University of Michigan Library

An 8-week solo research fellowship that increased new user satisfaction by 5%

Problem
New undergraduate students are often intimidated by the Library Search tool's interface, leading to low initial adoption and reliance on less effective research methods.
Outcome
I conducted qualitative user research to better understand the research behaviors of the undergraduates of the 2020s and to redesign the visual informational cues of the search results landing pages.
Timeline
8 weeks in 2024
Team
Design Researcher (me!)
Product Owner
UI/UX Designer
Front-end Developer
Why we did this project

Steep learning curve for students

Years of previous user research showed that undergraduate students struggled to onboard to Library Search, a significant barrier to student success.

What we wanted to find out was: What are the specific points in the search flow that cause the most confusion? Are there any UI design solutions that we could implement as "quick wins" to address these pain points?

"I wish it was more beginner-friendly and could better guide new users as to what to do. Once I was taught the tips and tricks, it was easy to use, and I wish I had known about it sooner."
— Undergraduate Student, 2022 Library Search Benchmarking Survey
Search results page prior to this project.     
Insights from User Research

Novice users lack a working library search mental model

To understand novice users' pain points, I conducted 11 interviews with library staff who directly work with incoming students teaching them how to do research. I also conducted 2 usability tests of the website with sophmores who had limited experience with Library Search.

Here are the highlights from that research:

Incoming students have a ‘Google bias’ from their extensive prior internet search experience
, where the best answer is handed to them instantly with zero "digging." However, library discovery is intentionally designed to shift students from passive consumers to active agents, requiring them to critically evaluate materials, a mismatch in expectations which causes friction and frustration.


Many students receive limited library instruction, meaning they don't understand fundamental terminology such as catalogs, databases, and licensed material. This makes Library Search's information architecture essentially meaningless to them until they learn these distinctions.


Students have a STRONG preference for online materials. Ambiguous format labels cause students to fail to recognize that "Book" entries may offer immediate online access, causing students to miss valuable resources.

Actions:
forum
11 teaching librarian interviews
feature_search
2 usability tests
sticky_note_2
Affinity mapping
Design Process

We chose to add subtle explanatory content in order to bridge the mental model gap

I translated my findings into a set of evidence-based design recommendations. I provided Figma mockups and the research results as the basis of my designs. This served as the blueprint for the UI/UX designer’s final implementation.

I handed off my mockups to the design and development teams, who iterated and tested several options in order to land on the final designs.

Online Access Labels
To align with user expectations, we grouped the 'Available online' label with the record’s format information. We opted against using badges, as they drew attention and were mistaken for clickable buttons.
Datastore descriptions
We opted for a concise list of formats for each datastore, on a light background for high-contrast readability.
Summaries & Subjects
We decided on a 230 character limit for summaries and 3 subject maximum + see more button for subjects to preserve vertical space.
Actions:
checklist
Competitive analysis
draw
Rapid sketching
rocket_launch
Mockups
Outcomes of this project

Changes to Library Search UI

It is now immediately clear whether a book can be accessed online:

Users can now see what types of materials are included in each "bucket" of content:

Users can now evaluate results by more than just their titles within the search results:

Conclusion

Impact & Metrics

Our benchmarking survey showed a 5% lift in user satisfaction post-UI updates. While several factors likely contributed to this, librarians have shared that the new designs reduce the need for them to provide basic navigation support, freeing them up to focus on deeper research instruction with students.

Up Next: General Motors

2024 Chevrolet Silverado EV Center Display