Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Berget, G."
  1. Berget, G.; Sandnes, F.E.: Do autocomplete functions reduce the impact of dyslexia on information-searching behavior? : the case of Google (2016) 0.00
    0.0015795645 = product of:
      0.003159129 = sum of:
        0.003159129 = product of:
          0.006318258 = sum of:
            0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 3112) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006318258 = score(doc=3112,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041389145 = queryNorm
                0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 3112, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3112)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Dyslexic users often do not exhibit spelling and reading skills at a level required to perform effective search. To explore whether autocomplete functions reduce the impact of dyslexia on information searching, 20 participants with dyslexia and 20 controls solved 10 predefined tasks in the search engine Google. Eye-tracking and screen-capture documented the searches. There were no significant differences between the dyslexic students and the controls in time usage, number of queries, query lengths, or the use of the autocomplete function. However, participants with dyslexia made more misspellings and looked less at the screen and the autocomplete suggestions lists while entering the queries. The results indicate that although the autocomplete function supported the participants in the search process, a more extensive use of the autocomplete function would have reduced misspellings. Further, the high tolerance for spelling errors considerably reduced the effect of dyslexia, and may be as important as the autocomplete function.
    Type
    a
  2. Berget, G.; MacFarlane, A.: What Is known about the impact of impairments on information seeking and searching? (2020) 0.00
    0.0013163039 = product of:
      0.0026326077 = sum of:
        0.0026326077 = product of:
          0.0052652154 = sum of:
            0.0052652154 = weight(_text_:a in 5817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0052652154 = score(doc=5817,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041389145 = queryNorm
                0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 5817, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5817)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Information seeking and access are essential for users in all walks of life, from addressing personal needs such as finding flights to locating information needed to complete work tasks. Over the past decade or so, the general needs of people with impairments have increasingly been recognized as something to be addressed, an issue embedded both in international treaties and in state legislation. The same tendency can be found in research, where a growing number of user studies including people with impairments have been conducted. The purpose of these studies is typically to uncover potential barriers for access to information, especially in the context of inaccessible search user interfaces. This literature review provides an overview of research on the information seeking and searching of users with impairments. The aim is to provide an overview to both researchers and practitioners who work with any of the user groups identified. Some diagnoses are relatively well represented in the literature (for instance, visual impairment), but there is very little work in other areas (for instance, autism) and in some cases no work at all (for instance, aphasia). Gaps are identified in the research, and suggestions are made regarding areas where further research is needed.
    Type
    a