Search (84 results, page 1 of 5)

0.042140376 = product of:
  0.105350934 = sum of:
    0.03399104 = product of:
      0.06798208 = sum of:
        0.06798208 = weight(_text_:problems in 2125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06798208 = score(doc=2125,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4514426 = fieldWeight in 2125, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2125)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.071359895 = product of:
      0.14271979 = sum of:
        0.14271979 = weight(_text_:exercises in 2125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14271979 = score(doc=2125,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25947425 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.11192 = idf(docFreq=97, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5500345 = fieldWeight in 2125, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.11192 = idf(docFreq=97, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2125)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Three different interfaces for online public access catalogues were evaluated using transaction logging as a methodology. In two cases exercises were set and run against each interface so that results could be critically evaluated to indicate areas of weakness. In all cases a random transaction log was derived and this was used to diagnose system problems and identify patterns of behaviour. Results showed that searches were often difficult to categorise, users employing different approaches to the same end. Users also were prepared to undertake sustained searching until something was retrieved; however they then frequently stopped. Search input problems are also identified and possible areas for further research suggested

0.02311211 = product of:
  0.057780277 = sum of:
    0.04542244 = product of:
      0.09084488 = sum of:
        0.09084488 = weight(_text_:problems in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09084488 = score(doc=2680,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.6032656 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0123578375 = product of:
      0.024715675 = sum of:
        0.024715675 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024715675 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2680, 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=2680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This study addresses the impact of domain expertise (i.e. of prior knowledge of the domain) on the performance and query strategies used by users while searching for information. Twenty-four experts (psychology students) and 24 non-experts (students from other disciplines) had to search for psychology information from the Universalis website in order to perform six information problems of varying complexity: two simple problems (the keywords required to complete the task were provided in the problem statement), two more difficult problems (the keywords required had to be inferred) and two impossible problems (no answer was provided by the website). The results showed that participants with prior knowledge in the domain (experts in psychology) performed better (i.e. reached more correct answers after shorter search times) than non-experts. This difference was stronger as the complexity of the problems increased. This study also showed that experts and non-experts displayed different query strategies. Experts reformulated the impossible problems more often than non-experts, because they produced new queries with psychology-related keywords. The participants rarely used thematic category tool and when they did so this did not enhance their performance.

Date

25. 1.2016 18:46:22

0.022432221 = product of:
  0.05608055 = sum of:
    0.02060168 = product of:
      0.04120336 = sum of:
        0.04120336 = weight(_text_:problems in 4995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04120336 = score(doc=4995,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.27361554 = fieldWeight in 4995, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4995)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.03547887 = product of:
      0.07095774 = sum of:
        0.07095774 = weight(_text_:etc in 4995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07095774 = score(doc=4995,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.35906604 = fieldWeight in 4995, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4995)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The author presents the results of additional analyses of shifts of focus in IR interaction. Results indicate that users and search intermediaries work toward search goals in nonlinear fashion. Twenty interactions between 20 different users and one of four different search intermediaries were examined. Analysis of discourse between the two parties during interactive information retrieval (IR) shows changes in topic occurs, on average, every seven utterances. These twenty interactions included some 9,858 utterances and 1,439 foci. Utterances are defined as any uninterrupted sound, statement, gesture, etc., made by a participant in the discourse dyad. These utterances are segmented by the researcher according to their intentional focus, i.e., the topic on which the conversation between the user and search intermediary focus until the focus changes (i.e., shifts of focus). In all but two of the 20 interactions, the search intermediary initiated a majority of shifts of focus. Six focus categories were observed. These were foci dealing with: documents; evaluation of search results; search strategies; IR system; topic of the search; and information about the user

0.018896578 = product of:
  0.047241446 = sum of:
    0.027468907 = product of:
      0.054937813 = sum of:
        0.054937813 = weight(_text_:problems in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054937813 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.36482072 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019772539 = product of:
      0.039545078 = sum of:
        0.039545078 = weight(_text_:22 in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039545078 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Reports on a dramatic shift from subject to periodical title searching at Colorado University Libraries. States possible reasons for the change, examines problems encountered by users with searching the periodical title index and suggests how this change in online catalogue searching may affect future catalogue design and bibliographic instruction

Date

29. 7.1998 10:57:22

0.016769426 = product of:
  0.08384713 = sum of:
    0.08384713 = sum of:
      0.05913145 = weight(_text_:etc in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05913145 = score(doc=297,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
            0.036484417 = queryNorm
          0.2992217 = fieldWeight in 297, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=297)
      0.024715675 = weight(_text_:22 in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024715675 = score(doc=297,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.036484417 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 297, 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=297)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In information needs, seeking and use (INSU) research, individuals have most commonly been perceived as users (e.g., Kuhlthau, 1991; Dervin & Nilan, 1986; Dervin, 1989; Belkin, 1980). The concept user originates from the user of libraries and other information services and information systems. Over the years the scope of the concept has become wider and it is nowadays often understood in the sense of seekers of information (e.g., Wilson, 1981; Marchionini, 1995) and users of information (e.g., Streatfield, 1983). Nevertheless, the concept has remained ambiguous by being on the one hand universal and on the other hand extremely specific. The purpose of this paper is to map and evaluate views on people whose information behaviour has been in one way or another the core of our research area. The goal is to shed some light on various relationships between the different aspects of doers in INSU studies. The paper is inspired by Dervin's (1997) analysis of context where she identified among other themes the nature of subject by contrasting a `transcendental individual' with a `decentered subject', and Talja's (1997) presentation about constituting `information' and `user' from the discourse analytic viewpoint as opposed to the cognitive viewpoint. Instead of the metatheoretical approach applied by Dervin and Talja, a more concrete approach is valid in the present analysis where no direct arguments for or against the underlying metatheories are itemised. The focus is on doers in INSU studies leaving other, even closely-related concepts (i.e., information, information seeking, knowledge etc.), outside the scope of the paper.

Date

22. 3.2002 9:55:52

0.016534507 = product of:
  0.04133627 = sum of:
    0.024035294 = product of:
      0.048070587 = sum of:
        0.048070587 = weight(_text_:problems in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048070587 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.31921813 = fieldWeight in 7914, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7914)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.017300973 = product of:
      0.034601945 = sum of:
        0.034601945 = weight(_text_:22 in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034601945 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7914, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7914)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The library of the Cité des Sciences et de l'industrie attracts 4.000 visitors daily of whom 25% consult the GEAC system OPAC. Describes a 1992 survey consisting of online questions followed by an interview. The questionnaires were adapted from ones used in the UK and utilised OLIVE (Online Interactive Validation and Evaluation). While difficulties arose from users' inconsistency in their replies and failures to answer questions, it has become clear that subject access is unsatisfactory, sometimes because of mistyping by the searcher but also because of the vocabulary problems and lack of guidance in search strategies

Source

International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 22(1993) no.4, S.68-71

0.014271979 = product of:
  0.071359895 = sum of:
    0.071359895 = product of:
      0.14271979 = sum of:
        0.14271979 = weight(_text_:exercises in 1421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14271979 = score(doc=1421,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25947425 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.11192 = idf(docFreq=97, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5500345 = fieldWeight in 1421, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.11192 = idf(docFreq=97, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1421)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Desicusses the user training programme of the Helsinki University of Technology Library in the light of an internordic monitoring project. In the project, the use of OPACs was evaluated by analyzing the transaction logs and it was concluded that end users do not exploit the various possibilities of OPACs. A large part of the material found in the collections in the library is not retrieved: misspellings, lack of truncation, inequate use of Boolean operators and wrong database choices lead to ineffective retrieval. Emphasis in the online catalogue training has been on the 'hands on' exercises and it appears that the training programme is not very effective in the area of subject searching. Presents reasons for this and discusses plans for the future development of the library user training programme

0.012233125 = product of:
  0.061165623 = sum of:
    0.061165623 = product of:
      0.12233125 = sum of:
        0.12233125 = weight(_text_:exercises in 2034) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12233125 = score(doc=2034,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25947425 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.11192 = idf(docFreq=97, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.47145814 = fieldWeight in 2034, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.11192 = idf(docFreq=97, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2034)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This longitudinal study examined the search behavior of 10 students as they completed assigned exercises for an online professional course in expert searching. The research objective was to identify, describe, and hypothesize about features of the behavior that are indicative of procedural knowledge gained during guided instruction. Log-data of search interaction were coded using a conceptual framework focused on components of search practice hypothesized to organize an expert searcher's attention during search. The coded data were analyzed using a measure of pointwise mutual information and state-transition analysis. Results of the study provide important insight for future investigation of domain-independent search expertise and for the design of systems that assist searchers in gaining expertise.

0.011810362 = product of:
  0.029525906 = sum of:
    0.017168067 = product of:
      0.034336135 = sum of:
        0.034336135 = weight(_text_:problems in 2117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034336135 = score(doc=2117,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.22801295 = fieldWeight in 2117, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2117)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0123578375 = product of:
      0.024715675 = sum of:
        0.024715675 = weight(_text_:22 in 2117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024715675 = score(doc=2117,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2117, 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=2117)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This paper presents an application of the model described in Part I to the evaluation of Web search engines by undergraduates. The study observed how 36 undergraduate used four major search engines to find information for their own individual problems and how they evaluated these engines based an actual interaction with the search engines. User evaluation was based an 16 performance measures representing five evaluation criteria: relevance, efficiency, utility, user satisfaction, and connectivity. Non-performance (user-related) measures were also applied. Each participant searched his/ her own topic an all four engines and provided satisfaction ratings for system features and interaction and reasons for satisfaction. Each also made relevance judgements of retrieved items in relation to his/her own information need and participated in post-search Interviews to provide reactions to the search results and overall performance. The study found significant differences in precision PR1 relative recall, user satisfaction with output display, time saving, value of search results, and overall performance among the four engines and also significant engine by discipline interactions an all these measures. In addition, the study found significant differences in user satisfaction with response time among four engines, and significant engine by discipline interaction in user satisfaction with search interface. None of the four search engines dominated in every aspect of the multidimensional evaluation. Content analysis of verbal data identified a number of user criteria and users evaluative comments based an these criteria. Results from both quantitative analysis and content analysis provide insight for system design and development, and useful feedback an strengths and weaknesses of search engines for system improvement

Date

24. 1.2004 18:27:22

0.010987563 = product of:
  0.054937813 = sum of:
    0.054937813 = product of:
      0.10987563 = sum of:
        0.10987563 = weight(_text_:problems in 342) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10987563 = score(doc=342,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.72964144 = fieldWeight in 342, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=342)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.009448289 = product of:
  0.023620723 = sum of:
    0.013734453 = product of:
      0.027468907 = sum of:
        0.027468907 = weight(_text_:problems in 286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027468907 = score(doc=286,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.18241036 = fieldWeight in 286, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=286)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=286,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 286, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=286)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This paper highlights some of the significant findings from author's PhD: "Factors affecting the end-use of electronic databases in public libraries." Public libraries have a wide range of different types of users who, unlike academic or special library users, are not necessarily information-trained (see Coles, 1998). Whereas the academic, special library user may have specific information needs that can be met by electronic sources, public library users do not necessarily have such specific information needs that can easily be identified and met. Most user surveys have tended to concentrate on the searching and retrieval aspect of information seeking behaviour, whereas this study's user survey focused more on how people perceived and related to Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). It was not how people searched a particular electronic source, in this case CD-ROM, that was of prime interest but rather whether or not people actually used them at all and the reasons why people did or did not use electronic media. There were several reasons the study looked at CD-ROM specifically. Firstly, CD-ROM is a well established technology, most people should be familiar with CD-ROM/multimedia. Secondly, CD-ROM was, at the start of the study, the only open access electronic media widely available in public libraries. As well as examining why public library users chose to use electronic sources, the paper looks at the types of CD-ROM databases used both in the library and in general Also examined are what sort of searches users carried out. Where appropriate some of the problems inherent in studying end-users in public libraries and the difficulty in getting reliable data, are discussed. Several methods were used to collect the data. I wished to avoid limiting research to a small sample of library sites, the aim was to be as broad in scope as possible. There were two main groups of people 1 wished to look at: non-users as well as CD-ROM users

Date

22. 3.2002 8:51:28

0.009448289 = product of:
  0.023620723 = sum of:
    0.013734453 = product of:
      0.027468907 = sum of:
        0.027468907 = weight(_text_:problems in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027468907 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.18241036 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.009886269 = product of:
      0.019772539 = sum of:
        0.019772539 = weight(_text_:22 in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019772539 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Previous empirical studies of searcher behaviour have drawn attention to a wide variety of factors that affect performance; for instance, the display of retrieved results can alter search strategies (Allen 1991, 1994), the information need type influences search behaviour, (Elkerton et al 1984, Marchionini 1995); while the task complexity, reflected in the information need can affect user's search behaviour (Large et al 1994). Furthermore, information source selection (Bassilli 1977), and the user's model of the system and domain impact on the search process (Michel 1994); while motivation (Solomon 1993, Jacobsen et al 1992) and the importance of the information need (Wendt 1969) also influence search duration and the effort a user will employ. Rouse and Rouse (1984) in a review of empirical studies, summarise a wide variety of variables that can effect searching behaviour, including payoff, costs of searching, resource available, amount of information sought, characteristics of the data and conflicts between documents. It appears that user behaviour is inconsistent in the search strategies adopted even for the same search need and system (Davidson 1977, Iivonen 1995). Theories of searcher behaviour have been proposed that provide explanations of aspects of end-user behaviour, such as the evolution of the user's information need and the problems of articulating a query, [Bates (1979, 1989), Markey and Atherton 1978], effective search strategies in browsing and goal directed searches [Marchionini 1995, Belkin (1987, 1993)], the linguistic problem of matching search terms with indexing terms or content of target documents through an expert intermediary (Ingwersen 1982) or cognitive aspects of IR (Kulthau 1984, Ingwersen 1996).

Date

22. 3.2002 9:54:13

0.009213353 = product of:
  0.04606676 = sum of:
    0.04606676 = product of:
      0.09213352 = sum of:
        0.09213352 = weight(_text_:problems in 2281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09213352 = score(doc=2281,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.61182296 = fieldWeight in 2281, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2281)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Research in user behavior on online catalogs is in its early stages, but preliminary findings suggest that users encounter many of the same problems identified in behavioral studies of other types of bibliographic retrieval systems. Much can be learned from comparing the results of user behavior studies on these two types of systems. Research on user problems with both the mechanical aspects and the conceptual aspects of system use is reviewed, with the conclusion that more similiratiy exists across types of systems in conceptual than in mechanical problems. Also discussed are potential sources of the problems, due either to individual characteristics or to system variables. A series of research questions is proposed and a number of potential interim solutions ae suggested for alleviating some of the problems encountered by users of information systems

0.009084488 = product of:
  0.04542244 = sum of:
    0.04542244 = product of:
      0.09084488 = sum of:
        0.09084488 = weight(_text_:problems in 6714) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09084488 = score(doc=6714,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.6032656 = fieldWeight in 6714, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6714)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In this paper, we report on the second part of an empirical study designed to observe how users interact with World Wide Web resources. Applying a holistic approach, the researches examine users' cognitive, affective, and physical behaviors during user-Web interaction in order to understand better the nature of information retrieval on the Web, the needs of Web users, and the problem-solving strategies Web users employ. From analyses and the participant verbalizations collected during monitored searches, the researchers developed a taxonomy of problem solving strategies. The coding scheme was developed based on a content analysis of the integrated process data. Information from triangulation follow-up with participants via anonymously completed questionnaires, the taxonomy, and analyses of search transcripts were collected to determine 1) what problems users encountered during the interaction and how users solved these problems; and 2) which problem-solving strategies Web users considered and selected for finding factual information. The focus of the coding was on the participants' cognitive, affective, and physical behaviors in response to the components of the problems encountered, which included problems of the following types: Web interfaces, users' mental models, and the Web information sources. Searching behavior and problem-solving patterns are described and interpreted within the relevant situational context and the problems users encountered are identified and analyzed. Both the problems users faced and their problem-solving approaches endeavored evidence a strong reliance on mental models of the features available on sites, the location of those features, and other interface design concepts

0.0069203894 = product of:
  0.034601945 = sum of:
    0.034601945 = product of:
      0.06920389 = sum of:
        0.06920389 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06920389 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7585, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7585)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 1.2000 17:52:11

0.0069203894 = product of:
  0.034601945 = sum of:
    0.034601945 = product of:
      0.06920389 = sum of:
        0.06920389 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06920389 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3924, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3924)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

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

0.006867227 = product of:
  0.034336135 = sum of:
    0.034336135 = product of:
      0.06867227 = sum of:
        0.06867227 = weight(_text_:problems in 1627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06867227 = score(doc=1627,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4560259 = fieldWeight in 1627, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1627)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

A transaction log analysis of searches for serials looks at how users go about their searching (by title, subject, or keyword) and what problems they encounter, and then examines the results of those searches. Explores ways in which serials records could be improved to enhance retrieval

0.0067982078 = product of:
  0.03399104 = sum of:
    0.03399104 = product of:
      0.06798208 = sum of:
        0.06798208 = weight(_text_:problems in 489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06798208 = score(doc=489,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4514426 = fieldWeight in 489, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=489)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This article reports on a transaction log study of the BIS online catalog at North Caroline State University. Transaction logs were used to gather data on failure rates, usage patterns, and causes of problems. The result show that 54 percent of the searches analyzed failed. Subject searching was the most often used but least successful search. Problems experienced by patrons searching BIS were often due to a misunderstanding of how to operate the system, typographical errors, and the use of uncontrolled vocabulary. As in earlier studies, transaction logs analysis proved to be a fruitful and practical methodology for studying users' searching behaviour in an online catalog.

0.0067982078 = product of:
  0.03399104 = sum of:
    0.03399104 = product of:
      0.06798208 = sum of:
        0.06798208 = weight(_text_:problems in 2283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06798208 = score(doc=2283,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4514426 = fieldWeight in 2283, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2283)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This article reports on a low-cost study of the transaction log of an online public access catalog at an academic library. The three goals of the study were to determine failure rates, to study usage patterns, and to investigate problable causes of patron problems when using the OPAC. The study found that failure rates (defined as those searches that produced zero hits) of approximately 40% are common, and that usage patterns and failure rates do not vary greatly over time or from terminal to terminal, but that the distribution of probable causes of user problems varies significantly from terminal to terminal

0.0067982078 = product of:
  0.03399104 = sum of:
    0.03399104 = product of:
      0.06798208 = sum of:
        0.06798208 = weight(_text_:problems in 2395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06798208 = score(doc=2395,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4514426 = fieldWeight in 2395, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2395)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

A research project at Middlesex Polytechnic is examning the problems of subject access in an OPAC. A series of user studies have been carried out which examined students' use of existing catalogue facilities, which in turn led to the experimental evaluation of various interface designs for an online catalogue. The experiments were primarily concerned with the effect of the following variables on the speed and accuracy of retrieval of specific items, the use of colour, the speed of presentation of information, the amount of information on a screen, the paging and scrolling of information, the position of a sought item within a list