Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.016338257 = product of:
  0.09802954 = sum of:
    0.09802954 = weight(_text_:network in 2768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09802954 = score(doc=2768,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2012564 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045191888 = queryNorm
        0.48708782 = fieldWeight in 2768, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2768)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Presents the selected findings of a research project based on the British Library Network Online Public Access Catalogue (NOPAC) carried out in the department of information and library management at the University of Northumbria in Newcastle, UK over the academic year 1994/95. Data was collected by means of interviews with NOPAC users especially on use made of the NOPAC and on attitudes towards the NOPAC's interface. Discusses the views of users as they relate to: display features; mode of interaction; help/user assistance; extra features available; and usability. Lists important points which emerged from the survey concerning the NOPAC service

0.004081918 = product of:
  0.024491508 = sum of:
    0.024491508 = product of:
      0.048983015 = sum of:
        0.048983015 = weight(_text_:22 in 5299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048983015 = score(doc=5299,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1582543 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045191888 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5299, 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=5299)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

22. 7.2006 18:17:44

0.0027721736 = product of:
  0.016633041 = sum of:
    0.016633041 = product of:
      0.033266082 = sum of:
        0.033266082 = weight(_text_:resources in 6714) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033266082 = score(doc=6714,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16496566 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045191888 = queryNorm
            0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 6714, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6714)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

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

0.0027721736 = product of:
  0.016633041 = sum of:
    0.016633041 = product of:
      0.033266082 = sum of:
        0.033266082 = weight(_text_:resources in 87) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033266082 = score(doc=87,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16496566 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045191888 = queryNorm
            0.20165458 = fieldWeight in 87, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=87)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In the summer of 2008 all University of North Carolina libraries switched from a traditional library catalog interface supporting text-based searching (TextOnly) to a text and facet-based interface (TextFacet) to improve users' search experiences. This study seeks to understand the differences between these two interfaces and how they affect the search experience of the novice user. In this study, 40 participants were asked to search for resources using both interfaces. Their search times and accuracy were measured across three types of search tasks (known, partially known, and exploratory). After completing the searches, they were asked a series of questions about their experiences. The data were analyzed in order to identify strengths and weaknesses in both search interfaces. Thirty-six out of 40 participants preferred the TextFacet interface to the TextOnly interface. Using three dependent variables-time, accuracy, and rating-the two interfaces were compared and interactions were tested with the three task types. Search times for the TextFacet were shorter and participants preferred the TextFacet search interface over the TextOnly search interface. Performances across the three task types were different in terms of search time. The partially known and exploratory task types showed similar distributions for rating and accuracy. These distributions were distinctly different from the known task type. The results of this study may assist libraries in developing improved library catalog search interfaces that utilize facets as well as text searching.