Search (60 results, page 1 of 3)

0.05134662 = product of:
  0.11552989 = sum of:
    0.041947264 = weight(_text_:applications in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041947264 = score(doc=3312,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2432066 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
    0.019081537 = weight(_text_:of in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019081537 = score(doc=3312,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=3312,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
    0.034061253 = weight(_text_:software in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034061253 = score(doc=3312,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.21915624 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
  0.44444445 = coord(4/9)

Abstract

Facilitating engaging user experiences is essential in the design of interactive systems. To accomplish this, it is necessary to understand the composition of this construct and how to evaluate it. Building on previous work that posited a theory of engagement and identified a core set of attributes that operationalized this construct, we constructed and evaluated a multidimensional scale to measure user engagement. In this paper we describe the development of the scale, as well as two large-scale studies (N=440 and N=802) that were undertaken to assess its reliability and validity in online shopping environments. In the first we used Reliability Analysis and Exploratory Factor Analysis to identify six attributes of engagement: Perceived Usability, Aesthetics, Focused Attention, Felt Involvement, Novelty, and Endurability. In the second we tested the validity of and relationships among those attributes using Structural Equation Modeling. The result of this research is a multidimensional scale that may be used to test the engagement of software applications. In addition, findings indicate that attributes of engagement are highly intertwined, a complex interplay of user-system interaction variables. Notably, Perceived Usability played a mediating role in the relationship between Endurability and Novelty, Aesthetics, Felt Involvement, and Focused Attention.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.1, S.50-69

0.025785297 = product of:
  0.07735589 = sum of:
    0.041947264 = weight(_text_:applications in 5419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041947264 = score(doc=5419,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2432066 = fieldWeight in 5419, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5419)
    0.014968789 = weight(_text_:of in 5419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014968789 = score(doc=5419,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 5419, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5419)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 5419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=5419,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 5419, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5419)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

Understanding users' search behavior has largely relied on the information available from search engine logs, which provide limited information about the contextual factors affecting users' behavior. Consequently, questions such as how users' intentions, task goals, and substances of the users' tasks affect search behavior, as well as what triggers information needs, remain largely unanswered. We report an experiment in which naturalistic information search behavior was captured by analyzing 24/7 continuous recordings of information on participants' computer screens. Written task diaries describing the participants' tasks were collected and used as real-life task contexts for further categorization. All search tasks were extracted and classified under various task categories according to users' intentions, task goals, and substances of the tasks. We investigated the effect of different task categories on three behavioral factors: search efforts, content-triggers, and application context. Our results suggest four findings: (i) Search activity is integrally associated with the users' creative processes. The content users have seen prior to searching more often triggers search, and is used as a query, within creative tasks. (ii) Searching within intellectual and creative tasks is more time-intensive, while search activity occurring as a part of daily routine tasks is associated with more frequent searching within a search task. (iii) Searching is more often induced from utility applications in tasks demanding a degree of intellectual effort. (iv) Users' leisure information-seeking activity is occurring inherently within social media services or comes from social communication platforms. The implications of our findings for information access and management systems are discussed.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.11, S.1248-1261

0.023628347 = product of:
  0.07088504 = sum of:
    0.016735615 = weight(_text_:of in 2637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016735615 = score(doc=2637,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 2637, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2637)
    0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 2637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040879667 = score(doc=2637,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.339541 = fieldWeight in 2637, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2637)
    0.013269759 = product of:
      0.026539518 = sum of:
        0.026539518 = weight(_text_:22 in 2637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026539518 = score(doc=2637,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2637, 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=2637)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

This article reports the findings of a qualitative research study that examined professional image users' knowledge of, and interest in using, content-based image retrieval (CBIR) systems in an attempt to clarify when and where CBIR methods might be applied. The research sought to determine the differences in the perceived usefulness of CBIR technologies among image user groups from several domains and explicate the reasons given regarding the utility of CBIR systems for their professional tasks. Twenty participants (archaeologists, architects, art historians, and artists), individuals who rely on images of cultural materials in the performance of their work, took part in the study. The findings of the study reveal that interest in CBIR methods varied among the different professional user communities. Individuals who showed an interest in these systems were primarily those concerned with the formal characteristics (i.e., color, shape, composition, and texture) of the images being sought. In contrast, those participants who expressed a strong interest in images of known items, images illustrating themes, and/or items from specific locations believe concept-based searches to be the most direct route. These image users did not see a practical application for CBIR systems in their current work routines.

Date

22. 1.2016 12:32:25

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.2, S.350-365

0.013324712 = product of:
  0.059961203 = sum of:
    0.019081537 = weight(_text_:of in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019081537 = score(doc=3699,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 3699, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3699)
    0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040879667 = score(doc=3699,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.339541 = fieldWeight in 3699, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3699)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

We report on a study that investigated the efficacy of four different interactive information retrieval (IIR) systems, each designed to support a specific information-seeking strategy (ISS). These systems were constructed using different combinations of IR techniques (i.e., combinations of different methods of representation, comparison, presentation and navigation), each of which was hypothesized to be well suited to support a specific ISS. We compared the performance of searchers in each such system, designated experimental, to an appropriate baseline system, which implemented the standard specified query and results list model of current state-of-the-art experimental and operational IR systems. Four within-subjects experiments were conducted for the purpose of this comparison. Results showed that each of the experimental systems was superior to its baseline system in supporting user performance for the specific ISS (that is, the information problem leading to that ISS) for which the system was designed. These results indicate that an IIR system, which intends to support more than one kind of ISS, should be designed within a framework which allows the use and combination of different IR support techniques for different ISSs.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.8, S.1543-1563

0.010449912 = product of:
  0.047024604 = sum of:
    0.012963352 = weight(_text_:of in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012963352 = score(doc=1103,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
    0.034061253 = weight(_text_:software in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034061253 = score(doc=1103,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.21915624 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Users' preferences for folders versus tags was studied in 2 working environments where both options were available to them. In the Gmail study, we informed 75 participants about both folder-labeling and tag-labeling, observed their storage behavior after 1 month, and asked them to estimate the proportions of different retrieval options in their behavior. In the Windows 7 study, we informed 23 participants about tags and asked them to tag all their files for 2 weeks, followed by a period of 5 weeks of free choice between the 2 methods. Their storage and retrieval habits were tested prior to the learning session and, after 7 weeks, using special classification recording software and a retrieval-habits questionnaire. A controlled retrieval task and an in-depth interview were conducted. Results of both studies show a strong preference for folders over tags for both storage and retrieval. In the minority of cases where tags were used for storage, participants typically used a single tag per information item. Moreover, when multiple classification was used for storage, it was only marginally used for retrieval. The controlled retrieval task showed lower success rates and slower retrieval speeds for tag use. Possible reasons for participants' preferences are discussed.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.10, S.1995-2012

0.010324167 = product of:
  0.04645875 = sum of:
    0.017552461 = weight(_text_:of in 3319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017552461 = score(doc=3319,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.28651062 = fieldWeight in 3319, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3319)
    0.02890629 = weight(_text_:systems in 3319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02890629 = score(doc=3319,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.24009174 = fieldWeight in 3319, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3319)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

No prior research has been identified that investigates the causal factors for workplace exploratory search task performance. The impact of user, task, and environmental factors on user satisfaction and task performance was investigated through a mixed methods study with 26 experienced information professionals using enterprise search in an oil and gas enterprise. Some participants found 75% of high-value items, others found none, with an average of 27%. No association was found between self-reported search expertise and task performance, with a tendency for many participants to overestimate their search expertise. Successful searchers may have more accurate mental models of both search systems and the information space. Organizations may not have effective exploratory search task performance feedback loops, a lack of learning. This may be caused by management bias towards technology, not capability, a lack of systems thinking. Furthermore, organizations may not "know" they "don't know" their true level of search expertise, a lack of knowing. A metamodel is presented identifying the causal factors for workplace exploratory search task performance. Semistructured qualitative interviews with search staff from the defense, pharmaceutical, and aerospace sectors indicates the potential transferability of the finding that organizations may not know their search expertise levels.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.1, S.62-76

0.010131279 = product of:
  0.045590755 = sum of:
    0.021062955 = weight(_text_:of in 2034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021062955 = score(doc=2034,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 2034, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2034)
    0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 2034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0245278 = score(doc=2034,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 2034, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2034)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

This longitudinal study examined the search behavior of 10 students as they completed assigned exercises for an online professional course in expert searching. The research objective was to identify, describe, and hypothesize about features of the behavior that are indicative of procedural knowledge gained during guided instruction. Log-data of search interaction were coded using a conceptual framework focused on components of search practice hypothesized to organize an expert searcher's attention during search. The coded data were analyzed using a measure of pointwise mutual information and state-transition analysis. Results of the study provide important insight for future investigation of domain-independent search expertise and for the design of systems that assist searchers in gaining expertise.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.7, S.1388-1405

0.009951797 = product of:
  0.044783086 = sum of:
    0.015876798 = weight(_text_:of in 5410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015876798 = score(doc=5410,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 5410, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5410)
    0.02890629 = weight(_text_:systems in 5410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02890629 = score(doc=5410,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.24009174 = fieldWeight in 5410, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5410)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

It is a frequently seen scenario that when people are not familiar with their search topics, they use a simple keyword search, which leads to a large amount of search results in multiple pages. This makes it difficult for users to pick relevant documents, especially given that they are not knowledgeable of the topics. To explore how systems can better help users find relevant documents from search results, the current research analyzed document selection behaviors of users with different levels of domain knowledge (DK). Data were collected in a laboratory study with 35 participants each searching on four tasks in the genomics domain. The results show that users with high and low DK levels selected different sets of documents to view; those high in DK read more documents and gave higher relevance ratings for the viewed documents than those low in DK did. Users with low DK tended to select documents ranking toward the top of the search result lists, and those with high in DK tended to also select documents ranking down the search result lists. The findings help design search systems that can personalize search results to users with different levels of DK.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.11, S.1236-1247

0.009246422 = product of:
  0.0416089 = sum of:
    0.021169065 = weight(_text_:of in 5440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021169065 = score(doc=5440,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 5440, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5440)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 5440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=5440,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 5440, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5440)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Libraries increasingly offer much of their collection online, rendering it invisible or unavailable to readers who, for reasons of information experience, prefer to browse the shelves. Although the evidence that shelf browsing is an important part of information behavior is increasing, information browsing as a behavior is somewhat of a black box (in contrast to web browsing, which is relatively well understood). It seems likely from early work that browsing is not, in fact, a monolithic behavior, but rather a set of behaviors and goals. The typologies presented in these works, however, are of a too high level to offer much insight into what support is needed for successful online browsing. In contrast, a recent spate of speculative browsing technologies meet some browsing needs, but offer little theoretical understanding of how systems support browsing. The major contribution of this article is a new typology of library browsing behavior based on recent observations of browsing behavior in libraries. The secondary contribution is an understanding of the interface features that would support these types of information browsers in an online environment.

Footnote

Part of a special issue for research on people's engagement with technology.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.12, S.1383-1394

0.008616175 = product of:
  0.038772784 = sum of:
    0.018332949 = weight(_text_:of in 3624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018332949 = score(doc=3624,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 3624, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3624)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 3624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=3624,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 3624, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3624)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to resolve a gap in the knowledge of how people with dyslexia interact with information retrieval (IR) systems, specifically an understanding of their information-searching behaviour. Design/methodology/approach - The dyslexia cognitive profile is used to design a logging system, recording the difference between two sets of participants: dyslexic and control users. A standard Okapi interface is used - together with two standard TREC topics - in order to record the information searching behaviour of these users. Findings - Using the log data, the differences in information-searching behaviour of control and dyslexic users, i.e. in the way the two groups interact with Okapi, are established and it also established that qualitative information collected (such as experience etc.) may not be able to account for these differences. Evidence from query variables was unable to distinguish between groups, but differences on topic for the same variables were recorded. Users who view more documents tended to judge more documents as being relevant, in terms of either the user group or topic. Session data indicated that there may be an important difference between the number of iterations used in a search between the user groups, as there may be little effect from the topic on this variable. Originality/value - This is the first study of the effect of dyslexia on information search behaviour, and it provides some evidence to take the field forward.

Source

Journal of documentation. 66(2010) no.3, S.307-326

0.008427388 = product of:
  0.037923247 = sum of:
    0.021999538 = weight(_text_:of in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021999538 = score(doc=1540,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 1540, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1540)
    0.015923709 = product of:
      0.031847417 = sum of:
        0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031847417 = score(doc=1540,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1540, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1540)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Hundreds of scholarly studies have investigated various aspects of Wikipedia. Although a number of literature reviews have provided overviews of this vast body of research, none has specifically focused on the readers of Wikipedia and issues concerning its readership. In this systematic literature review, we review 99 studies to synthesize current knowledge regarding the readership of Wikipedia and provide an analysis of research methods employed. The scholarly research has found that Wikipedia is popular not only for lighter topics such as entertainment but also for more serious topics such as health and legal information. Scholars, librarians, and students are common users, and Wikipedia provides a unique opportunity for educating students in digital literacy. We conclude with a summary of key findings, implications for researchers, and implications for the Wikipedia community.

Date

18.11.2014 13:22:03

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.12, S.2381-2403

0.007868583 = product of:
  0.035408624 = sum of:
    0.014968789 = weight(_text_:of in 4097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014968789 = score(doc=4097,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 4097, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4097)
    0.020439833 = weight(_text_:systems in 4097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020439833 = score(doc=4097,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 4097, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4097)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Although many studies have identified search tactics, few studies have explored tactic transitions. This study investigated the transitions of search tactics during the Web-based search process. Bringing their own 60 search tasks, 31 participants, representing the general public with different demographic characteristics, participated in the study. Data collected from search logs and verbal protocols were analyzed by applying both qualitative and quantitative methods. The findings of this study show that participants exhibited some unique Web search tactics. They overwhelmingly employed accessing and evaluating tactics; they used fewer tactics related to modifying search statements, monitoring the search process, organizing search results, and learning system features. The contributing factors behind applying most and least frequently employed search tactics are in relation to users' efforts, trust in information retrieval (IR) systems, preference, experience, and knowledge as well as limitation of the system design. A matrix of search-tactic transitions was created to show the probabilities of transitions from one tactic to another. By applying fifth-order Markov chain, the results also presented the most common search strategies representing patterns of tactic transition occurring at the beginning, middle, and ending phases within one search session. The results of this study generated detailed and useful guidance for IR system design to support the most frequently applied tactics and transitions, to reduce unnecessary transitions, and support transitions at different phases.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.11, S.2188-2205

0.0075036935 = product of:
  0.03376662 = sum of:
    0.02049686 = weight(_text_:of in 1003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02049686 = score(doc=1003,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 1003, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1003)
    0.013269759 = product of:
      0.026539518 = sum of:
        0.026539518 = weight(_text_:22 in 1003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026539518 = score(doc=1003,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1003, 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=1003)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Young undergraduate college students are often described as "digital natives," presumed to prefer living and working in completely digital information environments. In reality, their world is part-paper/part-digital, in constant transition among successive forms of digital storage and communication devices. Studying for a degree is the daily work of these young people, and effective management of paper and digital academic materials and resources contributes crucially to their success in life. Students must also constantly manage their work against deadlines to meet their course and university requirements. This study, following the "Personal Information Management" (PIM) paradigm, examines student academic information management under these various constraints and pressures. A total of 41 18- to 22-year-old students were interviewed and observed regarding the content, structure, and uses of their immediate working environment within their dormitory rooms. Students exhibited remarkable creativity and variety in the mixture of automated and manual resources and devices used to support their academic work. The demands of a yearlong procession of assignments, papers, projects, and examinations increase the importance of time management activities and influence much of their behavior. Results provide insights on student use of various kinds of information technology and their overall planning and management of information associated with their studies.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.8, S.1590-1607

0.0066705723 = product of:
  0.030017575 = sum of:
    0.019401768 = weight(_text_:of in 4440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019401768 = score(doc=4440,freq=42.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.31669703 = fieldWeight in 4440, product of:
          6.4807405 = tf(freq=42.0), with freq of:
            42.0 = termFreq=42.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4440)
    0.010615807 = product of:
      0.021231614 = sum of:
        0.021231614 = weight(_text_:22 in 4440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021231614 = score(doc=4440,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4440, 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=4440)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to get a first approximation of the usefulness of online forums with regard to information seeking and knowledge generation. Design/methodology/approach - This study captures the characteristics of knowledge generation by examining the pragmatics and types of information needs of posted questions and by investigating knowledge related characteristics of discussion posts as well as the success of communication. Three online forums were examined. The data set consists of 55 threads, containing 533 posts which were categorized manually by two researchers. Findings - Results show that questioners often ask for personal estimations. Information needs often aim for actionable insights or uncertainty reduction. With regard to answers, factual information is the dominant content type and has the highest knowledge value as it is the strongest predictor with regard to the generation of new knowledge. Opinions are also relevant, but in a rather subsequent and complementary way. Emotional aspects are scarcely observed. Overall, results indicate that knowledge creation predominantly follows a socio-cultural paradigm of knowledge exchange. Research limitations/implications - Although the investigation captures important aspects of knowledge building processes, the measurement of the forums' knowledge value is still rather limited. Success is only partly measurable with the current scheme. The central coding category "new topical knowledge" is only of nominal value and therefore not able to compare different kinds of knowledge gains in the course of discussion. Originality/value - The investigation reaches out beyond studies that do not consider that the role and relevance of posts is dependent on the state of the discussion. Furthermore, the paper integrates two perspectives of knowledge value: the success of the questioner with regard to the expressed information need and the knowledge building value for communicants and readers.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 67(2015) no.1, S.2-26

0.0064770123 = product of:
  0.029146556 = sum of:
    0.015876798 = weight(_text_:of in 4193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015876798 = score(doc=4193,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 4193, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4193)
    0.013269759 = product of:
      0.026539518 = sum of:
        0.026539518 = weight(_text_:22 in 4193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026539518 = score(doc=4193,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4193, 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=4193)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

The development of visual retrieval methods requires information about user interaction with images, including their description and categorization. This article presents the development of a categorization model for magazine images based on two user studies. In Study 1, we elicited 10 main classes of magazine image categorization criteria through sorting tasks with nonexpert and expert users (N=30). Multivariate methods, namely, multidimensional scaling and hierarchical clustering, were used to analyze similarity data. Content analysis of category names gave rise to classes that were synthesized into a categorization framework. The framework was evaluated in Study 2 by experts (N=24) who categorized another set of images consistent with the framework and found it to be useful in the task. Based on the evaluation study the framework was solidified into a model for categorizing magazine imagery. Connections between classes were analyzed both from the original sorting data and from the evaluation study and included into the final model. The model is a practical categorization tool that may be used in workplaces, such as magazine editorial offices. It may also serve to guide the development of computational methods for image understanding, selection of concepts for automatic detection, and approaches to support browsing and exploratory image search.

Date

22. 1.2011 14:09:26

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.295-313

0.0064770123 = product of:
  0.029146556 = sum of:
    0.015876798 = weight(_text_:of in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015876798 = score(doc=1177,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 1177, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1177)
    0.013269759 = product of:
      0.026539518 = sum of:
        0.026539518 = weight(_text_:22 in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026539518 = score(doc=1177,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1177, 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=1177)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Search engine users typically engage in multiquery sessions in their quest to fulfill their information needs. Despite a plethora of research findings suggesting that a significant group of users look for information within a specific geographical scope, existing reformulation studies lack a focused analysis of how users reformulate geographic queries. This study comprehensively investigates the ways in which users reformulate such needs in an attempt to fill this gap in the literature. Reformulated sessions were sampled from a query log of a major search engine to extract 2,400 entries that were manually inspected to filter geo sessions. This filter identified 471 search sessions that included geographical intent, and these sessions were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. The results revealed that one in five of the users who reformulated their queries were looking for geographically related information. They reformulated their queries by changing the content of the query rather than the structure. Users were not following a unified sequence of modifications and instead performed a single reformulation action. However, in some cases it was possible to anticipate their next move. A number of tasks in geo modifications were identified, including standard, multi-needs, multi-places, and hybrid approaches. The research concludes that it is important to specialize query reformulation studies to focus on particular query types rather than generically analyzing them, as it is apparent that geographic queries have their special reformulation characteristics.

Date

26. 1.2014 18:48:22

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.1, S.13-24

0.0060603954 = product of:
  0.02727178 = sum of:
    0.0140020205 = weight(_text_:of in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0140020205 = score(doc=2680,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.22855641 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
    0.013269759 = product of:
      0.026539518 = sum of:
        0.026539518 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026539518 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2680, 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=2680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

This study addresses the impact of domain expertise (i.e. of prior knowledge of the domain) on the performance and query strategies used by users while searching for information. Twenty-four experts (psychology students) and 24 non-experts (students from other disciplines) had to search for psychology information from the Universalis website in order to perform six information problems of varying complexity: two simple problems (the keywords required to complete the task were provided in the problem statement), two more difficult problems (the keywords required had to be inferred) and two impossible problems (no answer was provided by the website). The results showed that participants with prior knowledge in the domain (experts in psychology) performed better (i.e. reached more correct answers after shorter search times) than non-experts. This difference was stronger as the complexity of the problems increased. This study also showed that experts and non-experts displayed different query strategies. Experts reformulated the impossible problems more often than non-experts, because they produced new queries with psychology-related keywords. The participants rarely used thematic category tool and when they did so this did not enhance their performance.

Date

25. 1.2016 18:46:22

0.0053522103 = product of:
  0.048169892 = sum of:
    0.048169892 = weight(_text_:software in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048169892 = score(doc=566,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.30993375 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Die Arbeit untersucht die Usability von Online-Wörterbüchern und elektronischen Sprachportalen und soll eine Brücke zwischen der Usability von Websites hinsichtlich softwareergonomischer Normen und Konventionen und Wörterbüchern in elektronischer Form schlagen. Die einzige Usability-Methode, mit der es möglich ist, konkrete und empirisch belegte Aussagen darüber zu treffen, wie potentielle Nutzer ein Online-Wörterbuch verwenden und welche Probleme dabei festgestellt werden, ist ein Usability- Test mit realen Benutzern. Als Untersuchungsgegenstand dient das Online-Wortschatz-Informationssystem Deutsch (Owid), die Base lexicale du français (BLF) und das elektronische Lernerwörterbuch Deutsch-Italienisch (Eldit). Die Arbeit setzt sich aus vier verschiedenen empirischen Studien zusammen. Da ein Usability-Test immer nur einen Ausschnitt an Funktionalitäten aus einem gesamten System widerspiegeln kann, wurden mithilfe einer empirischen Fragebogen-Studie zunächst die für den Benutzer wichtigsten und am meisten verwendeten Funktionen eines Online-Wörterbuchs identifiziert und als Grundlage für den Test gewählt. Eine anschließende heuristische Evaluation trug potentielle Usability-Probleme der drei Online- Wörterbücher zusammen und stellte die Grundlage für die Thesenstellung des Usability-Tests dar. Der Test setzte sich aus zwei empirischen Teilen zusammen: Einem Aufgabenteil, den die Testperson für jedes der drei Online-Wörterbüchern einzeln bearbeiten und dabei die Testmethode des lauten Denkens anwenden musste und einem Post-Test- Fragebogen, der direkt nach dem Bearbeiten des jeweiligen Aufgabenkatalogs ausgefüllt wurde. Der gesamte Test wurde mit Morae, einer Software u. a. für Software- und Website- Usability-Tests, durchgeführt und ausgewertet.

0.0028807449 = product of:
  0.025926704 = sum of:
    0.025926704 = weight(_text_:of in 4146) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025926704 = score(doc=4146,freq=48.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.42320424 = fieldWeight in 4146, product of:
          6.928203 = tf(freq=48.0), with freq of:
            48.0 = termFreq=48.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4146)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Purpose - The paper aims to provide some insight into mental models of the bibliographic universe and how they compare with functional requirements for bibliographic records (FRBR) as a conceptual model of the bibliographic universe. Design/methodology/approach - To get a more complete picture of the mental models, different elicitation techniques were used. The three tasks of the paper were: card-sorting, concept mapping and comparison task. The paper deals with comparison task, which consisted of interviews and rankings, and provides a discussion of the results of the paper as a whole. Findings - Results of the ranking part of the comparison task confirm the findings of concept mapping task. In both cases, while there are individual differences between mental models, on average they gravitate towards FRBR. Research limitations/implications - This is a small study and it provides only a glimpse of the implications of using FRBR as a conceptual basis for cataloguing. More FRBR-related user studies are needed, including similar studies on different groups of individuals and different types of materials, as well as practical studies of user needs and user interfaces. Practical implications - The results of this study are the first user-tested indication of the validity of FRBR as a conceptual basis for the future of cataloguing. Originality/value - This is the first published paper of mental models of the bibliographic universe and uses a unique combination of mental model elicitation techniques.

Source

Journal of documentation. 66(2010) no.5, S.668-680

0.0026297483 = product of:
  0.023667734 = sum of:
    0.023667734 = weight(_text_:of in 3593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023667734 = score(doc=3593,freq=40.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.38633084 = fieldWeight in 3593, product of:
          6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
            40.0 = termFreq=40.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3593)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

We present the first systematic study of the influence of time on user judgements for rankings and relevance grades of web search engine results. The goal of this study is to evaluate the change in user assessment of search results and explore how users' judgements change. To this end, we conducted a large-scale user study with 86 participants who evaluated 2 different queries and 4 diverse result sets twice with an interval of 2 months. To analyze the results we investigate whether 2 types of patterns of user behavior from the theory of categorical thinking hold for the case of evaluation of search results: (a) coarseness and (b) locality. To quantify these patterns we devised 2 new measures of change in user judgements and distinguish between local (when users swap between close ranks and relevance values) and nonlocal changes. Two types of judgements were considered in this study: (a) relevance on a 4-point scale, and (b) ranking on a 10-point scale without ties. We found that users tend to change their judgements of the results over time in about 50% of cases for relevance and in 85% of cases for ranking. However, the majority of these changes were local.

Source

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