Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Savolainen, R."
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Savolainen, R.: Heuristics elements of information-seeking strategies and tactics : a conceptual analysis (2017) 0.04
    0.03611029 = product of:
      0.14444116 = sum of:
        0.14444116 = weight(_text_:objects in 4046) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14444116 = score(doc=4046,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.34784988 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.06544595 = queryNorm
            0.41523993 = fieldWeight in 4046, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4046)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to elaborate the picture of strategies and tactics for information seeking and searching by focusing on the heuristic elements of such strategies and tactics. Design/methodology/approach A conceptual analysis of a sample of 31 pertinent investigations was conducted to find out how researchers have approached heuristics in the above context since the 1970s. To achieve this, the study draws on the ideas produced within the research programmes on Heuristics and Biases, and Fast and Frugal Heuristics. Findings Researchers have approached the heuristic elements in three major ways. First, these elements are defined as general level constituents of browsing strategies in particular. Second, heuristics are approached as search tips. Third, there are examples of conceptualizations of individual heuristics. Familiarity heuristic suggests that people tend to prefer sources that have worked well in similar situations in the past. Recognition heuristic draws on an all-or-none distinction of the information objects, based on cues such as information scent. Finally, representativeness heuristic is based on recalling similar instances of events or objects and judging their typicality in terms of genres, for example. Research limitations/implications As the study focuses on three heuristics only, the findings cannot be generalized to describe the use of all heuristic elements of strategies and tactics for information seeking and searching. Originality/value The study pioneers by providing an in-depth analysis of the ways in which the heuristic elements are conceptualized in the context of information seeking and searching. The findings contribute to the elaboration of the conceptual issues of information behavior research.
  2. Hartel, J.; Savolainen, R.: Pictorial metaphors for information (2016) 0.03
    0.02553383 = product of:
      0.10213532 = sum of:
        0.10213532 = weight(_text_:objects in 3163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10213532 = score(doc=3163,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.34784988 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.06544595 = queryNorm
            0.29361898 = fieldWeight in 3163, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3163)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Arts-informed, visual research was conducted to document the pictorial metaphors that appear among original drawings of information. The purpose of this paper is to report the diversity of these pictorial metaphors, delineate their formal qualities as drawings, and provide a fresh perspective on the concept of information. Design/methodology/approach The project utilized pre-existing iSquare drawings of information that were produced by iSchool graduate students during a draw-and-write activity. From a data set of 417 images, 125 of the strongest pictorial metaphors were identified and subjected to cognitive metaphor theory. Findings Overwhelmingly, the favored source domain for envisioning information was nature. The most common pictorial metaphors were: Earth, web, tree, light bulb, box, cloud, and fishing/mining, and each brings different qualities of information into focus. The drawings were often canonical versions of objects in the world, leading to arrays of pictorial metaphors marked by their similarity. Research limitations/implications Less than 30 percent of the data set qualified as pictorial metaphors, making them a minority strategy for representing information as an image. The process to identify and interpret pictorial metaphors was highly subjective. The arts-informed methodology generated tensions between artistic and social scientific paradigms. Practical implications The pictorial metaphors for information can enhance information science education and fortify professional identity among information professionals. Originality/value This is the first arts-informed, visual study of information that utilizes cognitive metaphor theory to explore the nature of information. It strengthens a sense of history, humanity, nature, and beauty in our understanding of information today, and contributes to metaphor research at large.
  3. Savolainen, R.: Information need as trigger and driver of information seeking : a conceptual analysis (2017) 0.01
    0.011083779 = product of:
      0.044335116 = sum of:
        0.044335116 = weight(_text_:22 in 3713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044335116 = score(doc=3713,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22918057 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.06544595 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3713, 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=3713)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  4. Savolainen, R.: Modeling the interplay of information seeking and information sharing (2019) 0.01
    0.011083779 = product of:
      0.044335116 = sum of:
        0.044335116 = weight(_text_:22 in 5498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044335116 = score(doc=5498,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22918057 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.06544595 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5498, 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=5498)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Themes