Search (13 results, page 1 of 1)

0.017233187 = product of:
  0.060316153 = sum of:
    0.030891342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030891342 = score(doc=644,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 644, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=644)
    0.02942481 = weight(_text_:internet in 644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02942481 = score(doc=644,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.2609436 = fieldWeight in 644, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=644)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

A recent survey of more than 1700 households indicates that the main reason many parents purchase computers and connect their children to the Internet at home is for education (Safe and Smart). In addition the survey shows that children also use the Internet for educational activities that go beyond required school work. In fact, the fastest growing group of Internet users are children between the ages of eight and twelve (Vise, 2003), who are increasingly using the Web to access educational as well as entertainment materials. Children, however, rely on conventional information retrieval (IR) systems and search engines intended for general adult use, such as MSN or Google, and to a much lesser extent, Web portals such as Yahooligans! and LycosZone specifically intended for young users (Large et al., 2004; Large, Beheshti, and Rahman, 2002a). But research has shown that children's information needs (Walter, 1994), research approaches (Kuhlthau, 1991), and cognitive abilities and higher order thinking skills (Neuman, 1995; Siegler, 1998; Vandergrift, 1989) differ from those of adults. The results of earlier studies on children's use of online catalogues designed for adults indicate that young users are often faced with difficulties locating specific information related to their information needs (Hirsh, 1997). A growing body of research points to the problems children typically encounter when seeking information on the Web. Kafai and Bates (1997) conducted one of the first studies with young children on their use of Web sites, and concluded that they were able to navigate through the links and scroll. Only the older children, however, could use search engines effectively. Hirsh (1999) investigated the searching behavior of ten fifth graders and concluded that they encountered difficulties in formulating effective search queries and did not use advanced features. Schacter, Chung, and Dorr (1998) conducted a study on Internet searching by fifth and sixth graders and concluded that they did not plan their searches, used ill-defined queries, and preferred browsing. Large, Beheshti, and Moukdad (1999), investigating the information seeking behavior of 53 sixth graders, similarly found that children preferred browsing to searching. Bowler, Large, and Rejskind (2001), focusing on a few case studies of grade six students concluded that search engines designed for adults are unsuitable for children. Wallace et al. (2000), studying sixth graders, discovered that experience in using search engines does not improve children's search strategies and in general information seeking is an unfamiliar activity for children.

Series

The information retrieval series, vol. 19

Source

New directions in cognitive information retrieval. Eds.: A. Spink, C. Cole

0.009917542 = product of:
  0.0347114 = sum of:
    0.026008105 = weight(_text_:internet in 6545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026008105 = score(doc=6545,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.23064373 = fieldWeight in 6545, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6545)
    0.008703294 = product of:
      0.026109882 = sum of:
        0.026109882 = weight(_text_:29 in 6545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026109882 = score(doc=6545,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13436082 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 6545, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6545)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Reports on research into the information-seeking habits of primary schoolchildren conducted under operational conditions. Three workstations with Internet access were installed in a grade-six classroom in suburban Montreal. After a short introductory training session for the entire group followed by short individual sessions for each student, 53 students, working in small groups, used these workstations over a six-week period to seek information on the Web of relevance to a class project assigned by their teacher. The project dealt with the Winter Olympic Games (recently completed at that time). The student objective was to locate relevant information for a poster and an oral presentation on one of the sports represented at the Games. All screen activity was directly captured on videotape and group conversations at the workstation were audiotaped. Demographic and computer literacy information was gathered in a questionnaire. This paper presents a map of the information-seeking landscape based upon an analysis of the descriptive statistics gathered from the Web searches. It reveals that the novice users favored browsing over analytic search strategies, although they did show some sophistication in the construction of the latter. Online help was ignored. The children demonstrated a very high level of interactivity with the interface at the expense of thinking, planning and evaluating. This is a preliminary analysis of data which will subsequently be expanded by the inclusion of qualitative data

Date

29. 9.2001 20:35:09

Theme

Internet

0.008407089 = product of:
  0.05884962 = sum of:
    0.05884962 = weight(_text_:internet in 4154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05884962 = score(doc=4154,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.5218872 = fieldWeight in 4154, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4154)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Theme

Internet

0.007722836 = product of:
  0.05405985 = sum of:
    0.05405985 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05405985 = score(doc=1015,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 1015, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1015)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Describes an experiment using 48 sixth-grade students to compare retrieval techniques using the print and CD-ROM versions of Compton's Encyclopedia. Four queries of defferent complexity (measured by the numer of terms present) were searched by the students after a short training session. The searches were timed and the retrieval steps and search terms were noted. The searches were no faster on the CD-ROM than the print version, but in both cases time was related directly to the number of terms involved. The students coped well with the CD-ROM interface and its several retrieval paths

0.0066195736 = product of:
  0.046337012 = sum of:
    0.046337012 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046337012 = score(doc=6142,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 6142, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6142)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.0046807453 = product of:
  0.032765217 = sum of:
    0.032765217 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 7754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032765217 = score(doc=7754,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 7754, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7754)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Tests were carried out on 120 grade 6 students to compare Compton's Multimedia Encyclopedia on CD-ROM and its printe equivalent in terms of students' ability to recall information and to draw inferences from it. Between-subject varaibles were 3 presentation conditions (printed text with illustrations, text-on-screen, and multimedia-text, still images, and animation) and a retrieval condition (topic retrieved before viewing / topic presented without retrieval). Within-subject variables were text complexity (complex or simple), text type (descriptive or procedural), and measure (propositions recalled versus propositions inferred). Presentation conditions produced no significant main effect although text-on-screen resulted in somewhat higher recall and multimedia resulted in somewhat higher inference scores. Multimedia had the greatest effect in the case of simple topics, and especially the simple procedural topic

0.004413049 = product of:
  0.030891342 = sum of:
    0.030891342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 36) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030891342 = score(doc=36,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 36, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=36)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

There have been various approaches to conceptualizing interactive information retrieval (IR), which can be generally divided into system and user approaches (Hearst, 1999; cf. also Spink, 1997). Both system and user approaches define user-system interaction in terms of the system and the user reacting to the actions or behaviors of the other: the system reacts to the user's input; the user to the output of the system (Spink, 1997). In system approach models of the interaction, e.g., Moran (1981), "[T]he user initiates an action or operation and the system responds in some way which in turn leads the user to initiate another action and so on" (Beaulieu, 2000, p. 433). In its purest form, the system approach models the user as a reactive part of the interaction, with the system taking the lead (Bates, 1990). User approaches, on the other hand, in their purest form wish to insert a model of the user in all its socio-cognitive dimensions, to the extent that system designers consider such approaches impractical (Vakkari and Jarvelin, 2005, Chap. 7, this volume). The cognitive approach to IR interaction attempts to overcome this divide (Ruthven, 2005, Chap. 4, this volume; Vakkari and Jarvelin, 2005 Chap. 7, this volume) by representing the cognitive elements of both system designers and the user in the interaction model (Larsen and Ingwersen, 2005 Chap. 3, this volume). There are cognitive approach researchers meeting in a central ground from both the system and user side. On the system side, are computer scientists employing cognitive research to design more effective IR systems from the point of view of the user's task (Nathan, 1990; Fischer, Henninger, and Redmiles, 1991; O'Day and Jeffries, 1993; Russell et al., 1993; Kitajima and Polson, 1996; Terwilliger and Polson, 1997). On the user side are cognitive approach researchers applying methods, concepts and models from psychology to design systems that are more in tune with how users acquire information (e.g., Belkin, 1980; Ford (2005, Chap. 5, this volume); Ingwersen (Larsen and Ingwersen, 2005, Chap. 3, this volume); Saracevic, 1996; Vakkari (Vakkari and Jarvelin, 2005, Chap. 7, this volume)).

Series

The information retrieval series, vol. 19

Source

New directions in cognitive information retrieval. Eds.: A. Spink, C. Cole

0.003900621 = product of:
  0.027304346 = sum of:
    0.027304346 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027304346 = score(doc=460,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 460, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=460)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

When domain novices are in C.C. Kuhlthau's (1993) Stage 3, the exploration stage of researching an assignment, they often do not know their information need; this causes them to go back to Stage 2, the topic-selection stage, when they are selecting keywords to formulate their query to an Information Retrieval (IR) system. Our hypothesis is that instead of going backward, they should be going forward toward a goal state-the performance of the task for which they are seeking the information. If they can somehow construct their goal state into a query, this forward-looking query better operationalizes their information need than does a topic-based query. For domain novice undergraduates seeking information for a course essay, we define their task as selecting a high-impact essay structure which will put the students' learning on display for the course instructor who will evaluate the essay. We report a study of first-year history undergraduate students which tested the use and effectiveness of "essay type" as a task-focused query-formulation device. We randomly assigned 78 history undergraduates to an intervention group and a control group. The dependent variable was essay quality, based on (a) an evaluation of the student's essay by a research team member, and (b) the marks given to the student's essay by the course instructor. We found that conscious or formal consideration of essay type is inconclusive as a basis of a task-focused query-formulation device for IR.

0.0031526582 = product of:
  0.022068607 = sum of:
    0.022068607 = weight(_text_:internet in 2582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022068607 = score(doc=2582,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 2582, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2582)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Theme

Internet

0.0031526582 = product of:
  0.022068607 = sum of:
    0.022068607 = weight(_text_:internet in 5247) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022068607 = score(doc=5247,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11276311 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.1957077 = fieldWeight in 5247, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9522398 = idf(docFreq=6276, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5247)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Theme

Internet

0.0027581556 = product of:
  0.019307088 = sum of:
    0.019307088 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019307088 = score(doc=197,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11553899 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03819578 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 197, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=197)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.0014785718 = product of:
  0.010350002 = sum of:
    0.010350002 = product of:
      0.031050006 = sum of:
        0.031050006 = weight(_text_:22 in 197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031050006 = score(doc=197,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13375512 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 197, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=197)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

2. 6.2005 10:34:22

0.0012321433 = product of:
  0.008625003 = sum of:
    0.008625003 = product of:
      0.025875006 = sum of:
        0.025875006 = weight(_text_:22 in 667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025875006 = score(doc=667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13375512 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03819578 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 667, 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=667)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

22. 3.2013 19:41:17