Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × author_ss:"Toms, E.G."
  1. Toms, E.G.: Information interaction : providing a framework for information architcture (2002) 0.01 
    0.008243278 = product of:
  0.03297311 = sum of:
    0.03297311 = weight(_text_:information in 1013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03297311 = score(doc=1013,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.5375032 = fieldWeight in 1013, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1013)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Information interaction is the process that people use in interacting with the content of an information system. Information architecture is a blueprint and navigational aid to the content of information-rich systems. As such information architecture performs an important supporting rote in information interactivity. This article elaborates an a model of information interactivity that crosses the "no-man's land" between user and computer articulating a model that includes user, content and system, illustrating the context for information architecture.
    Footnote
    Teil eines Themenschwerpunktes Information architecture
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.10, S.855-862
  2. Toms, E.G.; Duff, W.: "I spent 1 1/2 hours sifting through one large box ..." : diaries as information behavior of the archives user: lessons learned (2002) 0.00 
    0.0033653039 = product of:
  0.013461215 = sum of:
    0.013461215 = weight(_text_:information in 4761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013461215 = score(doc=4761,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 4761, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4761)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 53(2002) no.14, S.1232-1238
  3. Bartlett, J.C.; Toms, E.G.: Developing a protocol for bioinformatics analysis : an integrated information behavior and task analysis approach (2005) 0.00 
    0.0033256328 = product of:
  0.013302531 = sum of:
    0.013302531 = weight(_text_:information in 5256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013302531 = score(doc=5256,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 5256, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5256)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The purpose of this research is to capture, understand, and model the process used by bioinformatics analysts when facing a specific scientific problem. Integrating information behavior with task analysis, we interviewed 20 bioinformatics experts about the process they follow to conduct a typical bioinformatics analysis - a functional analysis of a gene, and then used a task analysis approach to model that process. We found that each expert followed a unique process in using bioinformatics resources, but had significant similarities with their peers. We synthesized these unique processes into a standard research protocol, from which we developed a procedural model that describes the process of conducting a functional analysis of a gene. The model protocol consists of a series of 16 individual steps, each of which specifies detail for the type of analysis, how and why it is conducted, the tools used, the data input and output, and the interpretation of the results. The linking of information behavior and task analysis research is a novel approach, as it provides a rich high-level view of information behavior while providing a detailed analysis at the task level. In this article we concentrate on the latter.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.5, S.469-482
  4. Toms, E.G.; Freund, L.; Li, C.: WilRE: the Web Interactive information retrieval experimentation system prototype (2004) 0.00 
    0.003091229 = product of:
  0.012364916 = sum of:
    0.012364916 = weight(_text_:information in 2534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012364916 = score(doc=2534,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2534, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2534)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    We introduce WiIRE, a prototype system for conducting interactive information retrieval (IIR) experiments via the Internet. We conceived Wi IRE to increase validity while streamlining procedures and adding efficiencies to the conduct of IIR experiments. The system incorporates password-controlled access, online questionnaires, study instructions and tutorials, conditional interface assignment, and conditional query assignment as well as provision for data collection. As an initial evaluation, we used WiIRE inhouse to conduct a Web-based IIR experiment using an external search engine with customized search interfaces and the TREC 11 Interactive Track search queries. Our evaluation of the prototype indicated significant cost efficiencies in the conduct of IIR studies, and additionally had some novel findings about the human perspective: about half participants would have preferred some personal contact with the researcher, and participants spent a significantly decreasing amount of time on tasks over the course of a session.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 40(2004) no.4, S.655-676
  5. Toms, E.G.: User-centered design of information systems (2009) 0.00 
    0.0029446408 = product of:
  0.011778563 = sum of:
    0.011778563 = weight(_text_:information in 3900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011778563 = score(doc=3900,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 3900, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3900)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  6. Toms, E.G.; O'Brien, H.L.: Understanding the information and communication technology needs of the e-humanist (2008) 0.00 
    0.0025760243 = product of:
  0.010304097 = sum of:
    0.010304097 = weight(_text_:information in 1731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010304097 = score(doc=1731,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1731, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1731)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to understand the needs of humanists with respect to information and communication technology (ICT) in order to prescribe the design of an e-humanist's workbench. Design/methodology/approach - A web-based survey comprising over 60 questions gathered the following data from 169 humanists: profile of the humanist, use of ICT in teaching, e-texts, text analysis tools, access to and use of primary and secondary sources, and use of collaboration and communication tools. Findings - Humanists conduct varied forms of research and use multiple techniques. They rely on the availability of inexpensive, quality-controlled e-texts for their research. The existence of primary sources in digital form influences the type of research conducted. They are unaware of existing tools for conducting text analyses, but expressed a need for better tools. Search engines have replaced the library catalogue as the key access tool for sources. Research continues to be solitary with little collaboration among scholars. Research limitations/implications - The results are based on a self-selected sample of humanists who responded to a web-based survey. Future research needs to examine the work of the scholar at a more detailed level, preferably through observation and/or interviewing. Practical implications - The findings support a five-part framework that could serve as the basis for the design of an e-humanist's workbench. Originality/value - The paper examines the needs of the humanist, founded on an integration of information science research and humanities computing for a more comprehensive understanding of the humanist at work.
  7. Toms, E.G.; Taves, A.R.: Measuring user perceptions of Web site reputation (2004) 0.00 
    0.0021033147 = product of:
  0.008413259 = sum of:
    0.008413259 = weight(_text_:information in 2565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008413259 = score(doc=2565,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 2565, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2565)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    In this study, we compare a search tool, TOPIC, with three other widely used tools that retrieve information from the Web: AltaVista, Google, and Lycos. These tools use different techniques for outputting and ranking Web sites: external link structure (TOPIC and Google) and semantic content analysis (AltaVista and Lycos). TOPIC purports to output, and highly rank within its hit list, reputable Web sites for searched topics. In this study, 80 participants reviewed the output (i.e., highly ranked sites) from each tool and assessed the quality of retrieved sites. The 4800 individual assessments of 240 sites that represent 12 topics indicated that Google tends to identify and highly rank significantly more reputable Web sites than TOPIC, which, in turn, outputs more than AltaVista and Lycos, but this was not consistent from topic to topic. Metrics derived from reputation research were used in the assessment and a factor analysis was employed to identify a key factor, which we call 'repute'. The results of this research include insight into the factors that Web users consider in formulating perceptions of Web site reputation, and insight into which search tools are outputting reputable sites for Web users. Our findings, we believe, have implications for Web users and suggest the need for future research to assess the relationship between Web page characteristics and their perceived reputation.
    Source
    Information processing and management. 40(2004) no.2, S.291-317
  8. O'Brien, H.L.; Toms, E.G.: What is user engagement? : a conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology (2008) 0.00 
    0.0014872681 = product of:
  0.0059490725 = sum of:
    0.0059490725 = weight(_text_:information in 1721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0059490725 = score(doc=1721,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1721, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1721)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.6, S.938-955

Authors

Themes