Search (36 results, page 2 of 2)

0.0036413912 = product of:
  0.014565565 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 4776) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=4776,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 4776, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4776)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This study reports on the first part of a research project that investigated children's cognitive, affective, and physical behaviors as they use the Yahooligans! search engine to find information on a specific search task. 27 seventh-grade science children from a middle school located in Knoxville, Tennessee participated in the period. Their cognitive and physical behaviors were captured using Lotus ScreenCam, a Windows based software package that captures and replays activities recorded in Web browsers, such as Netscape. Their affective states were captured via a one-on-one exit interview. A new measure called "Web traversal measure" was developed to measure children's "weighted" traversal effectiveness and efficiency scores, as well as their quality moves in Yahooligans! Children's prior experience in using the Internet/Web and their knowledge of the Yahooligans! interface were gathered via a questionnaire. The findings provided insights into children's bahviors and success, as their weighted traversal effectiveness and efficiency scores, as well as quality moves. Implications for user training and system design are discussed

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.7, S.646-665

0.0036413912 = product of:
  0.014565565 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 6978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=6978,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 6978, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6978)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article reports the results of a study of the role of individual differences in Internet searching. The dimensions of individual differences forming the focus of the research consisted of: cognitive styles; levels of prior experience; Internet perceptions; study approaches; age; and gender. Sixty-nine Masters students searched for information on a prescribed topic using the AItaVista search engine. Results were assessed using simple binary relevance judgements. Factor analysis and multiple regression revealed interesting differences, retrieval effectiveness being linked to: male gender; low cognitive complexity; an imager (as opposed to verbalizer) cognitive style; and a number of Internet perceptions and study approaches grouped here as indicating low self-efficacy. The implications of these findings for system development and for future research are discussed.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.12, S.1049-1066

0.0034331365 = product of:
  0.013732546 = sum of:
    0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 6980) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013732546 = score(doc=6980,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 6980, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6980)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In previous articles, we reported the state of Web searching in 1997 (Jansen, Spink, & Saracevic, 2000) and in 1999 (Spink, Wolfram, Jansen, & Saracevic, 2001). Such snapshot studies and statistics on Web use appear regularly (OCLC, 1999), but provide little information about Web searching trends. In this article, we compare and contrast results from our two previous studies of Excite queries' data sets, each containing over 1 million queries submitted by over 200,000 Excite users collected on 16 September 1997 and 20 December 1999. We examine how public Web searching changing during that 2-year time period. As Table 1 shows, the overall structure of Web queries in some areas did not change, while in others we see change from 1997 to 1999. Our comparison shows how Web searching changed incrementally and also dramatically. We see some moves toward greater simplicity, including shorter queries (i.e., fewer terms) and shorter sessions (i.e., fewer queries per user), with little modification (addition or deletion) of terms in subsequent queries. The trend toward shorter queries suggests that Web information content should target specific terms in order to reach Web users. Another trend was to view fewer pages of results per query. Most Excite users examined only one page of results per query, since an Excite results page contains ten ranked Web sites. Were users satisfied with the results and did not need to view more pages? It appears that the public continues to have a low tolerance of wading through retrieved sites. This decline in interactivity levels is a disturbing finding for the future of Web searching. Queries that included Boolean operators were in the minority, but the percentage increased between the two time periods. Most Boolean use involved the AND operator with many mistakes. The use of relevance feedback almost doubled from 1997 to 1999, but overall use was still small. An unusually large number of terms were used with low frequency, such as personal names, spelling errors, non-English words, and Web-specific terms, such as URLs. Web query vocabulary contains more words than found in large English texts in general. The public language of Web queries has its own and unique characteristics. How did Web searching topics change from 1997 to 1999? We classified a random sample of 2,414 queries from 1997 and 2,539 queries from 1999 into 11 categories (Table 2). From 1997 to 1999, Web searching shifted from entertainment, recreation and sex, and pornography, preferences to e-commerce-related topics under commerce, travel, employment, and economy. This shift coincided with changes in information distribution on the publicly indexed Web.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.3, S.226-234

0.0030344925 = product of:
  0.01213797 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=289,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 289, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=289)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Children are increasingly using the Web. Cognitive theory tells us that directory structures are especially suited for information retrieval by children; however, empirical results show that they prefer keyword searching. One of the reasons for these findings could be that the directory structures and terminology are created by grown-ups. Using a card-sorting method and an enveloping system, we simulated the structure of a directory. Our goal was to try to understand what browsable, hierarchical subject categories children create when suggested terms are supplied and they are free to add or delete terms. Twelve groups of four children each (fourth and fifth graders) participated in our exploratory study. The initial terminology presented to the children was based on names of categories used in popular directories, in the sections on Arts, Television, Music, Cinema, and Celebrities. The children were allowed to introduce additional cards and change the terms appearing on the 61 cards. Findings show that the different groups reached reasonable consensus; the majority of the category names used by existing directories were acceptable by them and only a small minority of the terms caused confusion. Our recommendation is to include children in the design process of directories, not only in designing the interface but also in designing the content structure as well.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.6, S.895-907

0.0030344925 = product of:
  0.01213797 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=470,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 470, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=470)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In this study, we investigate the similarities and differences between rankings of search results by users and search engines. Sixty-seven students took part in a 3-week-long experiment, during which they were asked to identify and rank the top 10 documents from the set of URLs that were retrieved by three major search engines (Google, MSN Search, and Yahoo!) for 12 selected queries. The URLs and accompanying snippets were displayed in random order, without disclosing which search engine(s) retrieved any specific URL for the query. We computed the similarity of the rankings of the users and search engines using four nonparametric correlation measures in [0,1] that complement each other. The findings show that the similarities between the users' choices and the rankings of the search engines are low. We examined the effects of the presentation order of the results, and of the thinking styles of the participants. Presentation order influences the rankings, but overall the results indicate that there is no "average user," and even if the users have the same basic knowledge of a topic, they evaluate information in their own context, which is influenced by cognitive, affective, and physical factors. This is the first large-scale experiment in which users were asked to rank the results of identical queries. The analysis of the experimental results demonstrates the potential for personalized search.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.9, S.1254-1266

0.0030344925 = product of:
  0.01213797 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=968,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 968, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=968)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Web and especially major Web search engines are essential tools in the quest to locate online information for many people. This paper reports results from research that examines characteristics and changes in Web searching from nine studies of five Web search engines based in the US and Europe. We compare interactions occurring between users and Web search engines from the perspectives of session length, query length, query complexity, and content viewed among the Web search engines. The results of our research shows (1) users are viewing fewer result pages, (2) searchers on US-based Web search engines use more query operators than searchers on European-based search engines, (3) there are statistically significant differences in the use of Boolean operators and result pages viewed, and (4) one cannot necessary apply results from studies of one particular Web search engine to another Web search engine. The wide spread use of Web search engines, employment of simple queries, and decreased viewing of result pages may have resulted from algorithmic enhancements by Web search engine companies. We discuss the implications of the findings for the development of Web search engines and design of online content.

Source

Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.1, S.248-263

0.0030039945 = product of:
  0.012015978 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 2769) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=2769,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2769, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2769)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 60(2009) H.2, S.75-81

0.0030039945 = product of:
  0.012015978 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 4115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=4115,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 4115, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4115)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 69(2018) no.3, S.420-437

0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=4998,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4998, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4998)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.10, S.949-958

0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 4341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=4341,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4341, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4341)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.12, S.1303-1315

0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 5245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=5245,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5245, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5245)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.13, S.1183-1198

0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=281,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 281, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=281)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 58(2007) H.3, S.135-140

0.0025748524 = product of:
  0.01029941 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=431,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 431, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=431)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.4, S.508-517

0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 1081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=1081,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1081, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1081)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 39(2003) no.5, S.689-706

0.0021457102 = product of:
  0.008582841 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 3593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=3593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3593, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3593)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.5, S.1137-1148

0.0017165683 = product of:
  0.006866273 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=993,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 993, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=993)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.5, S.1379-1391