Search (159 results, page 2 of 8)

0.0025702172 = product of:
  0.010280869 = sum of:
    0.010280869 = weight(_text_:a in 2966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010280869 = score(doc=2966,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 2966, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2966)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to present a snapshot of virtual reference services (the use of instant messaging or chat for enquiries) in UK academic libraries, and provide information about software for libraries considering providing a virtual reference service. Design/methodology/approach - The paper summarises the results of a 2008 UK-wide survey of academic libraries and gives a brief overview and comparison matrix of top virtual reference software products as tested by the Virtual Enquiry Project. Findings - Virtual reference services are not widespread in UK academic libraries. However, current service providers are planning to continue or expand services and a majority of academic libraries surveyed are considering starting a service. Originality/value - This is the first survey of its kind among UK academic libraries.

Type

a

0.0025702172 = product of:
  0.010280869 = sum of:
    0.010280869 = weight(_text_:a in 1037) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010280869 = score(doc=1037,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 1037, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1037)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article presents a user study showing the effectiveness of a linked-based, virtual integration infrastructure that gives users access to relevant online resources, empowering them to design an information-seeking path that is specifically relevant to their context. IntegraL provides a lightweight approach to improve and augment search functionality by dynamically generating context-focused "anchors" for recognized elements of interest generated by library services. This article includes a description of how IntegraL's design supports users' information-seeking behavior. A full user study with both objective and subjective measures of IntegraL and hypothesis testing regarding IntegraL's effectiveness of the user's information-seeking experience are described along with data analysis, implications arising from this kind of virtual integration, and possible future directions.

Type

a

0.0025599976 = product of:
  0.01023999 = sum of:
    0.01023999 = weight(_text_:a in 4157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01023999 = score(doc=4157,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 4157, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4157)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine whether there is a need to consider gender or sex differences as variables in information behaviour research and, if so, how? Design/methodology/approach - A metasynthesis approach is used. A preliminary framework to categorise information behaviour research on women is developed by integrating main themes from feminist research and information behaviour research. Within each category, studies are compared and contrasted, to identify similar and divergent themes. Themes are then compared across categories, to synthesise the main concepts. Findings - The categorisation works for most studies, apart from a group of studies on health information use, communicating risk and decision making. The meta-synthesis indicates the importance of concepts such as situation (as mesh), intermediaries (as node with connections), and connecting behaviour. Gender-related or, rather gender-ascribed, constructs, such as concern for others, not gender alone are likely to be important variables in information behaviour. Research limitations/implications - The meta-synthesis is a top-level synthesis, as the number of studies prohibited a more detailed approach. Further meta-synthesis of a few high quality research studies would help to confirm the findings. Practical implications - The synthesis illuminates a different perspective on information behaviour: the network of information users rather than the individual information seeker. Originality/value - The synthesis integrates some feminist research themes with information behaviour research, and the findings have implications for general information behaviour research.

Type

a

0.0025599976 = product of:
  0.01023999 = sum of:
    0.01023999 = weight(_text_:a in 396) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01023999 = score(doc=396,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 396, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=396)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - In "Coming across information serendipitously - Part 1: a process model" the authors identified common elements of researchers' experiences of "coming across information serendipitously". These experiences involve a mix of unexpectedness and insight and lead to a valuable, unanticipated outcome. In this article, the authors aim to show how the elements of unexpectedness, insight and value form a framework for subjectively classifying whether a particular experience might be considered serendipitous and, if so, just how serendipitous. Design/methodology/approach - The classification framework was constructed by analysing 46 experiences of coming across information serendipitously provided by 28 interdisciplinary researchers during critical incident interviews. "Serendipity stories" were written to summarise each experience and to facilitate their comparison. The common elements of unexpectedness, insight and value were identified in almost all the experiences. Findings - The presence of different mixes of unexpectedness, insight and value in the interviewees' experiences define a multi-dimensional conceptual space (which the authors call the "serendipity space"). In this space, different "strengths" of serendipity exist. The classification framework can be used to reason about whether an experience falls within the serendipity space and, if so, how "pure" or "dilute" it is. Originality/value - The framework provides researchers from various disciplines with a structured means of reasoning about and classifying potentially serendipitous experiences.

Type

a

0.0025599976 = product of:
  0.01023999 = sum of:
    0.01023999 = weight(_text_:a in 2139) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01023999 = score(doc=2139,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 2139, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2139)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Design/methodology/approach An operationalisation of the model is presented based on the theory of expectancy-value and on the operationalisation used when the model was first developed. Data for the analysis were collected from a sample of seven informants working as consultants in Danish municipalities. Each participant filled out a questionnaire, kept a log book for a week and participated in a subsequent interview to elicit data regarding their information source behaviour and task motivation. Findings Motivation affected source use when the informants search for information as part of their professional life. This meant that the number of sources used and the preference for interpersonal and internal sources increased when the task had high-value motivation or low-expectancy motivation or both. Research limitations/implications The study is based on a relatively small sample and considers only one motivation theory. This should be addressed in future research along with a broadening of the studied group to involve other professions than municipality consultants. Originality/value Motivational theories from the field of psychology have been used sparsely in studies of information seeking. This study operationalises and verifies such a theory based on a theoretical adaptation of this model made by Savolainen (2012c).

Type

a

0.0025599976 = product of:
  0.01023999 = sum of:
    0.01023999 = weight(_text_:a in 4244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01023999 = score(doc=4244,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 4244, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4244)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose The current understanding of serendipity is based primarily on studies employing westerners as the participants, and it remains uncertain whether or not this understanding would be pervasive under different cultures, such as in China. In addition, there is not a sufficient systematic investigation of context during the occurrence of serendipity in current studies. The purpose of this paper is to examine the above issues by conducting a follow-up empirical study with a group of Chinese scholars. Design/methodology/approach The social media application "WeChat" was employed as a research tool. A diary-based study was conducted and 16 participants were required to send to the researchers any cases of serendipity they encountered during a period of two weeks, and this was followed by a post-interview. Findings Chinese scholars experienced serendipity in line with the three main processes of: encountering unexpectedness, connection-making and recognising the value. An updated context-based serendipity model was constructed, where the role of context during each episode of experiencing serendipity was identified, including the external context (e.g. time, location and status), the social context and the internal context (e.g. precipitating conditions, sagacity/perceptiveness and emotion). Originality/value The updated context model provides a further understanding of the role played by context during the different processes of serendipity. The framework for experiencing serendipity has been expanded, and this may be used to classify the categories of serendipity.

Type

a

0.0025599976 = product of:
  0.01023999 = sum of:
    0.01023999 = weight(_text_:a in 5028) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01023999 = score(doc=5028,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 5028, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5028)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose Information seeking is often performed in collaborative contexts. The research into such collaborative information seeking (CIS) has been proceeding since the 1990s but lacks methodological discussions. The purpose of this paper is to analyze and discuss methodological issues in existing CIS studies. Design/methodology/approach The authors systematically review 69 empirical CIS studies. Findings The review shows that the most common methods of data collection are lab experiments (43 percent), observation (19 percent) and surveys (16 percent), that the most common methods of data analysis are description (33 percent), statistical testing (29 percent) and content analysis (19 percent) and that CIS studies involve a fairly even mix of novice, intermediate and specialist participants. However, the authors also find that CIS research is dominated by exploratory studies, leaves it largely unexplored in what ways the findings of a study may be specific to the particular study setting, appears to assign primacy to precision at the expense of generalizability, struggles with investigating how CIS activities extend over time and provides data about behavior to a larger extent than about reasons, experiences and especially outcomes. Research limitations/implications The major implication of this review is its identification of the need for a shared model to which individual CIS studies can contribute in a cumulative manner. To support the development of such a model, the authors discuss a model of the core CIS process and a model of the factors that trigger CIS. Originality/value This study assesses the current state of CIS research, provides guidance for future CIS studies and aims to inspire further methodological discussion.

Type

a

0.0025599976 = product of:
  0.01023999 = sum of:
    0.01023999 = weight(_text_:a in 5292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01023999 = score(doc=5292,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 5292, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5292)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Internet has become the first source of consumer health information. Most theoretical and empirical studies are centered on information needs and seeking, rather than on information outcomes. This review's purpose is to explore and explain health outcomes of Online Consumer Health Information (OCHI) in primary care. A participatory systematic mixed studies review with a framework synthesis was undertaken. Starting from an initial conceptual framework, our specific objectives were to (a) identify types of OCHI outcomes in primary care, (b) identify factors associated with these outcomes, and (c) integrate these factors and outcomes into a comprehensive revised framework combining an information theory and a psychosocial theory of behavior. The results of 65 included studies were synthesized using a qualitative thematic data analysis. The themes derived from the literature underwent a harmonization process that produced a comprehensive typology of OCHI outcomes. The revised conceptual framework specifies four individual and one organizational level of OCHI outcomes, while including factors such as consumers' information needs and four interdependent contextual factors. It contributes to theoretical knowledge about OCHI health outcomes, and informs future research, information assessment methods, and tools to help consumers find and use health information.

Type

a

0.0024286269 = product of:
  0.0097145075 = sum of:
    0.0097145075 = weight(_text_:a in 457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0097145075 = score(doc=457,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 457, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=457)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Online question-answering (Q&A) services are becoming increasingly popular among information seekers. We divide them into two categories, social Q&A (SQA) and virtual reference (VR), and examine how experts (librarians) and end users (students) evaluate information within both categories. To accomplish this, we first performed an extensive literature review and compiled a list of the aspects found to contribute to a "good" answer. These aspects were divided among three high-level concepts: relevance, quality, and satisfaction. We then interviewed both experts and users, asking them first to reflect on their online Q&A experiences and then comment on our list of aspects. These interviews uncovered two main disparities. One disparity was found between users' expectations with these services and how information was actually delivered among them, and the other disparity between the perceptions of users and experts with regard to the aforementioned three characteristics of relevance, quality, and satisfaction. Using qualitative analyses of both the interviews and relevant literature, we suggest ways to create better hybrid solutions for online Q&A and to bridge the gap between experts' and users' understandings of relevance, quality, and satisfaction, as well as the perceived importance of each in contributing to a good answer.

Type

a

0.0024286269 = product of:
  0.0097145075 = sum of:
    0.0097145075 = weight(_text_:a in 1130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0097145075 = score(doc=1130,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 1130, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1130)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

There is increasing interest in topics at the nexus of collaboration and information behavior. A variety of studies conducted in organizational settings have provided us with key insights about the collaborative aspects of seeking, retrieving, and using information. Researchers have used a range of terms, including collaborative information seeking (CIS), collaborative information retrieval (CIR), collaborative search, collaborative sensemaking, and others to describe various pertinent activities. Consequently, we lack conceptual clarity concerning these activities, leading to a tendency to use terms interchangeably when in fact they may be referring to different issues. Here, we offer collaborative information behavior (CIB) as an umbrella term to connote the collaborative aspects of information seeking, retrieval, and use. We provide the contours of a model of CIB synthesized from findings of past studies conducted by our research team as well as other researchers. By reanalyzing and synthesizing the data from those studies, we conceptualize CIB as comprised of a set of constitutive activities, organized into three broad phases-problem formulation, collaborative information seeking, and information use. Some of the activities are specific to a particular phase, whereas others are common to all phases. We explain how those constitutive activities are related to one another. Finally, we discuss the limitations of our model as well as its potential usefulness in advancing CIB research.

Type

a

0.0024286269 = product of:
  0.0097145075 = sum of:
    0.0097145075 = weight(_text_:a in 2215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0097145075 = score(doc=2215,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 2215, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2215)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

With the increasing importance of social media in people's lives, more mobile applications have incorporated features to support social networking activities. These applications enable communication between people, using features such as chatting and blogging. There is, however, little consideration of the collaboration between people during information seeking. Mobile applications should support the seeking, sharing, confirming, and validating of information systematically to help users complete their tasks and fulfill their information needs. To support information seeking, especially collaboratively as a group, there is a need to understand people's social interaction behavior. Using tourism as a domain, we conducted a diary study to look into tourists' social interaction during information seeking. Further, based on the diary study findings and current research, we describe a set of triggers that lead to collaboration for each step in the information-seeking process. Here we present the social collaboration patterns between tourists and the people around them. Further, based on a diary study and current research, we describe a set of triggers that lead to collaboration for each step in the BIG6 information-seeking process.

Type

a

0.0022897315 = product of:
  0.009158926 = sum of:
    0.009158926 = weight(_text_:a in 615) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009158926 = score(doc=615,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 615, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=615)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This study investigates the motivational factors affecting the quantity and quality of voluntary knowledge contribution in online Q&A communities. Although previous studies focus on knowledge contribution quantity, this study regards quantity and quality as two important, yet distinct, aspects of knowledge contribution. Drawing on self-determination theory, this study proposes that five motivational factors, categorized along the extrinsic-intrinsic spectrum of motivation, have differential effects on knowledge contribution quantity versus quality in the context of online Q&A communities. An online survey with 367 participants was conducted in a leading online Q&A community to test the research model. Results show that rewards in the reputation system, learning, knowledge self-efficacy, and enjoy helping stand out as important motivations. Furthermore, rewards in the reputation system, as a manifestation of the external regulation, is more effective in facilitating the knowledge contribution quantity than quality. Knowledge self-efficacy, as a manifestation of intrinsic motivation, is more strongly related to knowledge contribution quality, whereas the other intrinsic motivation, enjoy helping, is more strongly associated with knowledge contribution quantity. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Type

a

0.0022897315 = product of:
  0.009158926 = sum of:
    0.009158926 = weight(_text_:a in 1756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009158926 = score(doc=1756,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 1756, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1756)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this review is to draw out patterns of information seeking behavior of graduate students as described in the empirical research published from 1997 to the present. Design/methodology/approach - A systematic search of databases for studies on information behavior and graduate students was employed in order to retrieve studies for a systematic review. Common themes that emerged from the literature were synthesized into a discussion of behavior patterns. Additionally a study quality analysis was conducted for all retrieved studies using a critical appraisal checklist for library and information research. Findings - This review revealed that graduate students begin their research on the internet much like any other information seeker, consult their faculty advisors before other people, and use libraries in diverse ways depending on the discipline studied. Additionally differences were noted between international and home students, and doctoral and master's students. Practical implications - The findings of this review indicate that information behavior research conducted on graduate students should delineate between masters' and doctoral students. Further, the findings may inform both academic librarian and faculty practice as to how to assist students with their research by helping them to understand how students typically approach research and how other institutions address common issues with special populations, such as non-native speakers and distance learners. Originality/value - No comprehensive review of information behavior studies, encompassing only the behaviors of graduate students has been conducted to date.

Type

a

0.0022897315 = product of:
  0.009158926 = sum of:
    0.009158926 = weight(_text_:a in 1787) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009158926 = score(doc=1787,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 1787, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1787)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine information seeking behaviour targeted to music information seeking by amateur musicians, accompanied with empirical evidence from a survey on a community concert band. While several studies in the literature have examined information seeking in the context of hedonic motives (e.g. entertainment oriented), music information can also be used for utilitarian purposes by providing amateur musicians the necessary tools to improve their skill and become better in their practice. Design/methodology/approach - A review of the literature on music information seeking and an empirical study on members of an amateur concert band are presented. The theoretical construct of the survey is informed by Wilsons' macro model of information seeking behaviour. This is employed in order to understand information motives and needs, as well as obstacles in information seeking of musicians. Findings - Musicians seek information not only for entertainment but for educational purposes as well as for the acquisition of certain music works. The use of the internet for information seeking as well as the gradual adoption of online social networks has provided access to new musical resources within the digital music networks. Originality/value - A person-centred approach for information seeking behaviour is studied and adapted for musicians. The survey provides new information behaviour results for designers of music information spaces which in turn are creating a new model of the relationship between music and society.

Type

a

0.0022897315 = product of:
  0.009158926 = sum of:
    0.009158926 = weight(_text_:a in 3319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009158926 = score(doc=3319,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.18016359 = fieldWeight in 3319, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3319)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

Type

a

0.0022667185 = product of:
  0.009066874 = sum of:
    0.009066874 = weight(_text_:a in 4058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009066874 = score(doc=4058,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4058, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4058)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Type

a

0.0022667185 = product of:
  0.009066874 = sum of:
    0.009066874 = weight(_text_:a in 4204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009066874 = score(doc=4204,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4204, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4204)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Type

a

0.0022667185 = product of:
  0.009066874 = sum of:
    0.009066874 = weight(_text_:a in 1600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009066874 = score(doc=1600,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 1600, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1600)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Type

a

0.0022667185 = product of:
  0.009066874 = sum of:
    0.009066874 = weight(_text_:a in 4475) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009066874 = score(doc=4475,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4475, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4475)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Academic libraries in the UK are placing an increased emphasis on engagement and partnership building with academics. Attempts to articulate what is meant by this engagement rely on analogies from the commercial world, notably from sales- driven environments. This language can prove counteractive to true faculty engagement. It retains a focus on a transactional approach to the detriment of partnership and often alienates academics (and librarians) reacting against their increasingly marketised and managerialised institutions. Therefore, we argue that it is necessary to abandon the technical vocabulary of sales and customer relations and develop better analogies to describe library liaison work.

Type

a

0.00217223 = product of:
  0.00868892 = sum of:
    0.00868892 = weight(_text_:a in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00868892 = score(doc=76,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.05083672 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044089027 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The user-centered approach to information retrieval emphasizes the importance of a user model in determining what information will be most useful to a particular user, given their context. Mediated search provides an opportunity to elaborate on this idea, as an intermediary's elicitations reveal what aspects of the user model they think are worth inquiring about. However, empirical evidence is divided over whether intermediaries actually work to develop a broadly conceived user model. Our research revisits the issue in a web research services setting, whose characteristics are expected to result in more thorough user modeling on the part of intermediaries. Our empirical study confirms that intermediaries engage in rich user modeling. While intermediaries behave differently across settings, our interpretation is that the underlying user model characteristics that intermediaries inquire about in our setting are applicable to other settings as well.

Type

a