Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.029393207 = product of:
  0.08817962 = sum of:
    0.08817962 = product of:
      0.13226943 = sum of:
        0.0961623 = weight(_text_:online in 6742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0961623 = score(doc=6742,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.62100726 = fieldWeight in 6742, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6742)
        0.03610713 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03610713 = score(doc=6742,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 6742, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6742)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports results of a study to examine the performance of online catalogue searches involving personal names and to recommend improvements to the basic system approach to soliciting user queries and searching for them. The research questions addressed in the study wre: how online systems can chose searching approaches on their own that are likely to produce useful retrieval; how online systems solicit queries from users; and how users respond to an experimental online catalogue that prompts them for the different elements of their personal name queries. Improvements include: the implementation of a new design for online catalogue searching that features search trees; new methods for soliciting user queries bearing personal names; and enlisting the participation of online catalogue users in the evaluation of system prompts, instructions, and messages that request input from them

0.022224266 = product of:
  0.066672795 = sum of:
    0.066672795 = product of:
      0.10000919 = sum of:
        0.058743894 = weight(_text_:online in 4380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058743894 = score(doc=4380,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.37936267 = fieldWeight in 4380, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4380)
        0.041265294 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041265294 = score(doc=4380,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 4380, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4380)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

We return to arguments made 10 years ago that online catalogs are difficult to use because their design does not incorporate sufficient understanding of searching behavior. The earlier article examined studies of information retrieval system searching for their implications for online catalog design; this article examines the implications of card catalog design for online catalogs. With this analysis, we hope to contribute to a better understanding of user behavior and to lay to rest the card catalog design model for online catalogs. We discuss the problems with query matching systems, which were designed for skilled search intermediaries rather than end-users, and the knowledge and skills they require in the information-seeking process, illustrated with examples of searching card and online catalogs. Searching requires conceptual knowledge of the information retrieval process - translating an information need into a searchable query; semantic knowledge of how to implement a query in a given system - the how and when to use system features; and technical skills in executing the query - basic computing skills and the syntax of entering queries as specific search statements. In the short term, we can help make online catalogs easier to use through improved training and documentation that is based on information-seeking bahavior, with the caveat that good training is not a substitute for good system design. Our long term goal should be to design intuitive systems that require a minimum of instruction. Given the complexity of the information retrieval problem and the limited capabilities of today's systems, we are far from achieving that goal. If libraries are to provide primary information services for the networked world, they need to put research results on the information-seeking process into practice in designing the next generation of online public access information retrieval systems

0.008076874 = product of:
  0.02423062 = sum of:
    0.02423062 = product of:
      0.07269186 = sum of:
        0.07269186 = weight(_text_:online in 347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07269186 = score(doc=347,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.46943733 = fieldWeight in 347, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=347)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.0057112123 = product of:
  0.017133636 = sum of:
    0.017133636 = product of:
      0.051400907 = sum of:
        0.051400907 = weight(_text_:online in 2348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051400907 = score(doc=2348,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.33194235 = fieldWeight in 2348, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2348)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

An analysis of transaction logs from an academic library online catalog describes instances in which users have tried both controlled and uncontrolled (title keyword) vocabulary subject access during the same search session. Eight hypotheses were tested. Over 6.6% of all dial access search sessions contained both methods of subject access. Over 58% of the isolated sessions began with an uncontrolled vocabulary attempt. Over 76% contained only one vocabulary shift. On average, user persistence was greater during controlled vocabulary search logs, but search output was greater during uncontrolled vocabulary search logs. Several recommendations regarding catalog design and instruction are made.

0.005673688 = product of:
  0.017021064 = sum of:
    0.017021064 = product of:
      0.05106319 = sum of:
        0.05106319 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05106319 = score(doc=3061,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article reports the findings of an experiment using a simulated title pages, author surnames, and title words, one-third of which were selected by each of the 3 authors, to determine the frequency of one-screen displays when used to search for known items in an implied Boolean retrieval system. Searches comprising surname plus one significant title word produced one-screen displays 78% of time; surname plus 2 words 97% of the time; and surname plus 3 words 98,5%. Three quarters of the significant words were nouns

0.004038437 = product of:
  0.01211531 = sum of:
    0.01211531 = product of:
      0.03634593 = sum of:
        0.03634593 = weight(_text_:online in 2259) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03634593 = score(doc=2259,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1548489 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.23471867 = fieldWeight in 2259, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2259)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

51 subject searches were performed in an online catalog containing about 4,5 million records. Their success was judges in terms of lists of items, known to be relevant to the various topics, compiled by subject specialists (faculty members or authors of articles in specialized encyclopedias). Many of the items known to be relevant were not retrieved, even in very broad searches that sometimes retrieved several hundred records, and very little could be done to make them retrievable within the constraints of present cataloging practice. Librarians should recognize that library catalogs, as now implemented, offer only the most primitive of subject access and should seek to develop different types of subject access tools. - Vgl auch Letter (B.H. Weinberg) in: LTRS 36(1992) S.123-124.

0.0034387745 = product of:
  0.0103163235 = sum of:
    0.0103163235 = product of:
      0.03094897 = sum of:
        0.03094897 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 6735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03094897 = score(doc=6735,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15433937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051022716 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 6735, 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=6735)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)