Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Landoni, M."
  • × language_ss:"e"
  1. Chowdhury, S.; Gibb, F.; Landoni, M.: ¬A model of uncertainty and its relation to information seeking and retrieval (IS&R) (2014) 0.00
    0.0026202186 = product of:
      0.005240437 = sum of:
        0.005240437 = product of:
          0.010480874 = sum of:
            0.010480874 = weight(_text_:a in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.010480874 = score(doc=1795,freq=30.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.19735932 = fieldWeight in 1795, product of:
                  5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                    30.0 = termFreq=30.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1795)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to show that uncertainty may be caused not only by a knowledge gap in the mind of a user with respect to a given subject or topic, but also by the various complexities associated with the information seeking and retrieval (IS&R) process in a digital environment. Design/methodology/approach - Both quantitative and qualitative studies were conducted to collect data from users in the higher education sector regarding whether or not they experienced uncertainty in relation to the IS&R process. Analysis: a correlation analysis was undertaken to establish whether there were any relationships between information-seeking activities and information-seeking problems. Findings - The findings of this research show that uncertainty existed at different stages of the IS&R process amongst users. It was established that uncertainty was caused by a number of information-seeking activities and information-seeking problems, and that such uncertainty could continue over the course of successive search sessions, leading to the proposal of a new model of uncertainty. Research limitations/implications - The proposed model of uncertainty should contribute to a better understanding of the issues related to IS&R in a digital environment. Practical implications - A number of benefits could be realised in systems design from the application of this model in terms of reducing the negative impact of uncertainty, while at the same time helping users to gain from the positive aspects of uncertainty in IS&R.
    Originality/value - The general consensus is that uncertainty is a mental state of users reflecting a gap in knowledge which triggers an IS&R process, and that the gap is reduced as relevant information is found, and thus that the uncertainty disappears as the search process concludes. However, in the present study it is argued that some form of uncertainty is always associated with some part of the IS&R process and that it also fluctuates throughout the IS&R process. Users may therefore feel uncertain at any stage of the IS&R process and this may be related to: the initial information need and expression of that need, the search process itself, including identification of relevant systems, services and resources; and the assessment of, and reaction to, the results produced by the search process. Uncertainty may be unresolved, or even increase, as the user progresses, often iteratively, through the IS&R process and may remain even after its completion, resulting in what may be called a persistent uncertainty. In other words, this research hypothesises that, in addition to the uncertainty that triggers the information search process (Wilson et al., 2000), users suffer from varying degrees of uncertainty at every stage of the information search and retrieval process, and that in turn, triggers different information-seeking behaviours.
    Type
    a
  2. Landoni, M.; Bell, S.: Information retrieval techniques for evaluating search engines : a critical overview (2000) 0.00
    0.0024857575 = product of:
      0.004971515 = sum of:
        0.004971515 = product of:
          0.00994303 = sum of:
            0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 716) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00994303 = score(doc=716,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 716, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=716)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The objective of this paper is to highlight the importance of a scientifically sounded approach to search engine evaluation. Nowadays there is a flourishing literature which describes various attempts at conducting such evaluation by following all sort of approaches, but very often only the final results are published with little, if any, information about the methodology and the procedures adopted. These various experiments have been critically investigated and catalogued according to their scientific foundation by Bell [1] in the attempt to provide a valuable framework for future studies in this area. This paper reconsiders some of Bell's ideas in the light of the crisis of classic evaluation techniques for information retrieval and tries to envisage some form of collaboration between the IR and web communities in order to design a better and more consistent platform for the evaluation of tools for interactive information retrieval.
    Type
    a
  3. Dudek, D.; Mastora, A.; Landoni, M.: Is Google the answer? : a study into usability of search engines (2007) 0.00
    0.0023919214 = product of:
      0.0047838427 = sum of:
        0.0047838427 = product of:
          0.009567685 = sum of:
            0.009567685 = weight(_text_:a in 861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.009567685 = score(doc=861,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 861, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=861)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss the importance of usability and overall user satisfaction when comparing performance of different search engines. Design/methodology/approach - The study described in this paper starts from an investigation of existing methodologies for evaluating search engines in order to find out what are the most important factors for users to decide which system to use when searching the World Wide Web. Findings - This study confirmed that usability and popularity are closely linked. This study has shown that no one-search engine holds the key to ultimate search results. Just as there is cultural, political and geographical differences in the world's population, there are a number of search engines to fit the individual needs of every net citizen. Whereas results, precision, recall and reliability are the factors which participants prize highly, regardless of all other aspects. It was found that the speed of search engine results has become a high priority to participants. Research limitations/implications - Number of participants was limited and although some questions were confusing to some individuals, a majority of questionnaires were completed in a satisfactory fashion. Originality/value - This paper describes a usability study involving different search engines looking at links between popularity and usability.
    Type
    a
  4. Wilson, R.; Landoni, M.; Gibb, F.: ¬The WEB Book experiments in electronic textbook design (2003) 0.00
    0.0020506454 = product of:
      0.004101291 = sum of:
        0.004101291 = product of:
          0.008202582 = sum of:
            0.008202582 = weight(_text_:a in 4449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008202582 = score(doc=4449,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 4449, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4449)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper describes a series of three evaluations of electronic textbooks on the Web, which focused on assessing how appearance and design can affect users' sense of engagement and directness with the material. The EBONI Project's methodology for evaluating electronic textbooks is outlined and each experiment is described, together with an analysis of results. Finally, some recommendations for successful design are suggested, based on an analysis of all experimental data. These recommendations underline the main findings of the evaluations: that users want some features of paper books to be preserved in the electronic medium, while also preferring electronic text to be written in a scannable style.
    Type
    a