Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.019754423 = product of:
  0.049386058 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 2740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=2740,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2740, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2740)
    0.042574905 = sum of:
      0.011163551 = weight(_text_:information in 2740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.011163551 = score(doc=2740,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 2740, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2740)
      0.031411353 = weight(_text_:22 in 2740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.031411353 = score(doc=2740,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046368346 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2740, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2740)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) have become increasingly popular as a knowledge-sharing tool in contemporary corporations. Enticing employees to seek knowledge from KMS remains an important concern for researchers and practitioners. Trust has been widely recognized in many studies as an important enabling factor for seeking knowledge; however, the role of trust in promoting knowledge-seeking behavior using KMS has not been adequately addressed. Drawing upon the extant literature on trust and information technology adoption, this article examines the relationships between the knowledge seekers' trust in the community of KMS users, their perceptions toward the system (perceived usefulness and perceived seeking efforts), and the intention to continually use the KMS. The results reveal that trust in the community of KMS users does not directly affect the employees' knowledge-seeking continuance intention; rather, it happens indirectly through a mediated effect of perceived usefulness of the KMS. Furthermore, we find that trust seems to be a stronger determinant of perceived usefulness than of perceived seeking efforts. Our study thus demonstrates the indirect, but still crucial, role of trust in knowledge-seeking behavior in the context of corporate KMS usage. Other findings and the implications of this study for both researchers and practitioners are correspondingly discussed.

Date

22. 3.2009 13:01:44

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.526-537

Type

a

0.008561219 = product of:
  0.021403046 = sum of:
    0.010812371 = weight(_text_:a in 574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010812371 = score(doc=574,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 574, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=574)
    0.010590675 = product of:
      0.02118135 = sum of:
        0.02118135 = weight(_text_:information in 574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02118135 = score(doc=574,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 574, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=574)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

A conceptually relaxed utilization of the variable "search experience" makes it difficult for researchers to perform meaningful cross-study comparisons. The purpose of this study was to examine how search experience is defined and measured when used as a research variable. We implemented a qualitative analysis of 32 library and information science (LIS) research articles. We found that there was inconsistent terminology usage and measurements. Specifically, there were 21 unique labels to describe the search experience and 18 different measurements. The majority of the studies used a generic label "search experience" and relied on the reader to grasp specific context of the electronic information retrieval environment to which the variable applies from the description of the overall research design. In addition, there was a strong preference for measures that represented subjective self-reporting about the level of exposure to some information retrieval system. It is evident that there is a need for articles to contain detailed definitions of search experience variables for readers to truly understand the findings.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.10, S.1529-1546

Type

a

0.0072039375 = product of:
  0.018009843 = sum of:
    0.008341924 = weight(_text_:a in 3600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008341924 = score(doc=3600,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 3600, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3600)
    0.009667919 = product of:
      0.019335838 = sum of:
        0.019335838 = weight(_text_:information in 3600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019335838 = score(doc=3600,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 3600, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3600)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This article reports on a longitudinal analysis of query logs of a web-based case library system during an 8-year period (from 2005 to 2012). The analysis studies 3 different information-seeking approaches: keyword searching, browsing, and case-based reasoning (CBR) searching provided by the system by examining the query logs that stretch over 8 years. The longitudinal dimension of this study offers unique possibilities to see how users used the 3 different approaches over time. Various user information-seeking patterns and trends are identified through the query usage pattern analysis and session analysis. The study identified different user groups and found that a majority of the users tend to stick to their favorite information-seeking approach to meet their immediate information needs and do not seem to care whether alternative search options will offer greater benefits. The study also found that return users used CBR searching much more frequently than 1-time users and tend to use more query terms to look for information than 1-time users.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.5, S.1124-1136

Type

a

0.006338624 = product of:
  0.01584656 = sum of:
    0.009010308 = weight(_text_:a in 2036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009010308 = score(doc=2036,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 2036, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2036)
    0.006836252 = product of:
      0.013672504 = sum of:
        0.013672504 = weight(_text_:information in 2036) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013672504 = score(doc=2036,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2036, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2036)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This paper reportes a study that investigated the effects of conceptual description and search practice on users' mental models and information seeking in a case-based reasoning retrieval (CBR) system with a best match search mechanism. This study also found examined how the presence of a mental model affects the users' search performance and satisfaction in this system. The results of this study revealed that the conceptual description and search practice treatments do not have significantly different effects on the types of user's mental models, search correctness, and search satisfaction. However, the search practice group spent significantly less time than the conceptual description group in finding the results. Qualitative analysis for the subjects' post mental models revealed that subjects in the conceptual description group seem to have more complete mental models of the best match system than those in the search practice group. This study also that subjects with the best match mental models have significantly higher search correctness and search result satisfaction than subjects without the best match mental models. However, the best match mental models do not guarantee less search time in finding the results. This study did not find a significant correlation among search time, search correctness and search satisfaction. The study concludes with suggestions for future research and implications for system developers who are interested in CBR retrieval systems.

Source

Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.1, S.294-309

Type

a

0.005948606 = product of:
  0.014871514 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 5245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=5245,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5245, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5245)
    0.0066981306 = product of:
      0.013396261 = sum of:
        0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 5245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013396261 = score(doc=5245,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 5245, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5245)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

A cross-level model based on the information processing perspective and trait activation theory was developed and tested in order to investigate the effects of individual-level epistemic motivation and team-level task reflexivity on three different individual contribution behaviors (i.e., adding, deleting, and revising) in the process of knowledge creation on team wikis. Using the Hierarchical Linear Modeling software package and the 2-wave data from 166 individuals in 51 wiki-based teams, we found cross-level interaction effects between individual epistemic motivation and team task reflexivity on different knowledge contribution behaviors on wikis. Epistemic motivation exerted a positive effect on adding, which was strengthened by team task reflexivity. The effect of epistemic motivation on deleting was positive only when task reflexivity was high. In addition, epistemic motivation was strongly positively related to revising, regardless of the level of task reflexivity involved.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.5, S.448-461

Type

a