Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Toms, E.G."
  1. O'Brien, H.L.; Toms, E.G.: What is user engagement? : a conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology (2008) 0.07 
    0.0739315 = product of:
  0.147863 = sum of:
    0.147863 = sum of:
      0.113947935 = weight(_text_:perception in 1721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.113947935 = score(doc=1721,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05006422 = queryNorm
          0.35459045 = fieldWeight in 1721, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1721)
      0.033915058 = weight(_text_:22 in 1721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033915058 = score(doc=1721,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05006422 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1721, 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=1721)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The purpose of this article is to critically deconstruct the term engagement as it applies to peoples' experiences with technology. Through an extensive, critical multidisciplinary literature review and exploratory study of users of Web searching, online shopping, Webcasting, and gaming applications, we conceptually and operationally defined engagement. Building on past research, we conducted semistructured interviews with the users of four applications to explore their perception of being engaged with the technology. Results indicate that engagement is a process comprised of four distinct stages: point of engagement, period of sustained engagement, disengagement, and reengagement. Furthermore, the process is characterized by attributes of engagement that pertain to the user, the system, and user-system interaction. We also found evidence of the factors that contribute to nonengagement. Emerging from this research is a definition of engagement - a term not defined consistently in past work - as a quality of user experience characterized by attributes of challenge, positive affect, endurability, aesthetic and sensory appeal, attention, feedback, variety/novelty, interactivity, and perceived user control. This exploratory work provides the foundation for future work to test the conceptual model in various application areas, and to develop methods to measure engaging user experiences.
    Date
    21. 3.2008 13:39:22
  2. McCay-Peet, L.; Toms, E.G.: Investigating serendipity : how it unfolds and what may influence it (2015) 0.04 
    0.040286683 = product of:
  0.080573365 = sum of:
    0.080573365 = product of:
      0.16114673 = sum of:
        0.16114673 = weight(_text_:perception in 2044) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16114673 = score(doc=2044,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.50146663 = fieldWeight in 2044, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2044)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Serendipity is not an easy word to define. Its meaning has been stretched to apply to experiences ranging from the mundane to the exceptional. Serendipity, however, is consistently associated with unexpected and positive personal, scholarly, scientific, organizational, and societal events and discoveries. Diverse serendipitous experiences share a conceptual space; therefore, what lessons can we draw from an exploration of how serendipity unfolds and what may influence it? This article describes an investigation of work-related serendipity. Twelve professionals and academics from a variety of fields were interviewed. The core of the semi-structured interviews focused on participants' own work-related experiences that could be recalled and discussed in depth. This research validated and augmented prior research while consolidating previous models of serendipity into a single model of the process of serendipity, consisting of: Trigger, Connection, Follow-up, and Valuable Outcome, and an Unexpected Thread that runs through 1 or more of the first 4 elements. Together, the elements influence the Perception of Serendipity. Furthermore, this research identified what factors relating to the individual and their environment may facilitate the main elements of serendipity and further influence its perception.
  3. Bartlett, J.C.; Toms, E.G.: Developing a protocol for bioinformatics analysis : an integrated information behavior and task analysis approach (2005) 0.01 
    0.008478764 = product of:
  0.016957529 = sum of:
    0.016957529 = product of:
      0.033915058 = sum of:
        0.033915058 = weight(_text_:22 in 5256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033915058 = score(doc=5256,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5256, 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=5256)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 14:28:55
  4. Dufour, C.; Bartlett, J.C.; Toms, E.G.: Understanding how webcasts are used as sources of information (2011) 0.01 
    0.008478764 = product of:
  0.016957529 = sum of:
    0.016957529 = product of:
      0.033915058 = sum of:
        0.033915058 = weight(_text_:22 in 4195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033915058 = score(doc=4195,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4195, 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=4195)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 1.2011 14:16:14
  5. Wildemuth, B.; Freund, L.; Toms, E.G.: Untangling search task complexity and difficulty in the context of interactive information retrieval studies (2014) 0.01 
    0.008478764 = product of:
  0.016957529 = sum of:
    0.016957529 = product of:
      0.033915058 = sum of:
        0.033915058 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033915058 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1786, 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=1786)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    6. 4.2015 19:31:22
  6. Toms, E.G.: What motivates the browser? (1999) 0.01 
    0.006783011 = product of:
  0.013566022 = sum of:
    0.013566022 = product of:
      0.027132044 = sum of:
        0.027132044 = weight(_text_:22 in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027132044 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 292, 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=292)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    22. 3.2002 9:44:47

Authors

Years

Themes