Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0044618044 = product of:
  0.017847218 = sum of:
    0.017847218 = weight(_text_:information in 4082) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017847218 = score(doc=4082,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.2909321 = fieldWeight in 4082, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4082)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Aims to better understand the relationship between relevance and user satisfaction, the 2 predominant aspects of user based performance in information systems. Unconfounds relevance and user satisfaction assessments of system performance at the retrieved item level. To minimize the idiosyncrasies of any one system, a generalized, naturalistic information system was employed in this study. Respondents completed sensemaking timeline questionnaires in which they described a recent need they had for geographic information. Retrieved documents from the generalized system consisted of the responses users obtained while resolving their information needs. Respondents directly provided process, product, cost benefit, and overall satisfaction assessments with the generalized geographic systems. Relevance judgements of retrieved items were obtained through content analysis from sensemaking questionnaires as a secondary observation technique. The content analysis provided relevance values on both 5 category and 2 category scales. Results indicate that relevance has strong relationships with process, product and overall user satisfaction measures while relevance and cost benefit satisfaction measures have no significant relationship. This analysis also indicates that neither relevance nor user satisfaction subsumes the other concept, and that understanding the proper units of analysis for these measures helps resolve the paradox of the management information system and information science literature not informing aech other concerning user based information system performance measures

Source

Information processing and management. 32(1996) no.1, S.89-104

0.004371658 = product of:
  0.017486632 = sum of:
    0.017486632 = weight(_text_:information in 2678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017486632 = score(doc=2678,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.2850541 = fieldWeight in 2678, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2678)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Presents brief accounts of the user based performance measure of relevance and the information system-based performance measure of competence. Relevance and competence are shown to be complex notions that have not been studied cojointly. Reports the results of an experiment that used a geographical information system to illustrate how collecting and analyzing data simultaneously from both system and user views of performance can suggest improvements. The user's view was formed by respondents describing how user needs were met by a geographic information system. The system view of the user was described by the accuracy and time on tasks of subjects as they read and answered questions concerning text and maps. This research generated 2 hypotheses: relevance varies directly with levels of competence and experience, and relevance varies directly with the difficulty of the task. Findings also indicate that through a merged, no fault model, information science can contribute to constructing a holistic view of the system performance by illustrating relationships among factors such as competence and relevance, and by exposing new factors such as expectation

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 46(1995) no.6, S.446-460