Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.029359091 = product of:
  0.08807727 = sum of:
    0.08807727 = sum of:
      0.056015976 = weight(_text_:group in 2922) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.056015976 = score(doc=2922,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047327764 = queryNorm
          0.2557028 = fieldWeight in 2922, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2922)
      0.032061294 = weight(_text_:22 in 2922) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.032061294 = score(doc=2922,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.047327764 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2922, 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=2922)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose People face barriers and failures in various kinds of information seeking experiences. These are often attributed to either the information seeker or the system/service they use. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how and why individuals fail to fulfill their information needs in all contexts and situations. It addresses the limitations of existing studies in examining the context of the task and information seeker's strategy and seeks to gain a holistic understanding of information seeking barriers and failures. Design/methodology/approach The primary method used for this investigation is a qualitative survey, in which 63 participants provided 208 real life examples of failures in information seeking. After analyzing the survey data, ten semi-structured interviews with another group of participants were conducted to further examine the survey findings. Data were analyzed using various theoretical frameworks of tasks, strategies, and barriers. Findings A careful examination of aspects of tasks, barriers, and strategies identified from the examples revealed that a wide range of external and internal factors caused people's failures. These factors were also caused or affected by multiple aspects of information seekers' tasks and strategies. People's information needs were often too contextual and specific to be fulfilled by the information retrieved. Other barriers, such as time constraint and institutional restrictions, also intensified the problem. Originality/value This paper highlights the importance of considering the information seeking episodes in which individuals fail to fulfill their needs in a holistic approach by analyzing their tasks, information needs, strategies, and obstacles. The modified theoretical frameworks and the coding methods used could also be instrumental for future research.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.015843712 = product of:
  0.04753113 = sum of:
    0.04753113 = product of:
      0.09506226 = sum of:
        0.09506226 = weight(_text_:group in 4082) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09506226 = score(doc=4082,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.43394202 = fieldWeight in 4082, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4082)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Support for explicit collaboration in information-seeking activities is increasingly recognized as a desideratum for search systems. Several tools have emerged recently that help groups of people with the same information-seeking goals to work together. Many issues for these collaborative information-seeking (CIS) environments remain understudied. The authors identified awareness as one of these issues in CIS, and they presented a user study that involved 42 pairs of participants, who worked in collaboration over 2 sessions with 3 instances of the authors' CIS system for exploratory search. They showed that while having awareness of personal actions and history is important for exploratory search tasks spanning multiple sessions, support for group awareness is even more significant for effective collaboration. In addition, they showed that support for such group awareness can be provided without compromising usability or introducing additional load on the users.

0.009335997 = product of:
  0.028007988 = sum of:
    0.028007988 = product of:
      0.056015976 = sum of:
        0.056015976 = weight(_text_:group in 952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056015976 = score(doc=952,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.2557028 = fieldWeight in 952, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=952)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Communication and coordination are considered essential components of successful collaborations, and provision of awareness is a highly valuable feature of a collaborative information seeking (CIS) system. In this article, we investigate how providing different kinds of awareness support affects people's coordination behavior in a CIS task, as reflected by the communication that took place between them. We describe a laboratory study with 84 participants in 42 pairs with an experimental CIS system. These participants were brought to the laboratory for two separate sessions and given two exploratory search tasks. They were randomly assigned to one of the three systems, defined by the kind of awareness support provided. We analyzed the messages exchanged between the participants of each team by coding them for their coordination attributes. With this coding, we show how the participants employed different kinds of coordination during the study. Using qualitative and quantitative analyses, we demonstrate that the teams with no awareness, or with only personal awareness support, needed to spend more time and effort doing coordination than those with proper group awareness support. We argue that appropriate and adequate awareness support is essential for a CIS system for reducing coordination costs and keeping the collaborators well coordinated for a productive collaboration. The findings have implications for system designers as well as cognitive scientists and CIS researchers in general.

0.009335997 = product of:
  0.028007988 = sum of:
    0.028007988 = product of:
      0.056015976 = sum of:
        0.056015976 = weight(_text_:group in 1193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056015976 = score(doc=1193,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.2557028 = fieldWeight in 1193, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1193)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The notions that information seeking is not always a solitary activity and that people working in collaboration for information intensive tasks should be studied and supported have become more prevalent in recent years. Several new research questions, methodologies, and systems have emerged around these notions that may prove to be useful beyond the field of collaborative information seeking (CIS), with relevance to the broader area of information seeking and behavior. This article provides an overview of such key research work from a variety of domains, including library and information science, computer-supported cooperative work, human-computer interaction, and information retrieval. It starts with explanations of collaboration and how CIS fits in different contexts, emphasizing the interactive, intentional, and mutually beneficial nature of CIS activities. Relations to similar and related fields such as collaborative information retrieval, collaborative information behavior, and collaborative filtering are also clarified. Next, the article presents a synthesis of various frameworks and models that exist in the field today, along with a new synthesis of 12 different dimensions of group activities. A discussion on issues and approaches relating to evaluating various parameters in CIS follows. Finally, a list of known issues and challenges is presented to provide an overview of research opportunities in this field.

0.009335997 = product of:
  0.028007988 = sum of:
    0.028007988 = product of:
      0.056015976 = sum of:
        0.056015976 = weight(_text_:group in 4467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056015976 = score(doc=4467,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.2557028 = fieldWeight in 4467, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4467)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Community Question-Answering (CQA) sites have become popular venues where people can ask questions, seek information, or share knowledge with a user community. Although responses on CQA sites are obviously slower than information retrieved by a search engine, one of the most frustrating aspects of CQAs occurs when an asker's posted question does not receive a reasonable answer or remains unanswered. CQA sites could improve users' experience by identifying potential answerers and routing appropriate questions to them. In this paper, we predict the potential answerers based on question content and user profiles. Our approach builds user profiles based on past activity. When a new question is posted, the proposed method computes scores between the question and all user profiles to find the potential answerers. We conduct extensive experimental evaluations on two popular CQA sites - Yahoo! Answers and Stack Overflow - to show the effectiveness of our algorithm. The results show that our technique is able to predict a small group of 1000 users from which at least one user will answer the question with a probability higher than 50% in both CQA sites. Further analysis indicates that topic interest and activity level can improve the correctness of our approach.