Search (237 results, page 11 of 12)

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=3250,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = 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)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

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

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=3877,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3877, 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=3877)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Reports from a study investigating the extent to which academic end users conduct multiple search sessions, over time woth OPAC or CD-ROM databases at different stages of their information seeking related to a current research project. Interviews were conducted using a questionnaire with 200 academic end users at Rutgers University Alexander Library, NJ and University of North Texas, to investigate the occurrence of multiple search sessions. Results show that at the time of the survey interview, 57% of end users had conducted multiple search sessions during their research project and 86% of end users conducted their 1st search session at the beginning stage of their information seeking process. 49% of end users had conducted between 1 and 6 search sessions and 8% more than 6 search sessions. 70% of multiple search sessionss end users had modified their search terms since their 1st search session. Discusses the implications of the findings for end user training, information retrieval systems design and further research

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=2246,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2246, 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=2246)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

As more people gain at-home access to the Internet, information seeking an the Web has become embedded in everyday life. The objective of this study was to characterize the home as an information use environment and to identify a range of information seeking and Websearch behaviors at home. Twelve Northern California residents were recruited, and the data were collected through semi-structured at-home interviews based an a self-reported Search Activities Diary that subjects kept over a 3-5 day period. The data were analyzed an four levels: home environment, information seeking goals, information retrieval interaction, and search query. Eindings indicated that the home, indeed, provided a distinct information use environment beyond physical setting alone in which the subjects used the Web for diverse purposes and interests. Based an the findings, the relationships among home environment, Web context, and interaction situation were identified with respect to user goals and information-seeking behaviors.

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=2658,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2658, 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=2658)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Theme

Semantisches Umfeld in Indexierung u. Retrieval

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4758) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=4758,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 4758, 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=4758)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The HILT Phase II project aimed to develop a pilot terminologies server with a view to improving cross-sectoral information retrieval. In order to inform this process, it was first necessary to examine how a representative group of users approached a range of information-related tasks. This paper focuses on exploratory interviews conducted to investigate the proposed ideal and actual strategies of a group of 30 users in relation to eight separate information tasks. In addition, users were asked to give examples of search terms they may employ and to describe how they would formulate search queries in each scenario. The interview process undertaken and the results compiled are outlined, and associated implications for the development of a pilot terminologies server are discussed.

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=5240,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 5240, 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=5240)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

In this issue we begin with the first of four parts of a five part series of papers by Spink, Wilson, Ford, Foster, and Ellis. Spink, et alia, in the first section of this report set forth the design of a project to test whether existing models of the information search process are appropriate for an environment of mediated successive searching which they believe characterizes much information seeking behavior. Their goal is to develop an integrated model of the process. Data were collected from 198 individuals, 87 in Texas and 111 in Sheffield in the U.K., with individuals with real information needs engaged in interaction with operational information retrieval systems by use of transaction logs, recordings of interactions with intermediaries, pre, and post search interviews, questionnaire responses, relevance judgments of retrieved text, and responses to a test of cognitive styles. Questionnaires were based upon the Kuhlthau model, the Saracevic model, the Ellis model, and incorporated a visual analog scale to avoid a consistency bias.

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=611,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 611, 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=611)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Purpose - Apart from information retrieval there is virtually no other area of information science that has occasioned as much research effort and writing as "user studies". Within user studies the investigation of "information needs" has been the subject of much debate and no little confusion. The aim of this paper is to attempt to reduce this confusion by devoting attention to the definition of some concepts and by proposing the basis for a theory of the motivations for information-seeking behaviour. Design/methodology/approach - The paper describes the issues of user studies and information needs within the context of information science. Findings - The paper finds that the problem seems to lie, not so much with the lack of a single definition, as with a failure to use a definition appropriate to the level, and purpose of the investigation. Originality/value - The analysis may be used as a springboard to research based upon a wider, holistic view of the information user.

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=991,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 991, 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=991)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Multitasking is the human ability to handle the demands of multiple tasks. Multitasking behavior involves the ordering of multiple tasks and switching between tasks. People often multitask when using information retrieval (IR) technologies as they seek information on more than one information problem over single or multiple search episodes. However, limited studies have examined how people order their information problems, especially during their Web search engine interaction. The aim of our exploratory study was to investigate assigned information problem ordering by forty (40) study participants engaged in Web search. Findings suggest that assigned information problem ordering was influenced by the following factors, including personal interest, problem knowledge, perceived level of information available on the Web, ease of finding information, level of importance and seeking information on information problems in order from general to specific. Personal interest and problem knowledge were the major factors during assigned information problem ordering. Implications of the findings and further research are discussed. The relationship between information problem ordering and gratification theory is an important area for further exploration.

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2024) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=2024,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2024, 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=2024)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenbereichs: Evaluation of Interactive Information Retrieval Systems

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=2263,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2263, 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=2263)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=3637,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 3637, 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=3637)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Gegenstand der empirischen Forschungsarbeit sind dargestellte wie empfundene Gefühle bei Videos. Sind Nutzer in der Lage, solche Gefühle derart konsistent zu erschließen, dass man deren Angaben für ein emotionales Videoretrieval gebrauchen kann? Wir arbeiten mit einem kontrollierten Vokabular für neun tionen (Liebe, Freude, Spaß, Überraschung, Sehnsucht, Trauer, Ärger, Ekel und Angst), einem Schieberegler zur Einstellung der jeweiligen Intensität des Gefühls und mit dem Ansatz der broad Folksonomy, lassen also unterschiedliche Nutzer die Videos taggen. Versuchspersonen bekamen insgesamt 20 Videos (bearbeitete Filme aus YouTube) vorgelegt, deren Emotionen sie indexieren sollten. Wir erhielten Angaben von 776 Probanden und entsprechend 279.360 Schiebereglereinstellungen. Die Konsistenz der Nutzervoten ist sehr hoch; die Tags führen zu stabilen Verteilungen der Emotionen für die einzelnen Videos. Die endgültige Form der Verteilungen wird schon bei relativ wenigen Nutzern (unter 100) erreicht. Es ist möglich, im Sinne der Power Tags die jeweils für ein Dokument zentralen Gefühle (soweit überhaupt vorhanden) zu separieren und für das emotionale Information Retrieval (EmIR) aufzubereiten.

6.2775286E-4 = product of:
  0.00439427 = sum of:
    0.00439427 = product of:
      0.02197135 = sum of:
        0.02197135 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02197135 = score(doc=2691,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2691, 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=2691)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

We report a naturalistic interactive information retrieval (IIR) study of 18 ordinary users in the age of 20-25 who carry out everyday-life information seeking (ELIS) on the Internet with respect to the three types of information needs identified by Ingwersen (1986): the verificative information need (VIN), the conscious topical information need (CIN), and the muddled topical information need (MIN). The searches took place in the private homes of the users in order to ensure as realistic searching as possible. Ingwersen (1996) associates a given search behaviour to each of the three types of information needs, which are analytically deduced, but not yet empirically tested. Thus the objective of the study is to investigate whether empirical data does, or does not, conform to the predictions derived from the three types of information needs. The main conclusion is that the analytically deduced information search behaviour characteristics by Ingwersen are positively corroborated for this group of test participants who search the Internet as part of ELIS.

5.6712516E-4 = product of:
  0.003969876 = sum of:
    0.003969876 = product of:
      0.01984938 = sum of:
        0.01984938 = weight(_text_:system in 4213) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01984938 = score(doc=4213,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 4213, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4213)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Footnote

Novice end users were given 2 hours of training in searching a full-text magazine database (Magazine ASAP(TM)) on DIALOG. Subjects searched during 3 to 4 sessions in the presence of a trained monitor who prompted them to think aloud throughout the sessions. qualitative analysis of the transcripts and transaction logs yielded empirical information on user variables (purpose, motivation, satisfaction), uses of the database, move types, and every question users asked during the searches. The spontaneous, naturalistic questions were categorized according to affective, cognitive, and sensorimotor speech acts. Results show that most of the searches were performed for the self and were work related. The most common use of the database was to retrieve full-text articles online and to download and print them out rather than read them on screen. The majority of searches were judged satisfactory. Innovative uses included browsing for background information and obtaining contextualized sentences for language teaching. Searchers made twice as many moves to limit sets as moves to expand sets. Affective questions outnumbered cognitive and sensorimotor questions by two to one. This preponderance of affective micro-information needs during searching might be addressed by new system functions

5.6712516E-4 = product of:
  0.003969876 = sum of:
    0.003969876 = product of:
      0.01984938 = sum of:
        0.01984938 = weight(_text_:system in 5583) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01984938 = score(doc=5583,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5583, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5583)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This study reports the results of Part 11 of a research project that investigated the cognitive and physical behaviors of middle school students in using Yahooligans! Seventeen students in the seventh grade searched Yahooligans! to locate relevant information for an assigned research task. Sixty-nine percent partially succeeded, while 31 % failed. Children had difficulty completing the task mainly because they lacked adequate level of research skills and approached the task by seeking specific answers. Children's cognitive and physical behaviors varied by success levels. Similarities and differences in children's cognitive and physical behaviors were found between the research task and the factbased task they performed in the previous study. The present study considers the impact of prior experience in using the Web, domain knowledge, topic knowledge, and reading ability on children's success. It reports the overall patterns of children's behaviors, including searching and browsing moves, backtracking and looping moves, and navigational styles, as well as the time taken to complete the research task. Children expressed their information needs and provided recommendations for improving the interface design of Yahooligans! Implications for formal Web training and system design improvements are discussed

5.6712516E-4 = product of:
  0.003969876 = sum of:
    0.003969876 = product of:
      0.01984938 = sum of:
        0.01984938 = weight(_text_:system in 5584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01984938 = score(doc=5584,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5584, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5584)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This article reports on a model and patterns of use of a library catalog that can be accessed through the Internet. Three categories of users are identified. individuals who perform a search of the catalog, tourists who look only at opening pages of the library catalog's site, and Web spiders that come to the site to obtain pages for indexing the Web. A number of types of use activities are also identified, and can be grouped with the presearch phase (which takes place before any searching begins): the search phase, the display phase (in which users display the results of their search), and phases in which users make errors, ask the system for help or assistance, and take other actions. An empirical investigation of patterns of use of a university Web-based library catalog was conducted for 479 days. During that period, the characteristics of about 2.5 million sessions were recorded and analyzed, and usage trends were identified. Of the total, 62% of the sessions were for users who performed a search, 27% were from spiders, and 11% were for tourists. During the study period, the average search session lasted about 5 minutes when the study began and had increased to about 10 minutes 16 months later. An average search consisted of about 1.5 presearch actions lasting about 25 seconds, about 5.3 display actions, and 2.5 searches per session. The latter two categories are in the range of 35-37 seconds per session each. There were major differences in usage (number of searches, search time, number of display actions, and display time), depending upon the database accessed

5.6712516E-4 = product of:
  0.003969876 = sum of:
    0.003969876 = product of:
      0.01984938 = sum of:
        0.01984938 = weight(_text_:system in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01984938 = score(doc=5229,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Thirty-one patrons, who were selected by Slone to provide a range of age and experience, agreed when approached while using the catalog of the Wake County library system to try searching via the Internet. Fifteen searched the Wake County online catalog in this manner and 16 searched the World Wide Web, including that catalog. They were subjected to brief pre-structured taped interviews before and after their searches and observed during the searching process resulting in a log of behaviors, comments, pages accessed, and time spent. Data were analyzed across participants and categories. Web searches were characterized as linking, URL, search engine, within a site domain, and searching a web catalog; and participants by the number of these techniques used. Four used only one, 13 used two, 11 used three, two used four, and one all five. Participant experience was characterized as never used, used search engines, browsing experience, email experience, URL experience, catalog experience, and finally chat room/newsgroup experience. Sixteen percent of the participants had never used the Internet, 71% had used search engines, 65% had browsed, 58% had used email, 39% had used URLs, 39% had used online catalogs, and 32% had used chat rooms. The catalog was normally consulted before the web, where both were used, and experience with an online catalog assists in web use. Scrolling was found to be unpopular and practiced halfheartedly.

5.6712516E-4 = product of:
  0.003969876 = sum of:
    0.003969876 = product of:
      0.01984938 = sum of:
        0.01984938 = weight(_text_:system in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01984938 = score(doc=3312,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

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.

5.6712516E-4 = product of:
  0.003969876 = sum of:
    0.003969876 = product of:
      0.01984938 = sum of:
        0.01984938 = weight(_text_:system in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01984938 = score(doc=566,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

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.

5.2312744E-4 = product of:
  0.003661892 = sum of:
    0.003661892 = product of:
      0.01830946 = sum of:
        0.01830946 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6928) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01830946 = score(doc=6928,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 6928, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6928)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The objective of this study was to describe the criteria mentioned by users evaluating the information within documents as it related to the users' information need situations. Data were collected by asking users in an academic environment to evaluate representations and the full text of documents that had been retrieved specifically for each user's information need situation. Users were asked to mark the portions of the documents representations or of the full text of documents that indicated to the users whether they would or would not pursue the information within documents. An open-ended interview technique was then employed to discuss each marked portion with users. The interviews were audiotaped, the tapes transcribed, and the transcriptions were content analyzed in order to identify and describe evaluation criteria. The results indicate that the criteria employed by users included tangilble characteristics of documents (e.g., the information content of the document, the provision of references to other sources of information), subjective qualities (e.g., agreement with the information provided by the document) and situational factors (e.g., the time constraints under which the user was working). The implications of this research for our understanding of the concept of relevance, and for the design and evaluation of information retrieval systems, are discussed

5.2312744E-4 = product of:
  0.003661892 = sum of:
    0.003661892 = product of:
      0.01830946 = sum of:
        0.01830946 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01830946 = score(doc=4591,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4591, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4591)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

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