-
Freund, L.; Toms, E.G.: Interacting with archival finding aids (2016)
0.03
0.027200706 = product of:
0.09520247 = sum of:
0.042364612 = weight(_text_:digital in 2851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042364612 = score(doc=2851,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16201277 = queryWeight, product of:
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 2851, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2851)
0.052837856 = weight(_text_:techniques in 2851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052837856 = score(doc=2851,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18093403 = queryWeight, product of:
4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.2920283 = fieldWeight in 2851, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2851)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- This research aimed to gain a detailed understanding of how genealogists and historians interact with, and make use of, finding aids in print and digital form. The study uses the lens of human information interaction to investigate finding aid use. Data were collected through a lab-based study of 32 experienced archives' users who completed two tasks with each of two finding aids. Participants were able to carry out the tasks, but they were somewhat challenged by the structure of the finding aid and employed various techniques to cope. Their patterns of interaction differed by task type and they reported higher rates of satisfaction, ease of use, and clarity for the assessment task than the known-item task. Four common patterns of interaction were identified: top-down, bottom-up, interrogative, and opportunistic. Results show how users interact with findings aids and identify features that support and hinder use. This research examines process and performance in addition to outcomes. Results contribute to the archival science literature and also suggest ways to extend models of human information interaction.
-
Toms, E.G.; Taves, A.R.: Measuring user perceptions of Web site reputation (2004)
0.02
0.02320403 = product of:
0.0812141 = sum of:
0.03718255 = weight(_text_:processing in 2565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03718255 = score(doc=2565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1662677 = queryWeight, product of:
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 2565, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2565)
0.044031553 = weight(_text_:techniques in 2565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044031553 = score(doc=2565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18093403 = queryWeight, product of:
4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.24335694 = fieldWeight in 2565, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2565)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- In this study, we compare a search tool, TOPIC, with three other widely used tools that retrieve information from the Web: AltaVista, Google, and Lycos. These tools use different techniques for outputting and ranking Web sites: external link structure (TOPIC and Google) and semantic content analysis (AltaVista and Lycos). TOPIC purports to output, and highly rank within its hit list, reputable Web sites for searched topics. In this study, 80 participants reviewed the output (i.e., highly ranked sites) from each tool and assessed the quality of retrieved sites. The 4800 individual assessments of 240 sites that represent 12 topics indicated that Google tends to identify and highly rank significantly more reputable Web sites than TOPIC, which, in turn, outputs more than AltaVista and Lycos, but this was not consistent from topic to topic. Metrics derived from reputation research were used in the assessment and a factor analysis was employed to identify a key factor, which we call 'repute'. The results of this research include insight into the factors that Web users consider in formulating perceptions of Web site reputation, and insight into which search tools are outputting reputable sites for Web users. Our findings, we believe, have implications for Web users and suggest the need for future research to assess the relationship between Web page characteristics and their perceived reputation.
- Source
- Information processing and management. 40(2004) no.2, S.291-317
-
Toms, E.G.; O'Brien, H.L.: Understanding the information and communication technology needs of the e-humanist (2008)
0.02
0.022667255 = product of:
0.07933539 = sum of:
0.03530384 = weight(_text_:digital in 1731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03530384 = score(doc=1731,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16201277 = queryWeight, product of:
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 1731, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1731)
0.044031553 = weight(_text_:techniques in 1731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044031553 = score(doc=1731,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18093403 = queryWeight, product of:
4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.24335694 = fieldWeight in 1731, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.405231 = idf(docFreq=1467, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1731)
0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to understand the needs of humanists with respect to information and communication technology (ICT) in order to prescribe the design of an e-humanist's workbench. Design/methodology/approach - A web-based survey comprising over 60 questions gathered the following data from 169 humanists: profile of the humanist, use of ICT in teaching, e-texts, text analysis tools, access to and use of primary and secondary sources, and use of collaboration and communication tools. Findings - Humanists conduct varied forms of research and use multiple techniques. They rely on the availability of inexpensive, quality-controlled e-texts for their research. The existence of primary sources in digital form influences the type of research conducted. They are unaware of existing tools for conducting text analyses, but expressed a need for better tools. Search engines have replaced the library catalogue as the key access tool for sources. Research continues to be solitary with little collaboration among scholars. Research limitations/implications - The results are based on a self-selected sample of humanists who responded to a web-based survey. Future research needs to examine the work of the scholar at a more detailed level, preferably through observation and/or interviewing. Practical implications - The findings support a five-part framework that could serve as the basis for the design of an e-humanist's workbench. Originality/value - The paper examines the needs of the humanist, founded on an integration of information science research and humanities computing for a more comprehensive understanding of the humanist at work.
-
Toms, E.G.; Freund, L.; Li, C.: WilRE: the Web Interactive information retrieval experimentation system prototype (2004)
0.01
0.006374152 = product of:
0.04461906 = sum of:
0.04461906 = weight(_text_:processing in 2534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04461906 = score(doc=2534,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1662677 = queryWeight, product of:
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 2534, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2534)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Source
- Information processing and management. 40(2004) no.4, S.655-676
-
Toms, E.G.; Campbell, D.G.; Blades, R.: Does genre define the shape of information? : the role of form and function in user interaction with digital documents (1999)
0.00
0.004034725 = product of:
0.028243072 = sum of:
0.028243072 = weight(_text_:digital in 6699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028243072 = score(doc=6699,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16201277 = queryWeight, product of:
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.17432621 = fieldWeight in 6699, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6699)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
-
Bartlett, J.C.; Toms, E.G.: Developing a protocol for bioinformatics analysis : an integrated information behavior and task analysis approach (2005)
0.00
0.0019874151 = product of:
0.013911906 = sum of:
0.013911906 = product of:
0.027823811 = sum of:
0.027823811 = weight(_text_:22 in 5256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027823811 = score(doc=5256,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14382903 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5256, 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=5256)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Date
- 22. 7.2006 14:28:55
-
O'Brien, H.L.; Toms, E.G.: What is user engagement? : a conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology (2008)
0.00
0.0019874151 = product of:
0.013911906 = sum of:
0.013911906 = product of:
0.027823811 = sum of:
0.027823811 = weight(_text_:22 in 1721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027823811 = score(doc=1721,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14382903 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1721, 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=1721)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Date
- 21. 3.2008 13:39:22
-
Dufour, C.; Bartlett, J.C.; Toms, E.G.: Understanding how webcasts are used as sources of information (2011)
0.00
0.0019874151 = product of:
0.013911906 = sum of:
0.013911906 = product of:
0.027823811 = sum of:
0.027823811 = weight(_text_:22 in 4195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027823811 = score(doc=4195,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14382903 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4195, 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=4195)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Date
- 22. 1.2011 14:16:14
-
Wildemuth, B.; Freund, L.; Toms, E.G.: Untangling search task complexity and difficulty in the context of interactive information retrieval studies (2014)
0.00
0.0019874151 = product of:
0.013911906 = sum of:
0.013911906 = product of:
0.027823811 = sum of:
0.027823811 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027823811 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14382903 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1786, 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=1786)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Date
- 6. 4.2015 19:31:22
-
Toms, E.G.: What motivates the browser? (1999)
0.00
0.001589932 = product of:
0.011129524 = sum of:
0.011129524 = product of:
0.022259047 = sum of:
0.022259047 = weight(_text_:22 in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022259047 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14382903 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04107254 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
- Date
- 22. 3.2002 9:44:47
