Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Suchmaschinen"
  • × theme_ss:"OPAC"
  1. Markey, K.: Twenty-five years of end-user searching : part 1: research findings (2007) 0.01
    0.013613109 = product of:
      0.027226217 = sum of:
        0.027226217 = product of:
          0.054452434 = sum of:
            0.054452434 = weight(_text_:systems in 5163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054452434 = score(doc=5163,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.339541 = fieldWeight in 5163, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5163)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This is the first part of a two-part article that reviews 25 years of published research findings on end-user searching in online information retrieval (IR) systems. In Part 1 (Markey, 2007), the author seeks to answer the following questions: What characterizes the queries that end users submit to online IR systems? What search features do people use? What features would enable them to improve on the retrievals they have in hand? What features are hardly ever used? What do end users do in response to the system's retrievals? Are end users satisfied with their online searches? Summarizing searches of online IR systems by the search features people use everyday makes information retrieval appear to be a very simplistic one-stop event. In Part 2, the author examines current models of the information retrieval process, demonstrating that information retrieval is much more complex and involves changes in cognition, feelings, and/or events during the information seeking process. She poses a host of new research questions that will further our understanding about end-user searching of online IR systems.
  2. Markey, K.: Twenty-five years of end-user searching : part 2: future research directions (2007) 0.01
    0.013613109 = product of:
      0.027226217 = sum of:
        0.027226217 = product of:
          0.054452434 = sum of:
            0.054452434 = weight(_text_:systems in 443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054452434 = score(doc=443,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.339541 = fieldWeight in 443, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=443)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This is the second part of a two-part article that examines 25 years of published research findings on end-user searching of online information retrieval (IR) systems. In Part 1, it was learned that people enter a few short search statements into online IR systems. Their searches do not resemble the systematic approach of expert searchers who use the full range of IR-system functionality. Part 2 picks up the discussion of research findings about end-user searching in the context of current information retrieval models. These models demonstrate that information retrieval is a complex event, involving changes in cognition, feelings, and/or events during the information seeking process. The author challenges IR researchers to design new studies of end-user searching, collecting data not only on system-feature use, but on multiple search sessions and controlling for variables such as domain knowledge expertise and expert system knowledge. Because future IR systems designers are likely to improve the functionality of online IR systems in response to answers to the new research questions posed here, the author concludes with advice to these designers about retaining the simplicity of online IR system interfaces.
  3. Rieh, S.Y.; Kim, Y.-M.; Markey, K.: Amount of invested mental effort (AIME) in online searching (2012) 0.01
    0.009625921 = product of:
      0.019251842 = sum of:
        0.019251842 = product of:
          0.038503684 = sum of:
            0.038503684 = weight(_text_:systems in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038503684 = score(doc=2726,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.24009174 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This research investigates how people's perceptions of information retrieval (IR) systems, their perceptions of search tasks, and their perceptions of self-efficacy influence the amount of invested mental effort (AIME) they put into using two different IR systems: a Web search engine and a library system. It also explores the impact of mental effort on an end user's search experience. To assess AIME in online searching, two experiments were conducted using these methods: Experiment 1 relied on self-reports and Experiment 2 employed the dual-task technique. In both experiments, data were collected through search transaction logs, a pre-search background questionnaire, a post-search questionnaire and an interview. Important findings are these: (1) subjects invested greater mental effort searching a library system than searching the Web; (2) subjects put little effort into Web searching because of their high sense of self-efficacy in their searching ability and their perception of the easiness of the Web; (3) subjects did not recognize that putting mental effort into searching was something needed to improve the search results; and (4) data collected from multiple sources proved to be effective for assessing mental effort in online searching.
  4. Jansen, B.J.; Pooch , U.: ¬A review of Web searching studies and a framework for future research (2001) 0.01
    0.009529176 = product of:
      0.019058352 = sum of:
        0.019058352 = product of:
          0.038116705 = sum of:
            0.038116705 = weight(_text_:systems in 5186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038116705 = score(doc=5186,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 5186, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5186)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Jansen and Pooch review three major search engine studies and compare them to three traditional search system studies and three OPAC search studies, to determine if user search characteristics differ. The web search engine studies indicate that most searchers use two, two search term queries per session, no boolean operators, and look only at the top ten items returned, while reporting the location of relevant information. In traditional search systems we find seven to 16 queries of six to nine terms, while about ten documents per session were viewed. The OPAC studies indicated two to five queries per session of two or less terms, with Boolean search about 1% and less than 50 documents viewed.
  5. Golderman, G.M.; Connolly, B.: Between the book covers : going beyond OPAC keyword searching with the deep linking capabilities of Google Scholar and Google Book Search (2004/05) 0.01
    0.008837775 = product of:
      0.01767555 = sum of:
        0.01767555 = product of:
          0.0353511 = sum of:
            0.0353511 = weight(_text_:22 in 731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0353511 = score(doc=731,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 731, 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=731)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    2.12.2007 19:39:22