Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.017330177 = product of:
  0.046213806 = sum of:
    0.022924898 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022924898 = score(doc=189,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 189, 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=189)
    0.012426502 = product of:
      0.024853004 = sum of:
        0.024853004 = weight(_text_:system in 189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024853004 = score(doc=189,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 189, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=189)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.010862407 = product of:
      0.021724815 = sum of:
        0.021724815 = weight(_text_:22 in 189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021724815 = score(doc=189,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 189, 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=189)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Almost 30 years ago, Taylor (1968) postulated that each information need moves along a continuum from the visceral need through the compromised need. The current study examines the final transition in this continuum: from formalized need (expressed in an explicit verbal statement) to compromised need (represented in the language of the retrieval system). This transition is primarily concerned with vocabulary: the searcher attempts to translate an explicit statement of need into a search term (or terms) that can be interpreted by the retrieval system. A few studies have empirically examined the match between the end-user searcher's formalized need and the compromised need (i.e., search terms). Markey (1984) compared the searcher's expressed topic (the formalized need, expressed in just a few words) and the search terms (the compromised need), and then went on to compare the search terms with the library catalog terms available for subject searching. She found that the search term matched or was a partial form of the expressed topic in 71% of the searches, and that over 75% of these searches matched a catalog term. Allen (1991) examined the relationship between logical reasoning ability and selection of search terms. He asked college students to read a magazine article (which could be seen as a very rich statement of the formalized need) and then to perform a search for articles on the same topic (expressing the compromised need).

Date

22. 3.2002 8:54:11

0.0024315526 = product of:
  0.019452421 = sum of:
    0.019452421 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019452421 = score(doc=3249,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3249, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3249)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Traditionally, catalogue records have contained a complete description of the item to ensure retrieval by a wide variety of approaches. An alternative approach, user centered design, requires a study of user behaviour and cognition related to interaction with the catalogue to determine inform design decisions. To support known item searching, it is necessary to users' conceptions of the item being sought, what the users know about them, and which pieces of known information are viewed by the users as most appropriate for inclusion in a search. Reports results of a pilot study, at the Davis Library, North Caroline University at Chapel Hill, in which 103 catalogue users described 386 searches and any written information known by the searchers was photocopied. Searchers generally knew the title, publication date, and page numbers (particular for periodical articles). Results indicated that this approach to catalogue design was feasible and valid, and provided a preliminary picture of nkown item searching in 1 library's catalogue

0.0024315526 = product of:
  0.019452421 = sum of:
    0.019452421 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019452421 = score(doc=3250,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032069415 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3250, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3250)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Traditionally, catalogue records have contained a complete description of the item to ensure retrieval by a wide variety of approaches. An alternative approach, user centered design, requires a study of user behaviour and cognition related to interaction with the catalogue to determine inform design decisions. To support known item searching, it is necessary to users' conceptions of the item being sought, what the users know about them, and which pieces of known information are viewed by the users as most appropriate for inclusion in a search. Reports results of a pilot study, at the Davis Library, North Caroline University at Chapel Hill, in which 103 catalogue users described 386 searches and any written information known by the searchers was photocopied. Searchers generally knew the title, publication date, and page numbers (particular for periodical articles). Results indicated that this approach to catalogue design was feasible and valid, and provided a preliminary picture of nkown item searching in 1 library's catalogue

0.0021922018 = product of:
  0.017537614 = sum of:
    0.017537614 = product of:
      0.03507523 = sum of:
        0.03507523 = weight(_text_:29 in 3772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03507523 = score(doc=3772,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 3772, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3772)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

31. 5.1999 18:03:29

0.0019009212 = product of:
  0.01520737 = sum of:
    0.01520737 = product of:
      0.03041474 = sum of:
        0.03041474 = weight(_text_:22 in 5302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03041474 = score(doc=5302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5302, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5302)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

22. 7.2006 18:30:09

0.0015533128 = product of:
  0.012426502 = sum of:
    0.012426502 = product of:
      0.024853004 = sum of:
        0.024853004 = weight(_text_:system in 2423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024853004 = score(doc=2423,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 2423, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2423)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Search statements in this revision process can be viewed as a 'move' in the overall search strategy. Very little is known about how end users develop and revise their search strategies. A study was conducted to analyse the moves made in 244 data base searches conducted by 26 medical students at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Students search INQUIRER, a data base of facts and concepts in microbiology. The searches were conducted during a 3-week period in spring 1990 and were recorded by the INQUIRER system. Each search statement was categorised, using Fidel's online searching moves (S. Online review 9(1985) S.61-74) and Bates' search tactics (s. JASIS 30(1979) S.205-214). Further analyses indicated that the most common moves were Browse/Specity, Select Exhaust, Intersect, and Vary, and that selection of moves varied by student and by problem. Analysis of search tactics (combinations of moves) identified 5 common search approaches. The results of this study have implcations for future research on search behaviours, for thedesign of system interfaces and data base structures, and for the training of end users

0.0013578009 = product of:
  0.010862407 = sum of:
    0.010862407 = product of:
      0.021724815 = sum of:
        0.021724815 = weight(_text_:22 in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021724815 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1257, 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=1257)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

20. 1.2003 9:37:22