Search (45 results, page 1 of 3)

0.023258494 = product of:
  0.04651699 = sum of:
    0.04651699 = sum of:
      0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.009076704 = score(doc=2742,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 2742, 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=2742)
      0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 2742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037440285 = score(doc=2742,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2742, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2742)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this research, we aim to identify factors that significantly affect the clickthrough of Web searchers. Our underlying goal is determine more efficient methods to optimize the clickthrough rate. We devise a clickthrough metric for measuring customer satisfaction of search engine results using the number of links visited, number of queries a user submits, and rank of clicked links. We use a neural network to detect the significant influence of searching characteristics on future user clickthrough. Our results show that high occurrences of query reformulation, lengthy searching duration, longer query length, and the higher ranking of prior clicked links correlate positively with future clickthrough. We provide recommendations for leveraging these findings for improving the performance of search engine retrieval and result ranking, along with implications for search engine marketing.

Date

22. 3.2009 17:49:11

Type

a

0.016967738 = product of:
  0.033935476 = sum of:
    0.033935476 = sum of:
      0.008975285 = weight(_text_:a in 642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.008975285 = score(doc=642,freq=22.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.16900843 = fieldWeight in 642, product of:
            4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
              22.0 = termFreq=22.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=642)
      0.02496019 = weight(_text_:22 in 642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02496019 = score(doc=642,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 642, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=642)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Information retrieval (IR) research has developed considerably since the 1950's to include consideration of more cognitive, interactive and iterative processes during the interaction between humans and IR or Web systems (Ingwersen, 1992, 1996). Interactive search sessions by humans with IR systems have been depicted as interactive IR models (Saracevic, 1997). Human-IR system interaction is also modeled as taking place within the context of broader human information behavior (HIB) processes (Spink et al., 2002). Research into the human or cognitive (user modeling) aspects of IR is a growing body of research on user interactivity, task performance and measures for observing user interactivity. The task context and situational characteristics of users' searches and evaluation have also been identified as key elements in a user's interaction with an IR system (Cool and Spink, 2002; Vakkari, 2003). Major theorized interactive IR models have been proposed relating to the single search episode, including Ingwersen's (1992,1996) Cognitive Model of IR Interaction, Belkin et al.'s (1995) Episodic Interaction Model, and Saracevic's (1996,1997) Stratified Model of IR Interaction. In this chapter we examine Saracevic's Stratified Model of IR Interaction and extend the model within the framework of cognitive IR (CIR) to depict CIR as a multitasking process. This chapter provides a new direction for CIR research by conceptualizing IR with a multitasking context. The next section of the chapter defines the concept of multitasking in the cognitive sciences and Section 3 discusses the emerging understanding of multitasking information behavior. In Section 4, cognitive IR is depicted within a multitasking framework using Saracevic's (1996, 1997) Stratified Model of IR Interaction. In Section 5, we link information searching and seeking models together, via Saracevic's Stratified Model of IR Interaction, but starting with a unitask model of HIB. We begin to model multitasking in cognitive IR in Section 6. In Sections 7 and 8, we increase the complexity of our developing multitasking model of cognitive IR by adding coordinating mechanisms, including feedback loops. Finally, in Section 9, we conclude the chapter and indicate future directions for further research.

Date

19. 1.2007 12:55:22

Source

New directions in cognitive information retrieval. Eds.: A. Spink, C. Cole

Type

a

0.003551822 = product of:
  0.007103644 = sum of:
    0.007103644 = product of:
      0.014207288 = sum of:
        0.014207288 = weight(_text_:a in 837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014207288 = score(doc=837,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.26752928 = fieldWeight in 837, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=837)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper outlines the relation between philosophy of information (PI) and human information behavior (HIB). In this paper, we first briefly outline the basic constructs and approaches of PI and HIB. We argue that a strong relation exists between PI and HIB, as both are exploring the concept of information and premise information as a fundamental concept basic to human existence. We then exemplify that a heuristic approach to PI integrates the HIB view of information as a cognitive human-initiated process by presenting a specific cognitive architecture for information initiation based on modular notion from HIB/evolutionary psychology and the vacuum mechanism from PI.

Type

a

0.003515392 = product of:
  0.007030784 = sum of:
    0.007030784 = product of:
      0.014061568 = sum of:
        0.014061568 = weight(_text_:a in 411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014061568 = score(doc=411,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.26478532 = fieldWeight in 411, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=411)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.00334869 = product of:
  0.00669738 = sum of:
    0.00669738 = product of:
      0.01339476 = sum of:
        0.01339476 = weight(_text_:a in 1774) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01339476 = score(doc=1774,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 1774, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1774)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0029294936 = product of:
  0.005858987 = sum of:
    0.005858987 = product of:
      0.011717974 = sum of:
        0.011717974 = weight(_text_:a in 5242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011717974 = score(doc=5242,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22065444 = fieldWeight in 5242, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5242)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In "Part 3. Successive Searching.'' where Spink is the primary author, after a review of the work on successive searching, a portion of the Texas generated data is reviewed for insights on how frequently successive searching occurred, the motivation for its occurrence, and any distinctive characteristics of the successive search pattern. Of 18 mediated searches, half requested a second search and a quarter a third search. All but one seeker reported a need to refine and enhance the previous results. Second searches while characterized as refinements included a significantly higher number of items retrieved and more search cycles. Third searches had the most cycles but less retrieved items than the second. Number of terms utilized did not change significantly and overlap was limited to about one in five terms between first and second searches. No overlap occurred between the second and third searches. Problem solving stage shifts did occur with 2 moving to a later stage after the first search, 5 remaining in the same stage and one reverting to a previous stage. Precision did not increase over successive searches, but partial relevant judgments decreased between the second and third search.

Type

a

0.0029294936 = product of:
  0.005858987 = sum of:
    0.005858987 = product of:
      0.011717974 = sum of:
        0.011717974 = weight(_text_:a in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011717974 = score(doc=967,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22065444 = fieldWeight in 967, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A user's single session with a Web search engine or information retrieval (IR) system may consist of seeking information on single or multiple topics, and switch between tasks or multitasking information behavior. Most Web search sessions consist of two queries of approximately two words. However, some Web search sessions consist of three or more queries. We present findings from two studies. First, a study of two-query search sessions on the AltaVista Web search engine, and second, a study of three or more query search sessions on the AltaVista Web search engine. We examine the degree of multitasking search and information task switching during these two sets of AltaVista Web search sessions. A sample of two-query and three or more query sessions were filtered from AltaVista transaction logs from 2002 and qualitatively analyzed. Sessions ranged in duration from less than a minute to a few hours. Findings include: (1) 81% of two-query sessions included multiple topics, (2) 91.3% of three or more query sessions included multiple topics, (3) there are a broad variety of topics in multitasking search sessions, and (4) three or more query sessions sometimes contained frequent topic changes. Multitasking is found to be a growing element in Web searching. This paper proposes an approach to interactive information retrieval (IR) contextually within a multitasking framework. The implications of our findings for Web design and further research are discussed.

Type

a

0.0028703054 = product of:
  0.005740611 = sum of:
    0.005740611 = product of:
      0.011481222 = sum of:
        0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 6949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011481222 = score(doc=6949,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 6949, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6949)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0028703054 = product of:
  0.005740611 = sum of:
    0.005740611 = product of:
      0.011481222 = sum of:
        0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 4426) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011481222 = score(doc=4426,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 4426, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4426)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Recent studies show that humans engage in multitasking information behaviors, often in libraries, as they seek and search for information on more than one information task. Multitasking information behaviors may consist of library search and use behaviors, or database or Web search sessions on multiple information tasks. However, few human information behavior models of seeking, searching or use, or library use models, include considerations of multitasking information behavior. This paper reports results from a case study exploring multitasking information behavior by an information seeker in a public library using diary, observation and interview data collection techniques. The information seeker sought information on four unrelated personal information tasks during two public library visits. Findings include a taxonomy of information behaviors; a sequential flowchart of the information seeker's complex and iterative processes, including multitasking information behavior, electronic searches, physical library searches, serendipitous browsing, and successive searches; and that the information seeker engaged in a process of 17 information task switches over two library visits. A model of information multitasking and information task switching is presented. Implications for library services and bibliographic instruction are also discussed.

Type

a

0.0028703054 = product of:
  0.005740611 = sum of:
    0.005740611 = product of:
      0.011481222 = sum of:
        0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 5240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011481222 = score(doc=5240,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 5240, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5240)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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.

Type

a

0.0028703054 = product of:
  0.005740611 = sum of:
    0.005740611 = product of:
      0.011481222 = sum of:
        0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 1035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011481222 = score(doc=1035,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 1035, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1035)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Search engines fail to make a clear distinction between items of varying relevance when presenting search results to users. Instead, they rely on the user of the system to estimate which items are relevant, partially relevant, or not relevant. The user of the system is given the task of distinguishing between documents that are relevant to different degrees. This process often hinders the accessibility of relevant or partially relevant documents, particularly when the results set is large and documents of varying relevance are scattered throughout the set. In this paper, we present a clustering scheme that groups documents within relevant, partially relevant, and not relevant regions for a given search. A clustering algorithm accomplishes the task of clustering documents based on relevance. The clusters were evaluated by end-users issuing categorical, interval, and descriptive relevance judgments for the documents returned from a search. The degree of overlap between users and the system for each of the clustered regions was measured to determine the overall effectiveness of the algorithm. This research showed that clustering documents on the Web by regions of relevance is highly necessary and quite feasible.

Type

a

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 910) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=910,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 910, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=910)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=384,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 384, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=384)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.0026849252 = product of:
  0.0053698504 = sum of:
    0.0053698504 = product of:
      0.010739701 = sum of:
        0.010739701 = weight(_text_:a in 5232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010739701 = score(doc=5232,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 5232, 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=5232)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In "Part 2. Uncertainty and Its Correlates,'' where Wilson is the primary author, after a review of uncertainty as a concept in information seeking and decision research, it is hypothesized that if the Kuhlthau problem solving stage model is appropriate the searchers will recognize the stage in which they currently are operating. Secondly to test Wilson's contention that operationalized uncertainty would be useful in characterizing users, it is hypothesized that uncertainty will decrease as the searcher proceeds through problem stages and after the completion of the search. A review of pre and post search interviews reveals that uncertainty can be operationalized, and that academic researchers have no difficulty with a stage model of the information seeking process. Uncertainty is unrelated to sex, age, or discipline, but is related to problem stage and domain knowledge. Both concepts appear robust.

Type

a

0.0026849252 = product of:
  0.0053698504 = sum of:
    0.0053698504 = product of:
      0.010739701 = sum of:
        0.010739701 = weight(_text_:a in 2091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010739701 = score(doc=2091,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 2091, 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=2091)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this paper, we define and present a comprehensive classification of user intent for Web searching. The classification consists of three hierarchical levels of informational, navigational, and transactional intent. After deriving attributes of each, we then developed a software application that automatically classified queries using a Web search engine log of over a million and a half queries submitted by several hundred thousand users. Our findings show that more than 80% of Web queries are informational in nature, with about 10% each being navigational and transactional. In order to validate the accuracy of our algorithm, we manually coded 400 queries and compared the results from this manual classification to the results determined by the automated method. This comparison showed that the automatic classification has an accuracy of 74%. Of the remaining 25% of the queries, the user intent is vague or multi-faceted, pointing to the need for probabilistic classification. We discuss how search engines can use knowledge of user intent to provide more targeted and relevant results in Web searching.

Type

a

0.0026742492 = product of:
  0.0053484985 = sum of:
    0.0053484985 = product of:
      0.010696997 = sum of:
        0.010696997 = weight(_text_:a in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010696997 = score(doc=600,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 600, 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=600)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Recent studies show that humans engage in multitasking behaviors as they seek and search information retrieval (IR) systems for information on more than one topic at the same time. For example, a Web search session by a single user may consist of searching on single topics or multitasking. Findings are presented from four separate studies of the prevalence of multitasking information seeking and searching by Web, IR system, and library users. Incidence of multitasking identified in the four different studies included: (1) users of the Excite Web search engine who completed a survey form, (2) Excite Web search engine users filtered from an Excite transaction log from 20 December 1999, (3) mediated on-line databases searches, and (4) academic library users. Findings include: (1) multitasking information seeking and searching is a common human behavior, (2) users may conduct information seeking and searching on related or unrelated topics, (3) Web or IR multitasking search sessions are longer than single topic sessions, (4) mean number of topics per Web search ranged of 1 to more than 10 topics with a mean of 2.11 topic changes per search session, and (4) many Web search topic changes were from hobbies to shopping and vice versa. A more complex model of human seeking and searching levels that incorporates multitasking information behaviors is presented, and a theoretical framework for human information coordinating behavior (HICB) is proposed. Multitasking information seeking and searching is developing as major research area that draws together IR and information seeking studies toward a focus on IR within the context of human information behavior. Implications for models of information seeking and searching, IR/Web systems design, and further research are discussed.

Type

a

0.0026742492 = product of:
  0.0053484985 = sum of:
    0.0053484985 = product of:
      0.010696997 = sum of:
        0.010696997 = weight(_text_:a in 216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010696997 = score(doc=216,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 216, 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=216)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The application of clustering to Web search engine technology is a novel approach that offers structure to the information deluge often faced by Web searchers. Clustering methods have been well studied in research labs; however, real user searching with clustering systems in operational Web environments is not well understood. This article reports on results from a transaction log analysis of Vivisimo.com, which is a Web meta-search engine that dynamically clusters users' search results. A transaction log analysis was conducted on 2-week's worth of data collected from March 28 to April 4 and April 25 to May 2, 2004, representing 100% of site traffic during these periods and 2,029,734 queries overall. The results show that the highest percentage of queries contained two terms. The highest percentage of search sessions contained one query and was less than 1 minute in duration. Almost half of user interactions with clusters consisted of displaying a cluster's result set, and a small percentage of interactions showed cluster tree expansion. Findings show that 11.1% of search sessions were multitasking searches, and there are a broad variety of search topics in multitasking search sessions. Other searching interactions and statistics on repeat users of the search engine are reported. These results provide insights into search characteristics with a cluster-based Web search engine and extend research into Web searching trends.

Type

a

0.0026742492 = product of:
  0.0053484985 = sum of:
    0.0053484985 = product of:
      0.010696997 = sum of:
        0.010696997 = weight(_text_:a in 1015) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010696997 = score(doc=1015,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 1015, 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=1015)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Web has become a worldwide source of information and a mainstream business tool. It is changing the way people conduct the daily business of their lives. As these changes are occurring, we need to understand what Web searching trends are emerging within the various global regions. What are the regional differences and trends in Web searching, if any? What is the effectiveness of Web search engines as providers of information? As part of a body of research studying these questions, we have analyzed two data sets collected from queries by mainly European users submitted to AlltheWeb.com on 6 February 2001 and 28 May 2002. AlltheWeb.com is a major and highly rated European search engine. Each data set contains approximately a million queries submitted by over 200,000 users and spans a 24-h period. This longitudinal benchmark study shows that European Web searching is evolving in certain directions. There was some decline in query length, with extremely simple queries. European search topics are broadening, with a notable percentage decline in sexual and pornographic searching. The majority of Web searchers view fewer than five Web documents, spending only seconds on a Web document. Approximately 50% of the Web documents viewed by these European users were topically relevant. We discuss the implications for Web information systems and information content providers.

Type

a

0.0025370158 = product of:
  0.0050740317 = sum of:
    0.0050740317 = product of:
      0.010148063 = sum of:
        0.010148063 = weight(_text_:a in 5586) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010148063 = score(doc=5586,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.19109234 = fieldWeight in 5586, 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=5586)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The dichotomous bipolar approach to relevance has produced an abundance of information retrieval (M) research. However, relevance studies that include consideration of users' partial relevance judgments are moving to a greater relevance clarity and congruity to impact the design of more effective [R systems. The study reported in this paper investigates the various regions of across a distribution of users' relevance judgments, including how these regions may be categorized, measured, and evaluated. An instrument was designed using four scales for collecting, measuring, and describing enduser relevance judgments. The instrument was administered to 21 end-users who conducted searches on their own information problems and made relevance judgments on a total of 1059 retrieved items. Findings include: (1) overlapping regions of relevance were found to impact the usefulness of precision ratios as a measure of IR system effectiveness, (2) both positive and negative levels of relevance are important to users as they make relevance judgments, (3) topicality was used more to reject rather than accept items as highly relevant, (4) utility was more used to judge items highly relevant, and (5) the nature of relevance judgment distribution suggested a new IR evaluation measure-median effect. Findings suggest that the middle region of a distribution of relevance judgments, also called "partial relevance," represents a key avenue for ongoing study. The findings provide implications for relevance theory, and the evaluation of IR systems

Type

a

0.0024857575 = product of:
  0.004971515 = sum of:
    0.004971515 = product of:
      0.00994303 = sum of:
        0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 4330) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00994303 = score(doc=4330,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 4330, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4330)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - During multitasking, humans handle multiple tasks through task switching or engage in multitasking information behaviors. For example, a user switches between seeking new kitchen information and medical information. Recent studies provide insights these complex multitasking human information behaviors (HIB). However, limited studies have examined the interplay between information and non-information tasks. Design/methodology/approach - The goal of the paper was to examine the interplay of information and non-information task behaviors. Findings - This paper explores and speculates on a new direction in HIB research. The nature of HIB as a multitasking activity including the interplay of information and non-information behavior tasks, and the relation between multitasking information behavior to cognitive style and individual differences, is discussed. A model of multitasking between information and non-information behavior tasks is proposed. Practical implications/limitations - Multitasking information behavior models should include the interplay of information and non-information tasks, and individual differences and cognitive styles. Originality/value - The paper is the first information science theoretical examination of the interplay between information and non-information tasks.

Type

a