Second, media professionals [2] A. Collijn. 2016. DIVE+: DIVE+: An exploratory search system for Humanities were most critical of all studies groups concerning the suggested scholars. In Master’s thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam. [3] M. Kruijt. 2016. Supporting exploratory search with features, visualizations, and narratives. Still, the potential of the exploration path and narratives interface design: a theoretical framework.. In Master’s thesis, Universiteit van is noted, for example for sharing stories and the search path with Amsterdam, Amsterdam. colleagues. Last, the relevance of search results is difficult to assess (due to the aforementioned problems), which limits the potential for serendipitous findings. 2