Search (249 results, page 1 of 13)

0.0068155187 = product of:
  0.027262075 = sum of:
    0.027262075 = weight(_text_:information in 4474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027262075 = score(doc=4474,freq=42.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.44440612 = fieldWeight in 4474, product of:
          6.4807405 = tf(freq=42.0), with freq of:
            42.0 = termFreq=42.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4474)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article proposes a theory of information need for information retrieval (IR). Information need traditionally denotes the start state for someone seeking information, which includes information search using an IR system. There are two perspectives on information need. The dominant, computer science perspective is that the user needs to find an answer to a well-defined question which is easy for the user to formulate into a query to the system. Ironically, information science's best known model of information need (Taylor, 1968) deems it to be a "black box"-unknowable and nonspecifiable by the user in a query to the information system. Information science has instead devoted itself to studying eight adjacent or surrogate concepts (information seeking, search and use; problem, problematic situation and task; sense making and evolutionary adaptation/information foraging). Based on an analysis of these eight adjacent/surrogate concepts, we create six testable propositions for a theory of information need. The central assumption of the theory is that while computer science sees IR as an information- or answer-finding system, focused on the user finding an answer, an information science or user-oriented theory of information need envisages a knowledge formulation/acquisition system.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.7, S.1216-1231

Theme

Information

0.0067306077 = product of:
  0.02692243 = sum of:
    0.02692243 = weight(_text_:information in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02692243 = score(doc=701,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Annual review of information science and technology. 42(2008), S.xxx-xxx

0.0066778176 = product of:
  0.02671127 = sum of:
    0.02671127 = weight(_text_:information in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02671127 = score(doc=281,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.4354273 = fieldWeight in 281, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=281)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This study grew out of a need for better research based understanding of information seeking and use in a specific context. Several researchers in library and information studies (LIS) pointed out the predominance of research on information needs and information seeking and expressed a need for the study of information use (i.a. Kuhlthau 1993; Vakkari 1997; Wilson 1981). The role of context for information seeking behaviour has been stressed (i.a. Dervin 1997; Wilson 1981, 1994). The complex process of information seeking and use in learning contexts needs further exploration, according to i.a. Kuhlthau (1993). My research project investigated how students used information and what they learnt from the information they retrieved and used for an assignment. The aim of the project was to study information seeking through an explorative investigation of the interaction between information seeking and use and learning outcomes.

Source

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

0.0066778176 = product of:
  0.02671127 = sum of:
    0.02671127 = weight(_text_:information in 991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02671127 = score(doc=991,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.4354273 = fieldWeight in 991, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=991)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Multitasking is the human ability to handle the demands of multiple tasks. Multitasking behavior involves the ordering of multiple tasks and switching between tasks. People often multitask when using information retrieval (IR) technologies as they seek information on more than one information problem over single or multiple search episodes. However, limited studies have examined how people order their information problems, especially during their Web search engine interaction. The aim of our exploratory study was to investigate assigned information problem ordering by forty (40) study participants engaged in Web search. Findings suggest that assigned information problem ordering was influenced by the following factors, including personal interest, problem knowledge, perceived level of information available on the Web, ease of finding information, level of importance and seeking information on information problems in order from general to specific. Personal interest and problem knowledge were the major factors during assigned information problem ordering. Implications of the findings and further research are discussed. The relationship between information problem ordering and gratification theory is an important area for further exploration.

Source

Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.5, S.1366-1378

0.0065844175 = product of:
  0.02633767 = sum of:
    0.02633767 = weight(_text_:information in 4611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02633767 = score(doc=4611,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.42933714 = fieldWeight in 4611, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4611)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper presents an outline of models of information seeking and other aspects of information behaviour, showing the relationship between communication and information behaviour in general with information seeking and information searching in information retrieval systems. It is suggested that these models address issues at various levels of information behaviour and that they can be related by envisaging a 'nesting' of models. It is also suggested that, within both information seeking research and information searching research, alternative models address similar issues in related ways and that the models are complementary rather than conflicting. Finally, an alternative, problem-solving model is presented, which, it is suggested, provides a basis for relating the models in appropriate research strategies.

0.0063099447 = product of:
  0.025239779 = sum of:
    0.025239779 = weight(_text_:information in 4915) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025239779 = score(doc=4915,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.41144013 = fieldWeight in 4915, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4915)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

For millennia humans have sought, organized, and used information as they learned and evolved patterns of human information behaviors to resolve their human problems and survive. However, despite the current focus an living in an "information age," we have a limited evolutionary understanding of human information behavior. In this article the authors examine the current three interdisciplinary approaches to conceptualizing how humans have sought information including (a) the everyday life information seeking-sense-making approach, (b) the information foraging approach, and (c) the problem-solution perspective an information seeking approach. In addition, due to the lack of clarity regarding the rote of information use in information behavior, a fourth information approach is provided based an a theory of information use. The use theory proposed starts from an evolutionary psychology notion that humans are able to adapt to their environment and survive because of our modular cognitive architecture. Finally, the authors begin the process of conceptualizing these diverse approaches, and the various aspects or elements of these approaches, within an integrated model with consideration of information use. An initial integrated model of these different approaches with information use is proposed.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.1, S.25-35

Theme

Information

0.006295907 = product of:
  0.025183627 = sum of:
    0.025183627 = weight(_text_:information in 3760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025183627 = score(doc=3760,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.41052482 = fieldWeight in 3760, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3760)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

"Information behavior" is the currently preferred term used to describe the many ways in which human beings interact with information, in particular, the ways in which people seek and utilize information. The broad history of research on information-seeking behavior over the last 50-60 years is reviewed, major landmarks are identified, and current directions in research are discussed.

Source

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

Theme

Information

0.0062465263 = product of:
  0.024986105 = sum of:
    0.024986105 = weight(_text_:information in 3265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024986105 = score(doc=3265,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.40730494 = fieldWeight in 3265, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3265)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Considers what elicitation or requests for information search intermediaries make of users with information requests during an information retrieval interaction - including prior to and during an information retrieval interaction - and for what purpose. Reports a study of elicitations during 40 mediated information retrieval interactions. Identifies a total of 1.557 search intermediary elicitations within 15 purpose categories. The elicitation purposes of search intermediaries included requests for information on search terms and strategies, database selection, search procedures, system's outputs and relevance of retrieved items, and users' knowledge and previous information seeking. Investigates the transition sequences from 1 type of search intermediary elicitation to another. Compares these findings with results from a study of end user questions

Source

Information processing and management. 34(1998) nos.2/3, S.257-273

0.006182458 = product of:
  0.024729831 = sum of:
    0.024729831 = weight(_text_:information in 3450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024729831 = score(doc=3450,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 3450, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3450)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Most information systems share a common assumption: information seeking is discrete. Such an assumption neither reflects real-life information seeking processes nor conforms to the perspective of phenomenology, "life is a journey constituted by continuous acquisition of knowledge." Thus, this study develops and validates a theoretical model that explains successive search experience for essentially the same information problem. The proposed model is called Multiple Information Seeking Episodes (MISE), which consists of four dimensions: problematic situation, information problem, information seeking process, episodes. Eight modes of multiple information seeking episodes are identified and specified with properties of the four dimensions of MISE. The results partially validate MISE by finding that the original MISE model is highly accurate, but less sufficient in characterizing successive searches; all factors in the MISE model are empirically confirmed, but new factors are identified as weIl. The revised MISE model is shifted from the user-centered to the interaction-centered perspective, taking into account factors of searcher, system, search activity, search context, information attainment, and information use activities.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.4, S.393-415

0.0059490725 = product of:
  0.02379629 = sum of:
    0.02379629 = weight(_text_:information in 4577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02379629 = score(doc=4577,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.38790947 = fieldWeight in 4577, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4577)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

To better understand how individuals and groups derive satisfaction from information, it is important to identify the information source preferences they apply in information seeking and decision making. Four informal propositions drove the structure and underlying logic of this study, forming a preliminary outline of a theory of information source preference profiles and their influence an information satisfaction. This study employed Social Judgment Analysis (SJA) to identify the information judgment preferences held by professional groups for six selected information sources: word of mouth, expert oral advice, Internet, print news, nonfiction books, and radio/television news. The research was designed as an hypotheses-generating exploratory study employing a purposive sample (n = 90) and generated four empirically supported, testable hypotheses about user satisfaction with information sources. The SJA judgment functions revealed the influences of volume and polarity (i.e., positive versus negative information) an information satisfaction. By advancing the understanding of how information source preferences can be identified empirically and their influence an information satisfaction, this research reflects a first, small step toward understanding "satisficing." Satisficing behaviors result in early termination of information search processes when individuals, facing incomplete information, are sufficiently satisfied to assume risks and execute decisions.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.9, S.879-904

0.0059192525 = product of:
  0.02367701 = sum of:
    0.02367701 = weight(_text_:information in 4288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02367701 = score(doc=4288,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.38596505 = fieldWeight in 4288, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4288)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The rationale for using information systems is to find information that helps us in our daily activities, be they tasks or interests. Systems are expected to support us in searching for and identifying useful information. Although the activities and tasks performed by humans generate information needs and searching, they have attracted little attention in studies of information searching. Such studies have concentrated an search tasks rather than the activities that trigger them. It is obvious that our understanding of information searching is only partial, if we are not able to connect aspects of searching to the related task. The expected contribution of information to the task is reflected in relevance assessments of the information items found, and in the search tactics and use of the system in general. Taking the task into account seems to be a necessary condition for understanding and explaining information searching, and, by extension, for effective systems design.

Source

Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.413-464

0.0059192525 = product of:
  0.02367701 = sum of:
    0.02367701 = weight(_text_:information in 4891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02367701 = score(doc=4891,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.38596505 = fieldWeight in 4891, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4891)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper proposes a conceptual framework for creative information seeking drawing upon Weisberg's argument that creativity exists in everyone, and mapping the creative process described in the holistic model of creativity to the information seeking activities identified in the behavioural model of information seeking. Design/methodology/approach - Using scenarios of information seeking behaviour, mappings between the creative process and information seeking activities were refined and six stages for creative information seeking were proposed. Scenarios were also used to provide theoretical justifications for stages in creative information seeking. Findings - Evidence gathered from the scenarios seemed to indicate that the type of information seeking task may have an impact on the extent to which an information seeker exhibits all stages in the framework. This is on-going research. Part II of this paper aims to conduct empirical studies and gather evidence to verify the framework and examine this observation in more detail. Originality/value - Proposes a framework for creative information seeking.

0.0059192525 = product of:
  0.02367701 = sum of:
    0.02367701 = weight(_text_:information in 1320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02367701 = score(doc=1320,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.38596505 = fieldWeight in 1320, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1320)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

User studies provide libraries with invaluable insight into their users' information needs and behaviors, allowing them to develop services that correspond to these needs. This insight has become even more important for libraries since the advent of the Internet. The Internet has brought about a development of information technologies and electronic information sources that have had a great impact on both the ways users search for information and the ways libraries manage information. Although humanists represent an important group of users for academic libraries, research studies into their information-seeking behavior since the advent of the Internet have been quite scarce (Ellis & Oldman, 2005) in the past decade. This study presents updated research on a group of humanists, Jewish studies scholars living in Israel, as information users in the digital age based on two categories: (a) the use of formal and informal information channels, and (b) the use of information technologies and their impact on humanistic research.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.14, S.2269-2279

0.0059192525 = product of:
  0.02367701 = sum of:
    0.02367701 = weight(_text_:information in 4138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02367701 = score(doc=4138,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.38596505 = fieldWeight in 4138, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4138)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Previous studies have found that both (a) the characteristics (e.g., quality and accessibility) and (b) the types of sources (e.g., relational and nonrelational sources) influence information source selection. Different from earlier studies that have prioritized one source attribute over the other, this research uses information need as a contingency factor to examine information seekers' simultaneous consideration of different attributes. An empirical test from 149 employees' evaluations of eight information sources revealed that (a) low-and high-information-need individuals favored information source quality over accessibility while medium-information-need individuals favored accessibility over quality; and (b) individuals are more likely to choose relational over nonrelational sources as information need increases.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.1, S.133-145

0.0058892816 = product of:
  0.023557127 = sum of:
    0.023557127 = weight(_text_:information in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023557127 = score(doc=2088,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 35(1999) no.6, S.727-750

0.0058892816 = product of:
  0.023557127 = sum of:
    0.023557127 = weight(_text_:information in 6785) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023557127 = score(doc=6785,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 6785, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6785)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

My original intention in this Keynote Paper was to talk about models of information behaviour, and I shall do that to some extent. However, both Carol Kuhlthau and Amanda Spink address this general conceptual level of research into information-seeking behaviour and I thought it would more appropriate to present my current research.

Content

Enthält Grafik des Schalen-Modells: Information searching behaviour < Information seeking behaviour < Information behaviour

Source

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

0.0058892816 = product of:
  0.023557127 = sum of:
    0.023557127 = weight(_text_:information in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023557127 = score(doc=3924,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 3924, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3924)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Library and information science research. 22(2000) no.4, S.371-382

0.0057601654 = product of:
  0.023040662 = sum of:
    0.023040662 = weight(_text_:information in 299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023040662 = score(doc=299,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.37559175 = fieldWeight in 299, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=299)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Research in information science aims to comprehend the facilitation of access to information for supporting purposeful action. The major themes to be addressed have been how information is organized for access, how it is retrieved from storage, and how it is sought out and used for various purposes. Two central research areas in the field are information retrieval (IR) and information seeking (IS) (Vakkari & Rochester, 1998). Although intuitively the fields seem to be overlapping, their research communities have been active in their own enclosures. Few researchers have visited the neighboring side. However, there are researchers (Bates, 1989; Belkin & Vickery, 1986; Belkin, 1993; Ellis, 1989; Ingwersen, 1992, 1996; Järvelin 1987; Kuhlthau, 1993; Marchionini, 1995; Saracevic & Kantor, 1988) who have stressed the need to connect results from both research traditions. IR can be seen as a part of a broader process of information seeking. By IS is understood a process of searching, obtaining and using information for a purpose (e.g., form a solution for a task) when a person does not have sufficient prior knowledge. By 1R is understood the use of an information system for obtaining relevant information for a purpose (e.g., a task). This implies that information systems are a specific means among other sources and channels for obtaining information.

Source

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

0.005643786 = product of:
  0.022575144 = sum of:
    0.022575144 = weight(_text_:information in 4861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022575144 = score(doc=4861,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.36800325 = fieldWeight in 4861, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4861)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Research has demonstrated that people engage in multiple types of information-seeking strategies when using IR systems; unfortunately, current IR systems are designed to support only one type of information-seeking strategy: specifying queries. The limitation of existing IR systems calls for the need to investigate how to support users as they shift from one information-seeking strategy to another in their attemps to achieve their information-seeking goals. The focus of this study is on the in-depth investigation of shifts in the mico-level of user goals - 'interactive intention' and information-seeking strategies that users engage in within an information-seeking episode. 40 cases of library uses were selected from 4 different types of libraries for this study. The qualitative and quantitative analysis of the data identifies 4 types of shifts of interactive intentions and 3 types of information-seeking strategies. The results of the study are discussed to understand the nature of the interactive IR process, and to further suggest their implications for the design of adaptive IR systems

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(2000) no.9, S.841-857

0.005643786 = product of:
  0.022575144 = sum of:
    0.022575144 = weight(_text_:information in 5120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022575144 = score(doc=5120,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.36800325 = fieldWeight in 5120, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5120)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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

Theme

Information