These are random notes from the sessions I attended Sunday. I need a new laptop so I didn't bring my tired old one to live blog - these are from my scribbled notes on paper.
How much change do you get from 40$ - Erik Choi - this was a typology of failures in social q&a. The system offers some suggestions for how to do better questions but I think their intention was to use this research to help people ask better questions. As Joe Hourclé pointed out in questions - Stack Exchange supports query negotiation/refinement but they're looking at what to do with Yahoo, which is the most popular and has a lot of failed questions. Their big categories were: unclear, complex, inappropriate (prank, awkward...), multiquestion.
Dynamic query suggestions - dynamic search results - Chirag Shah. This was looking at google's way of showing you results as you type and also offering search completions as you type. Google says it saves 2-5s per search, but they wanted to test it. They did it in a laboratory setting with 3 conditions - neither, only autocompletion, all. They gave a task asking users to search for information on the velvet revolution and other revolutions and they looked at the number of pages viewed, concepts (noun phrases?) used, eye tracking. The dynamic stuff didn't change the number of concepts in a query, the queries were shorter but not necessarily better.
How do libraries use social networking software to communicate to users - they looked at big libraries in English-speaking countries and "greater China" (Taiwan + Hong Kong + PRC). They looked at the posts and interviewed a librarian from each. Some discussion afterward how Weibo is better at supporting conversations than Twitter - it would almost have to be
Barriers to collaborative information seeking in organizations - I'll have to read this paper... he spent too much time on methods and really cut his results section short.