Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Benutzerstudien"
  • × theme_ss:"Retrievalstudien"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Park, S.: Usability, user preferences, effectiveness, and user behaviors when searching individual and integrated full-text databases : implications for digital libraries (2000) 0.05
    0.053888097 = product of:
      0.107776195 = sum of:
        0.07461992 = weight(_text_:digital in 4591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07461992 = score(doc=4591,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.37742734 = fieldWeight in 4591, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4591)
        0.033156272 = weight(_text_:library in 4591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033156272 = score(doc=4591,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.25158736 = fieldWeight in 4591, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4591)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This article addresses a crucial issue in the digital library environment: how to support effective interaction of users with heterogeneous and distributed information resources. In particular, this study compared usability, user preference, effectiveness, and searching behaviors in systems that implement interaction with multiple databases as if they were one (integrated interaction) in a experiment in the TREC environment. 28 volunteers were recruited from the graduate students of the School of Communication, Information & Library Studies at Rutgers University. Significantly more subjects preferred the common interface to the integrated interface, mainly because they could have more control over database selection. Subjects were also more satisfied with the results from the common interface, and performed better with the common interface than with the integrated interface. Overall, it appears that for this population, interacting with databases through a common interface is preferable on all grounds to interacting with databases through an integrated interface. These results suggest that: (1) the general assumption of the information retrieval (IR) literature that an integrated interaction is best needs to be revisited; (2) it is important to allow for more user control in the distributed environment; (3) for digital library purposes, it is important to characterize different databases to support user choice for integration; and (4) certain users prefer control over database selection while still opting for results to be merged
  2. Belkin, N.J.: ¬An overview of results from Rutgers' investigations of interactive information retrieval (1998) 0.03
    0.027631238 = product of:
      0.055262476 = sum of:
        0.03828556 = weight(_text_:library in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03828556 = score(doc=2339,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
        0.016976917 = product of:
          0.033953834 = sum of:
            0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033953834 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2339, 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=2339)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Over the last 4 years, the Information Interaction Laboratory at Rutgers' School of communication, Information and Library Studies has performed a series of investigations concerned with various aspects of people's interactions with advanced information retrieval (IR) systems. We have benn especially concerned with understanding not just what people do, and why, and with what effect, but also with what they would like to do, and how they attempt to accomplish it, and with what difficulties. These investigations have led to some quite interesting conclusions about the nature and structure of people's interactions with information, about support for cooperative human-computer interaction in query reformulation, and about the value of visualization of search results for supporting various forms of interaction with information. In this discussion, I give an overview of the research program and its projects, present representative results from the projects, and discuss some implications of these results for support of subject searching in information retrieval systems
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
    Imprint
    Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
    Source
    Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al
  3. Peters, T.A.; Kurth, M.: Controlled and uncontrolled vocabulary subject searching in an academic library online catalog (1991) 0.01
    0.009475192 = product of:
      0.03790077 = sum of:
        0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 2348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03790077 = score(doc=2348,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 2348, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2348)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    An analysis of transaction logs from an academic library online catalog describes instances in which users have tried both controlled and uncontrolled (title keyword) vocabulary subject access during the same search session. Eight hypotheses were tested. Over 6.6% of all dial access search sessions contained both methods of subject access. Over 58% of the isolated sessions began with an uncontrolled vocabulary attempt. Over 76% contained only one vocabulary shift. On average, user persistence was greater during controlled vocabulary search logs, but search output was greater during uncontrolled vocabulary search logs. Several recommendations regarding catalog design and instruction are made.