Search (34 results, page 1 of 2)

0.049879275 = product of:
  0.1330114 = sum of:
    0.08983659 = weight(_text_:use in 3670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08983659 = score(doc=3670,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.710464 = fieldWeight in 3670, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3670)
    0.025901893 = weight(_text_:of in 3670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025901893 = score(doc=3670,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.40111488 = fieldWeight in 3670, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3670)
    0.017272921 = product of:
      0.034545843 = sum of:
        0.034545843 = weight(_text_:on in 3670) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034545843 = score(doc=3670,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.38036036 = fieldWeight in 3670, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3670)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Presents an overview of research on information use. The majority of use and user studies are surveys which focus on the consulting of different information sources and channels. In most studies, however, the substantial issues of information use are omitted. Discusses conceptual and terminological questions of information use and knowledge utilization. No consensus on the definition of these concepts exists among researchers because they can have no direct access to individual processes of information use. Examines the contributions made to information use theory by Brenda Dervin and Robert S. Taylor. Reviews the categories of uses specified in Dervin's sense making theory and discusses Taylor's concept of information use environments. Considers some methodological questions concerning the challenges of empirical research on information use

Footnote

Research on information use in the field of information studies

0.041577607 = product of:
  0.11087362 = sum of:
    0.07652599 = weight(_text_:use in 304) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07652599 = score(doc=304,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.60519844 = fieldWeight in 304, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=304)
    0.021862645 = weight(_text_:of in 304) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021862645 = score(doc=304,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 304, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=304)
    0.012484977 = product of:
      0.024969954 = sum of:
        0.024969954 = weight(_text_:on in 304) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024969954 = score(doc=304,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 304, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=304)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Presents a study of information seeking behaviour and information use viewed from the social constructionist viewpoint. Introduces social constructionism and presents a social constructionist critique of previous research into information use. Reviews generally the nature of discursive action and its analysis and focuses on the principle issue of information use as a discursive action

Source

Information seeking in context: Proceedings of an International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, 14-16 August 1996, Tampere, Finland. Ed.: P. Vakkari u.a

0.037673492 = product of:
  0.100462645 = sum of:
    0.067910075 = weight(_text_:use in 564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067910075 = score(doc=564,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.5370603 = fieldWeight in 564, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=564)
    0.023188837 = weight(_text_:of in 564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023188837 = score(doc=564,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 564, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=564)
    0.009363732 = product of:
      0.018727465 = sum of:
        0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018727465 = score(doc=564,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 564, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=564)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this article is to elaborate the picture of the processes of information use by comparing conceptualizations provided by the constructivist approach and the human information processing approach. Design/methodology/approach - The article is a conceptual analysis of major articles characterizing information use and human information processing in the fields of information studies and consumer research. Findings - It is found that both research approaches share the assumption that interpreting, relating and comparing qualities of things is fundamental to the information use process. Research limitations/implications - The picture of information use processes is based on the comparison of two research approaches only. Originality/value - Compared to the numerous studies on information needs and seeking, the questions of information use have remained under-researched. The study elaborates the conceptual picture of information use processes by identifying similarities and differences between two major research approaches.

Source

Journal of documentation. 65(2009) no.2, S.187-207

0.03759998 = product of:
  0.10026661 = sum of:
    0.062872514 = weight(_text_:use in 5120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.062872514 = score(doc=5120,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.49722123 = fieldWeight in 5120, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5120)
    0.02592591 = weight(_text_:of in 5120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02592591 = score(doc=5120,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.4014868 = fieldWeight in 5120, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5120)
    0.011468184 = product of:
      0.022936368 = sum of:
        0.022936368 = weight(_text_:on in 5120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022936368 = score(doc=5120,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 5120, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5120)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

The conceptual issues of information use are discussed by reviewing the major ideas of sense-making methodology developed by Brenda Dervin. Sense-making methodology approaches the phenomena of information use by drawing on the metaphor of gap-bridging. The nature of this metaphor is explored by utilizing the ideas of metaphor analysis suggested by Lakoff and Johnson. First, the source domain of the metaphor is characterized by utilizing the graphical illustrations of sense-making metaphors. Second, the target domain of the metaphor is analyzed by scrutinizing Dervin's key writings on information seeking and use. The metaphor of gap-bridging does not suggest a substantive conception of information use; the metaphor gives methodological and heuristic guidance to posit contextual questions as to how people interpret information to make sense of it. Specifically, these questions focus on the ways in which cognitive, affective, and other elements useful for the sense-making process are constructed and shaped to bridge the gap. Ultimately, the key question of information use studies is how people design information in context.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.8, S.1116-1125

0.036810808 = product of:
  0.09816216 = sum of:
    0.062872514 = weight(_text_:use in 1075) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.062872514 = score(doc=1075,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.49722123 = fieldWeight in 1075, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1075)
    0.02592591 = weight(_text_:of in 1075) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02592591 = score(doc=1075,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.4014868 = fieldWeight in 1075, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1075)
    0.009363732 = product of:
      0.018727465 = sum of:
        0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 1075) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018727465 = score(doc=1075,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 1075, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1075)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

The author reviews the major approaches and central findings of empirical research use studies. 6 major approaches were identified by cross-tabulating 2 criteria: the major context of network use (job-related vs. non-work) and the social level of variables (individual vs. group level). Examples of all types of studies are presented. Themajority of studies can be classified among the surveys focusing on frequencies of service use. From these studies, analyses of job-related are the most advanced both theoretically and methodologically while studies focused on non-work context of use are less established in this sense. The qualitative research settings seem to gain more popularity, thus making the use studies more balanced methodologically. The strengths and weaknesses of the research approaches are assessed and conclusions are drawn concerning the development of more context sensitive analyses of network uses

Source

Journal of documentation. 54(1998) no.3, S.332-351

0.035447054 = product of:
  0.09452547 = sum of:
    0.05927678 = weight(_text_:use in 2401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05927678 = score(doc=2401,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.4687847 = fieldWeight in 2401, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2401)
    0.019957775 = weight(_text_:of in 2401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019957775 = score(doc=2401,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 2401, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2401)
    0.015290912 = product of:
      0.030581824 = sum of:
        0.030581824 = weight(_text_:on in 2401) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030581824 = score(doc=2401,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.33671528 = fieldWeight in 2401, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2401)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Reviews the sense-making theory which is based on constructivist assumptions on human information seeking and use. Focuses on the uses epistemic and practical interests of the theory, discussing them in relation to the interests of the traditional intermediary-centered approach. Sense-making theory is a programmatic research effort suggesting user-centered ideas for the conceptualization of the information seeking and use. Its contribution to LIS research is critique to the limitations of the traditional intermediary-centred approach

0.034293465 = product of:
  0.06858693 = sum of:
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 5498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=5498,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 5498, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5498)
    0.02087234 = weight(_text_:of in 5498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02087234 = score(doc=5498,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 5498, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5498)
    0.012337802 = product of:
      0.024675604 = sum of:
        0.024675604 = weight(_text_:on in 5498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024675604 = score(doc=5498,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.271686 = fieldWeight in 5498, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5498)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.013987125 = product of:
      0.02797425 = sum of:
        0.02797425 = weight(_text_:22 in 5498) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02797425 = score(doc=5498,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5498, 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=5498)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(4/8)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the creation of a holistic picture of information behavior by examining the connections between information seeking and sharing. Design/methodology/approach Conceptual analysis is used to focus on the ways in which the researchers have modeled the interplay of information seeking and sharing. The study draws on conceptual analysis of 27 key studies examining the above issue, with a focus on the scrutiny of six major models for information behavior. Findings Researchers have employed three main approaches to model the relationships between information seeking and sharing. The indirect approach conceptualizes information seeking and sharing as discrete activities connected by an intermediating factor, for example, information need. The sequential approach assumes that information seeking precedes information sharing. From the viewpoint of the interactive approach, information seeking and sharing appear as mutually related activities shaping each other iteratively or in a cyclical manner. The interactive approach provides the most sophisticated research perspective on the relationships of information seeking and sharing and contributes to holistic understanding of human information behavior. Research limitations/implications As the study focuses on information seeking and sharing, no attention is devoted to other activities constitutive of information behavior, for example, information use. Originality/value The study pioneers by providing an in-depth analysis of the connections of information seeking and information sharing.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 71(2019) no.4, S.518-534

0.032249913 = product of:
  0.08599977 = sum of:
    0.05659173 = weight(_text_:use in 283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05659173 = score(doc=283,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.44755027 = fieldWeight in 283, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=283)
    0.021604925 = weight(_text_:of in 283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021604925 = score(doc=283,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 283, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=283)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=283,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 283, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=283)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

As a result of the Internet, electronic networks occupy a more visible place in everyday life. Until the early nineties, the use of electronic networks was limited to a rather small number of people working in enterprises and universities. Since then, the networks have become more accessible for other citizens. Currently at least 60-70 million people all over the world are estimated to use the Internet (Gaines et al., 1997: 990). In 2000, the number of WWW users alone is expected to reach 160 million (Aldridge & Darwood 1997: 283). The rapid growth of network use has given rise to a lot of research needs. For example, what are the main purposes of network use and to what extent may the Internet replace other channels in information seeking? Thus far, the utilization of networks has been mainly surveyed in the USA but, in recent years issues of use have also attracted increasing attention in Western Europe. This study is a continuation of a research project focusing on the ways in which citizens seek information in the context of everyday life (see Savolainen 1995). An attempt is made to analyze how citizens utilize the electronic networks, primarily for non-work purposes. This paper communicates part of an empirical study; a detailed report is available in Finnish (Savolainen 1998b).

Source

Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, 13-15 August 1998, Sheffield, UK. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen

0.028121147 = product of:
  0.07498973 = sum of:
    0.044457585 = weight(_text_:use in 3780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044457585 = score(doc=3780,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.35158852 = fieldWeight in 3780, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3780)
    0.021168415 = weight(_text_:of in 3780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021168415 = score(doc=3780,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 3780, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3780)
    0.009363732 = product of:
      0.018727465 = sum of:
        0.018727465 = weight(_text_:on in 3780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018727465 = score(doc=3780,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 3780, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3780)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Information seeking may be analyzed in two major contexts: job-related and nonwork. The present entry concentrates on nonwork information seeking, more properly called everyday life information seeking (ELIS). Typically, ELIS studies discuss the ways in which people access and use various information sources to meet information needs in areas such as health, consumption, and leisure. The entry specifies the concept of ELIS and characterizes the major ELIS models. They include the Sense-Making approach (Dervin), the Small world theory (Chatman), the ecological model of ELIS (Williamson), ELIS in the context of way of life (Savolainen), the model of information practices (McKenzie), and the concept of information grounds (Fisher). ELIS practices tend to draw on the habitualized use of a limited number of sources which have been found useful in previous use contexts. Since the late 1990s, the Internet has increasingly affected the ELIS practices by providing easily accessible sources. Even though the popularity of the networked sources has grown rapidly they will complement, rather than replace, more traditional sources and channels.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.027727902 = product of:
  0.073941074 = sum of:
    0.04277933 = weight(_text_:use in 1789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04277933 = score(doc=1789,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3383162 = fieldWeight in 1789, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1789)
    0.021604925 = weight(_text_:of in 1789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021604925 = score(doc=1789,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 1789, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1789)
    0.00955682 = product of:
      0.01911364 = sum of:
        0.01911364 = weight(_text_:on in 1789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01911364 = score(doc=1789,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.21044704 = fieldWeight in 1789, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1789)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to elaborate the conceptual picture of the relationships between the affective and cognitive factors in information seeking and use. Design/methodology/approach - Conceptual analysis focusing on the ways in which the affective and cognitive factors and their interplay are approached in the Information Search Process model developed by Carol Kuhlthau, and the Social-Biological Information Technology model elaborated by Diane Nahl. Findings - Kuhlthau's model approaches the cognitive factors (thoughts) and affective factors (feelings) and affective-cognitive factors (mood) as integral constituents of the six-stage information search process. Thoughts determine the valence of feelings (positive or negative), while mood opens or closes the range of possibilities in a search. Nahl's taxonomic model defines the affective and cognitive factors as components of a biologically determined process serving the ends of adaptation to information ecology. The interplay of the above factors is conceptualized by focusing on their mutual roles in the cognitive and affective appraisal of information. Research limitations/implications - The findings are based on the comparison of two models only. Originality/value - So far, information scientists have largely ignored the study of the interplay between affective and cognitive factors in information seeking and use. The findings indicate that the examination of these factors together rather than separately holds a good potential to elaborate the holistic picture of information seeking and use.

Source

Journal of documentation. 71(2015) no.1, S.175-197

0.026526293 = product of:
  0.07073678 = sum of:
    0.042349376 = weight(_text_:use in 719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042349376 = score(doc=719,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.33491597 = fieldWeight in 719, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=719)
    0.017463053 = weight(_text_:of in 719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017463053 = score(doc=719,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 719, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=719)
    0.010924355 = product of:
      0.02184871 = sum of:
        0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02184871 = score(doc=719,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 719, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=719)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Issues of becoming an Internet user primarily in non-work contexts are discussed. The author reviews individual, social and economic factors motivating network use. Main findings of an empirical study based on the interviews of 23 Finns in 1997 are analysed. In addition, comparisons are made with the findings of the Consumer Research Project (1996-98), conducted in Finland. The main motivating factors leading to network use were the requirements of work and study; also making everyday transactions easier, for example by home banking, was seen as important. The network connections were also acquired for keeping in contact with others and for hobbies, whereas entertainment purposes were not valued.

0.024779404 = product of:
  0.06607841 = sum of:
    0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 3162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030249555 = score(doc=3162,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 3162, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3162)
    0.02231347 = weight(_text_:of in 3162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02231347 = score(doc=3162,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 3162, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3162)
    0.013515383 = product of:
      0.027030766 = sum of:
        0.027030766 = weight(_text_:on in 3162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027030766 = score(doc=3162,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.29761705 = fieldWeight in 3162, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3162)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

This article elaborates the picture of information use from the perspective of interpreting informational cues about the attributes of entities. It is assumed that such activity draws on cognitive mechanisms that are employed as the constituents of diverse interpretation approaches to informational cues. The empirical data of the study were gathered by means of think aloud method from 16 prospective homebuyers in 2008. The participants interpreted informational cues available in announcements published in a printed housing listing issue and a Web-based information system serving the needs of prospective homebuyers. The data were examined by means of qualitative content analysis. By drawing on the findings of Zhang and her associates, the study revealed 7 cognitive mechanisms: identification of key attributes, specification, evaluation, comparison by similarity, comparison by differentiation, explanation, and conclusion. Three major approaches employed in the interpetation of informational cues were identified. The descriptive-evaluative approach draws on the identification and evaluation of individual attributes of an entity. The comparative approach is more sophisticated because it is based on the evaluation of the attributes by their perceived similarity or differentiation. Finally, the explanatory approach draws on the identification of attributes with causal potential.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.11, S.2244-2254

0.023873175 = product of:
  0.0636618 = sum of:
    0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 4467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025667597 = score(doc=4467,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 4467, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4467)
    0.023188837 = weight(_text_:of in 4467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023188837 = score(doc=4467,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 4467, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4467)
    0.014805362 = product of:
      0.029610723 = sum of:
        0.029610723 = weight(_text_:on in 4467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029610723 = score(doc=4467,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.32602316 = fieldWeight in 4467, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4467)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

The author reflects the conceptual and practical questions of network competence in the context of information seeking. Network competence is seen as one of the information-related competences and is defined as the mastery of four major areas: knowledge of information resources available on the Internet, skilled use of the ICT tools to access information, judgment of the relevance of information, and communication. Drawing on the ideas of the social cognitive theory developed by Albert Bandura, a model of network competence is introduced in order to discuss network competence "in action". In the model, network competence is put in practical context by relating five major factors: network competence, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, affective factors such as anxiety, and experiences received from information seeking on the Internet. Particular attention is devoted to the connections between network competence and self-efficacy which denote a person's judgment of his or her ability to organize and execute action, such as finding information on the Web.

Source

Journal of documentation. 58(2002) no.2, S.211-226

0.02264126 = product of:
  0.060376693 = sum of:
    0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4412) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029222867 = score(doc=4412,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 4412, 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=4412)
    0.02342914 = weight(_text_:of in 4412) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02342914 = score(doc=4412,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.36282203 = fieldWeight in 4412, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4412)
    0.007724685 = product of:
      0.01544937 = sum of:
        0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 4412) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01544937 = score(doc=4412,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 4412, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4412)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Purpose - Describes the basic premises of three metatheories that represent important or emerging perspectives on information seeking, retrieval and knowledge formation in information science: constructivism, collectivism, and constructionism. Design/methodology/approach - Presents a literature-based conceptual analysis. Pinpoints the differences between the positions in their conceptions of language and the nature and origin of knowledge. Findings - Each of the three metatheories addresses and solves specific types of research questions and design problems. The metatheories thus complement one another. Each of the three metatheories encourages and constitutes a distinctive type of research and learning. Originality/value - Outlines each metatheory's specific fields of application.

Source

Journal of documentation. 61(2005) no.1, S.79-101

0.022613809 = product of:
  0.06030349 = sum of:
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 4046) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=4046,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 4046, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4046)
    0.02431554 = weight(_text_:of in 4046) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02431554 = score(doc=4046,freq=38.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 4046, product of:
          6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
            38.0 = termFreq=38.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4046)
    0.014598285 = product of:
      0.02919657 = sum of:
        0.02919657 = weight(_text_:on in 4046) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02919657 = score(doc=4046,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.3214632 = fieldWeight in 4046, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4046)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to elaborate the picture of strategies and tactics for information seeking and searching by focusing on the heuristic elements of such strategies and tactics. Design/methodology/approach A conceptual analysis of a sample of 31 pertinent investigations was conducted to find out how researchers have approached heuristics in the above context since the 1970s. To achieve this, the study draws on the ideas produced within the research programmes on Heuristics and Biases, and Fast and Frugal Heuristics. Findings Researchers have approached the heuristic elements in three major ways. First, these elements are defined as general level constituents of browsing strategies in particular. Second, heuristics are approached as search tips. Third, there are examples of conceptualizations of individual heuristics. Familiarity heuristic suggests that people tend to prefer sources that have worked well in similar situations in the past. Recognition heuristic draws on an all-or-none distinction of the information objects, based on cues such as information scent. Finally, representativeness heuristic is based on recalling similar instances of events or objects and judging their typicality in terms of genres, for example. Research limitations/implications As the study focuses on three heuristics only, the findings cannot be generalized to describe the use of all heuristic elements of strategies and tactics for information seeking and searching. Originality/value The study pioneers by providing an in-depth analysis of the ways in which the heuristic elements are conceptualized in the context of information seeking and searching. The findings contribute to the elaboration of the conceptual issues of information behavior research.

Source

Journal of documentation. 73(2017) no.6, S.1322-1342

0.0217776 = product of:
  0.058073603 = sum of:
    0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020873476 = score(doc=3361,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 3361, 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=3361)
    0.026164865 = weight(_text_:of in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026164865 = score(doc=3361,freq=44.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.40518725 = fieldWeight in 3361, product of:
          6.6332498 = tf(freq=44.0), with freq of:
            44.0 = termFreq=44.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3361)
    0.0110352645 = product of:
      0.022070529 = sum of:
        0.022070529 = weight(_text_:on in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022070529 = score(doc=3361,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 3361, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3361)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to elaborate the picture of strategies for information searching and seeking by reviewing the conceptualizations on this topic in the field of library and information science (LIS). Design/methodology/approach The study draws on Henry Mintzberg's idea of strategy as plan and strategy as pattern in a stream of actions. Conceptual analysis of 57 LIS investigations was conducted to find out how researchers have approached the above aspects in the characterizations of information search and seeking strategies. Findings In the conceptualizations of information search and information seeking strategies, the aspect of strategy as plan is explicated most clearly in text-book approaches describing the steps of rational web searching. Most conceptualizations focus on the aspect of strategy as pattern in a stream of actions. This approach places the main emphasis on realized strategies, either deliberate or emergent. Deliberate strategies indicate how information search or information seeking processes were oriented by intentions that existed previously. Emergent strategies indicate how patterns in information seeking and seeking developed in the absence of intentions, or despite them. Research limitations/implications The conceptualizations of the shifts in information seeking and searching strategies were excluded from the study. Similarly, conceptualizations of information search or information retrieval tactics were not examined. Originality/value The study pioneers by providing an in-depth analysis of the ways in which the key aspects of strategy are conceptualized in the classifications and typologies of information seeking and searching strategies. The findings contribute to the elaboration of the conceptual space of information behaviour research.

Source

Journal of documentation. 72(2016) no.6, S.1154-1180

0.020590853 = product of:
  0.05490894 = sum of:
    0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3029) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020873476 = score(doc=3029,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 3029, 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=3029)
    0.023000197 = weight(_text_:of in 3029) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023000197 = score(doc=3029,freq=34.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.35617945 = fieldWeight in 3029, product of:
          5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
            34.0 = termFreq=34.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3029)
    0.0110352645 = product of:
      0.022070529 = sum of:
        0.022070529 = weight(_text_:on in 3029) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022070529 = score(doc=3029,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 3029, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3029)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to elaborate the picture of the nature of integrated models for information behaviour from the perspective of conceptual growth in this field of study. Design/methodology/approach - Conceptual analysis focusing on the ways in which the researchers have developed integrated models. The study concentrates on seven key models proposed by Bates, Choo and associates, Godbold, Robson and Robinson, and Wilson. Findings - Researchers have employed four main approaches to develop integrated models. First, such frameworks are based on the juxtaposition of individual models. Second, integrated models are built by cross-tabulating the components of diverse models. Third, such models are constructed by relating similar components of individual models. Finally, integrated models are built by incorporating components taken from diverse frameworks. The integrated models have contributed to conceptual growth in three major ways: first, by integrating formerly separate parts of knowledge; second, by generalizing and explaining lower abstraction-level knowledge through higher level constructs; and third, by expanding knowledge by identifying new characteristics of the object of study. Research limitations/implications - The findings are based on the comparison of seven models only. The integrated frameworks of information retrieval were excluded from the study. Originality/value - The study pioneers by providing an in-depth analysis the nature of integrated models for information behaviour. The findings contribute to the identification of the key factors of information behaviour.

Source

Journal of documentation. 72(2016) no.4, S.648-673

0.019822419 = product of:
  0.052859783 = sum of:
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 3620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=3620,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 3620, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3620)
    0.023667008 = weight(_text_:of in 3620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023667008 = score(doc=3620,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.36650562 = fieldWeight in 3620, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3620)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 3620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=3620,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 3620, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3620)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to elaborate how source preference criteria are defined in the context of everyday projects that require the seeking of problem-specific information. More specifically, to find out how information seekers explain their preference criteria by characterizing the perceived strengths and weaknesses of diverse sources. Design/methodology/approach - The approach takes the form of qualitative content analysis of empirical data gathered by semi-structured interviews with 16 prospective home buyers in 2008. The source preference criteria were elicited by making use of the construct of information source horizon. Findings - Networked sources were favoured most strongly, followed by printed media, human sources and organizational sources. Content of information was the primary source preference criterion. Availability of information was a fairly important criterion, while user characteristics, usability of information and situational factors were fairly marginal in this regard. In the definition of the preference criteria, more emphasis was placed on the perceived strengths than weaknesses of sources. Positive qualities such as "provides updated information" were referred to particularly while judging the relevance of the networked sources. Negative qualities like "outdated information" were primarily associated with printed media and organizational sources. Research limitations/implications - The study is exploratory, drawing on a relatively small sample recruited through a web-based service. Thus, the findings cannot be generalized to prospective home buyers. Practical implications - Prospective home buyers tend to favour web-based information sources and services. They should provide the customers with detailed information about the property, including photos. Originality/value - The paper specifies the picture of user-defined relevance judgment in the context of everyday life information seeking.

Source

Journal of documentation. 66(2010) no.1, S.70-92

0.019365054 = product of:
  0.051640145 = sum of:
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 2034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=2034,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 2034, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2034)
    0.0167351 = weight(_text_:of in 2034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0167351 = score(doc=2034,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 2034, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2034)
    0.013515383 = product of:
      0.027030766 = sum of:
        0.027030766 = weight(_text_:on in 2034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027030766 = score(doc=2034,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.29761705 = fieldWeight in 2034, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2034)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

The study focuses on the ways in which people define their source preferences in the context of seeking problem-specific information for non-work purposes. The conceptual framework draws on two major concepts, that is, information source horizon and information pathways. The former denotes the ways information sources are mapped in preference order in an imaginary field, while information pathways refers to the sequences in which sources placed on the information source horizon are actually used. The empirical part of the study draws on semi-structured interviews with 18 individuals active in environmental issues. Human sources and the Internet were preferred most strongly in seeking for problem-based information. The major source preferences were content of information, and availability and accessibility. Usability of information sources and user characteristics were mentioned less frequently as preference criteria. Typically, information pathways consisted of the use of 3-4 sources. On average, human and networked sources were favored in the early phases of information seeking. Printed media such as magazines and organizational sources were often used to complement information received from human sources and the Internet. However, the source preferences varied considerably, depending on the requirements of the problem at hand.

0.019314842 = product of:
  0.051506247 = sum of:
    0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 4477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021389665 = score(doc=4477,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 4477, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4477)
    0.02231347 = weight(_text_:of in 4477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02231347 = score(doc=4477,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041294612 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 4477, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4477)
    0.007803111 = product of:
      0.015606222 = sum of:
        0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 4477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015606222 = score(doc=4477,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041294612 = queryNorm
            0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 4477, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4477)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

This exploratory study contributes to research on relevance assessment by specifying criteria that are used in the judgment of information quality and credibility in Internet discussion forums. To this end, 4,739 messages posted to 160 Finnish discussion threads were analyzed. Of the messages, 20.5% contained explicit judgments of the quality of information and credibility in other messages. In the judgments, the forum participants employed both positive criteria such as validity of information and negative criteria such as dishonesty in argumentation. In the evaluation of the quality of the message's information content, the most frequently used criteria pertained to the usefulness, correctness, and specificity of information. In the judgment of information credibility, the main criteria included the reputation, expertise, and honesty of the author of the message. Since Internet discussion forums tend to emphasize the role of disputational discourse questioning rather than accepting the views presented by others, mainly negative criteria were used in the judgments. The generality of our claims is limited because we chose forums that focused on sensitive and value-laden topics; future work could explore credibility and quality judgment in other forums and forumlike venues such as question and answer sites as well as exploring how quality and credibility judgments interact with other aspects of forum use.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.7, S.1243-1256