Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  • × author_ss:"Toms, E.G."
  1. Toms, E.G.: What motivates the browser? (1999) 0.03
    0.025030928 = product of:
      0.050061855 = sum of:
        0.050061855 = sum of:
          0.021780973 = weight(_text_:systems in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.021780973 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
          0.028280882 = weight(_text_:22 in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028280882 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = 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)
    
    Abstract
    Browsing is considered to be unstructured and human-driven, although not a cognitively intensive process. It is conducted using systems that facilitate considerable user-system interactivity. Cued by the content, people immerse themselves in a topic of interest and meander from topic to topic while concurrently recognising interesting and informative information en route. They seem to seek and gather information in a purposeless, illogical and indiscriminate manner. Typical examples of these ostensibly random acts are scanning a non-fiction book, examining the morning newspaper, perusing the contents of a business report and scavenging the World Wide Web. Often the result is the acquisition of new information, the rejection or confirmation of an idea, or the genesis of new, perhaps not-wholly-formed thoughts about a topic. Noteworthy about this approach is that people explore information without having consciously structured queries or explicit goals. This form of passive information interaction behaviour is defined as acquiring and gathering information while scanning an information space without a specific goal in mind (Waterworth & Chignell, 1991; Toms, 1997), and for the purposes of this study, is called browsing. Traditionally, browsing is thought of in two ways: as a physical process - the action taken when one scans a list, a document, or a set of linked information nodes (e.g., Fox & Palay, 1979; Thompson & Croft, 1989; Ellis, 1989), and as a conceptual process, information seeking when the goal is ill-defined (e.g., Cove & Walsh, 1987). Browsing is also combined with searching in an integrated information-seeking process for retrieving information (e.g., Ellis, 1989; Belkin, Marchetti & Cool, 1993; Marchionini, 1995; Chang, 1995). Each of these cases focuses primarily on seeking information when the objective ranges from fuzzy to explicit.
    Date
    22. 3.2002 9:44:47
  2. Toms, E.G.: Free-Neets : delivering information to the community (1994) 0.02
    0.015401474 = product of:
      0.030802948 = sum of:
        0.030802948 = product of:
          0.061605897 = sum of:
            0.061605897 = weight(_text_:systems in 579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.061605897 = score(doc=579,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.38414678 = fieldWeight in 579, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=579)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Computer-based systems are increasingly used by society for everyday activities. Yet these systems are rarely exploited to meet personal information needs. One development that may change this imbalance is the community online system. This paper examines one type of community online system, the Free-Net, and discusses its usefulness in delivering the information and services typically provided by community information centers
  3. Toms, E.G.; Kinnucan, M.T.: ¬The effectiveness of the electronic city metaphor for organizing the menus of free-nets (1996) 0.01
    0.0068065543 = product of:
      0.013613109 = sum of:
        0.013613109 = product of:
          0.027226217 = sum of:
            0.027226217 = weight(_text_:systems in 6505) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027226217 = score(doc=6505,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 6505, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6505)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Metaphors are used in the design of systems to ameliorate complxities, to exploit prior knowledge, and to enhace the user's understanding of the system. In this study, we examined the electronic city metaphor adopted by Free-Nets, the average citizen's medium for accessing electronic community information. The electronic city metaphor represents a categorized set of menus as buildings in a mythical city. To examnie this metaphor, we compared the performance of 2 groups of university student subjects who used a simulated Free-Net to find answers to simple factual questions. One group used an interface that embodied the electronic city metaphor, while the other group used an interface with labels composed from everyday language. Subjects used the simulated Free-Net in 2 sessions, about a week apart. Results were assessed using 3 performance measures: Number of top-level menu choices used, number of correct answers, and amout of time taken to respond to questions. Preference ratings were also obtained. Results indicated that both groups performed about equally in the first session, but that only the subjects who used the everyday language menu showed a learning effect over time. Subjects in both groups expressed a definite preference for the non-metaphor interface. The results raise questions about the utility of this type of metaphor, especially to represent categorized lists