Search (100 results, page 1 of 5)

0.08356151 = product of:
  0.29246527 = sum of:
    0.19738306 = weight(_text_:united in 4168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.19738306 = score(doc=4168,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.86777 = fieldWeight in 4168, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4168)
    0.09508222 = product of:
      0.19016445 = sum of:
        0.19016445 = weight(_text_:states in 4168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19016445 = score(doc=4168,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.85175437 = fieldWeight in 4168, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4168)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

LCSH

Libraries / United States / Automation
Library surveys / United States

Subject

Libraries / United States / Automation
Library surveys / United States

0.07705359 = product of:
  0.17979172 = sum of:
    0.07533984 = weight(_text_:industry in 1687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07533984 = score(doc=1687,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2351482 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.320393 = fieldWeight in 1687, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1687)
    0.07049395 = weight(_text_:united in 1687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07049395 = score(doc=1687,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.30991787 = fieldWeight in 1687, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1687)
    0.033957936 = product of:
      0.06791587 = sum of:
        0.06791587 = weight(_text_:states in 1687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06791587 = score(doc=1687,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.304198 = fieldWeight in 1687, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1687)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.42857143 = coord(3/7)

Abstract

A search for information can be viewed as a series of decisions made by the searcher. Two dimensions of the search environment affect a user's decisions: the user's knowledge, and the configuration of the information retrieval system. Drawing an previous findings an users' lack of search or domain knowledge, this article investigates what the user needs to know to make informed search decisions at the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Web site, which provides statistical information an labor and related topics. Its extensive Web site is a rich collection of statistical information, ranging from individual statistics such as the current Consumer Price Index (CM), to a [arge statistical database called LABSTAT that can be queried to construct a tabie or time series an the fly. Two models of the search environment and the query process in LABSTAT are presented. They provide complementary views of the decision points at which help may be needed, and also suggest useful help content. Extensive examples based an the industry concept illustrate how the information could assist users' search decisions. The article concludes with a discussion of the role of help facilities in Web searching, and the interesting question of how to initiate the provision of help.

0.059686795 = product of:
  0.20890377 = sum of:
    0.1409879 = weight(_text_:united in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1409879 = score(doc=1589,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.61983573 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
    0.06791587 = product of:
      0.13583174 = sum of:
        0.13583174 = weight(_text_:states in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13583174 = score(doc=1589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.608396 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

This article discusses the major catalog use studies that have been conducted in the United States and Great Britain. The potential to influence the construction of new online public access catalogs is emphasized. The cumulative findings could serve as an information base which designers of OPAC systems could refer to in the course of their work

0.04582335 = product of:
  0.16038172 = sum of:
    0.1196322 = weight(_text_:united in 5018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1196322 = score(doc=5018,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.52594805 = fieldWeight in 5018, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5018)
    0.040749524 = product of:
      0.08149905 = sum of:
        0.08149905 = weight(_text_:states in 5018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08149905 = score(doc=5018,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.3650376 = fieldWeight in 5018, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5018)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Summarizes findings of an international study on information-seeking habits and preferences: With extensive input from hundreds of librarians and OCLC staff, the OCLC Market Research team developed a project and commissioned Harris Interactive Inc. to survey a representative sample of information consumers. In June of 2005, we collected over 3,300 responses from information consumers in Australia, Canada, India, Singapore, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Perceptions report provides the findings and responses from the online survey in an effort to learn more about: * Library use * Awareness and use of library electronic resources * Free vs. for-fee information * The "Library" brand The findings indicate that information consumers view libraries as places to borrow print books, but they are unaware of the rich electronic content they can access through libraries. Even though information consumers make limited use of these resources, they continue to trust libraries as reliable sources of information.

0.035812076 = product of:
  0.12534226 = sum of:
    0.084592745 = weight(_text_:united in 4381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.084592745 = score(doc=4381,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.37190145 = fieldWeight in 4381, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4381)
    0.040749524 = product of:
      0.08149905 = sum of:
        0.08149905 = weight(_text_:states in 4381) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08149905 = score(doc=4381,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.3650376 = fieldWeight in 4381, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4381)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

An ongoing thread in information retrieval research has been the exploration of user goals (or information needs, or problems) on information retrieval systems. It has been suggested that an understanding of goals and their role in the information retrieval interaction can provide insight into appropriate retrieval strategies, relevant documents, and general system design. This article reports on empirical findings concerning goals of users searching an OPAC at a northeastern United States university. These findings were generated during a large inductive and qualitative study of users' interactions with the OPAC. It was found that respondents came to the OPAC to search for a variety of course- or degree-related projects in which they were engaged. Respondent goals were not greatly modified during the course of these interactions. A set of situational elements associated with the respondent's goal was also identified. The implications of these findings for OPAC design and the training of informational professionals are discussed

0.035812076 = product of:
  0.12534226 = sum of:
    0.084592745 = weight(_text_:united in 4986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.084592745 = score(doc=4986,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.37190145 = fieldWeight in 4986, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4986)
    0.040749524 = product of:
      0.08149905 = sum of:
        0.08149905 = weight(_text_:states in 4986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08149905 = score(doc=4986,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.3650376 = fieldWeight in 4986, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4986)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

In an effort to understand how academic scientists seek information relevant to their research in today's environment of ubiquitous electronic access, a correlation framework is built and regression analysis is applied to the survey results from 2,063 academic researchers in natural science, engineering, and medical science at five research universities in the United States. Previous work has reported descriptive statistics about these scientists' information-seeking behavior. This study extends that work to examine relationships between scientists' information-seeking behaviors and their personal and environmental factors. Several regression models, including the Poisson model, the logit model, and the ordered logit model, are built to interpret the correlation among scientists' behaviors. In addition, exploratory factor analysis is used for data reduction. Overall, many factors were found to affect the specific information-seeking behaviors of scientists, including demographic, psychological, role-related, and environmental factors. Of the factors having an effect, academic position was the most important determinant of information behavior.

0.029843397 = product of:
  0.10445189 = sum of:
    0.07049395 = weight(_text_:united in 598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07049395 = score(doc=598,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.30991787 = fieldWeight in 598, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=598)
    0.033957936 = product of:
      0.06791587 = sum of:
        0.06791587 = weight(_text_:states in 598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06791587 = score(doc=598,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.304198 = fieldWeight in 598, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=598)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Recreational reading among young people is reportedly on the decline in the United States. Some researchers have suggested that supporting children's strategies for book selection is crucial to encouraging children to engage with books, indicating that improving these strategies might increase the amount of reading they do. In response, this study explores how elementary-school children select books for recreational reading using a digital library. The work extends traditional models of relevance assessment with reader-response theory, employing the concept of aesthetic relevance: the potential of a document to provide a suitable reading experience. Individuals define aesthetic relevance in personal terms and apply it as they assess documents, much as they do in traditional relevance assessment. This study identified a total of 46 factors organized along seven dimensions that influence children's assessment of the aesthetic relevance of books during selection. The analysis yielded differences in the prevalence of the aesthetic-relevance factors that children mention at various stages of book selection. In addition, the children exhibited differences by age and subtle differences by gender in the frequency of mention of various aesthetic-relevance factors. Recommendations drawn from the findings are offered to improve systems design and literacy education in order to enhance children's access to books and to promote recreational reading.

0.02406643 = product of:
  0.168465 = sum of:
    0.168465 = weight(_text_:industry in 2388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.168465 = score(doc=2388,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.2351482 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.71642053 = fieldWeight in 2388, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2388)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Hypothesizing that workplace significantly affects information-seeking patterns, this study compared accessibility and use of information sources among 233 Israeli computer scientists and software engineers, employed in industry and academy, using a mail questionnaire, which yielded a usable reply rate of 33%. The two groups were found to differ significantly in age, education, seniority, and type of research they performed (basic vs. applied). Printed textbooks, professional journals, and oral discussions with colleagues or experts in the organization were common to both groups, topping almost all lists of accessibility and use. For most information sources, however, the two groups differed significantly and consistently. Printed professional journals as weIl as printed and electronic conference or meeting papers were consistently more accessible and more often used by the academy group, while the industry group reported greater access to and more frequent use of electronic textbooks and trade or promotional literature. In regard to handbooks and standards, in-house technical reports (printed), government technical reports (Internet), librarians and technical specialists (Internet), and oral discussions with supervisors, no significant differences in accessibility were found, but their use by the industry group was much higher. In both groups, accessibility was only partly related to use, and more so among the academy than the industry group.

0.023874719 = product of:
  0.08356151 = sum of:
    0.056395162 = weight(_text_:united in 3163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056395162 = score(doc=3163,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.2479343 = fieldWeight in 3163, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3163)
    0.02716635 = product of:
      0.0543327 = sum of:
        0.0543327 = weight(_text_:states in 3163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0543327 = score(doc=3163,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.24335839 = fieldWeight in 3163, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3163)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

The purposes of this study were to explore college students' perceptions, uses of, and motivations for using Wikipedia, and to understand their information behavior concerning Wikipedia based on social cognitive theory (SCT). A Web survey was used to collect data in the spring of 2008. The study sample consisted of students from an introductory undergraduate course at a large public university in the midwestern United States. A total of 134 students participated in the study, resulting in a 32.8% response rate. The major findings of the study include the following: Approximately one-third of the students reported using Wikipedia for academic purposes. The students tended to use Wikipedia for quickly checking facts and finding background information. They had positive past experiences with Wikipedia; however, interestingly, their perceptions of its information quality were not correspondingly high. The level of their confidence in evaluating Wikipedia's information quality was, at most, moderate. Respondents' past experience with Wikipedia, their positive emotional state, their disposition to believe information in Wikipedia, and information utility were positively related to their outcome expectations of Wikipedia. However, among the factors affecting outcome expectations, only information utility and respondents' positive emotions toward Wikipedia were related to their use of it. Further, when all of the independent variables, including the mediator, outcome expectations, were considered, only the variable information utility was related to Wikipedia use, which may imply a limited applicability of SCT to understanding Wikipedia use. However, more empirical evidence is needed to determine the applicability of this theory to Wikipedia use. Finally, this study supports the knowledge value of Wikipedia (Fallis, [2008]), despite students' cautious attitudes toward Wikipedia. The study suggests that educators and librarians need to provide better guidelines for using Wikipedia, rather than prohibiting Wikipedia use altogether.

0.021801619 = product of:
  0.15261133 = sum of:
    0.15261133 = sum of:
      0.1086654 = weight(_text_:states in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1086654 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04054466 = queryNorm
          0.48671678 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
      0.04394593 = weight(_text_:22 in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04394593 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04054466 = 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)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

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

0.021732513 = product of:
  0.07606379 = sum of:
    0.062330686 = weight(_text_:management in 1003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.062330686 = score(doc=1003,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.45609936 = fieldWeight in 1003, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1003)
    0.013733104 = product of:
      0.027466208 = sum of:
        0.027466208 = weight(_text_:22 in 1003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027466208 = score(doc=1003,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1003, 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=1003)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Young undergraduate college students are often described as "digital natives," presumed to prefer living and working in completely digital information environments. In reality, their world is part-paper/part-digital, in constant transition among successive forms of digital storage and communication devices. Studying for a degree is the daily work of these young people, and effective management of paper and digital academic materials and resources contributes crucially to their success in life. Students must also constantly manage their work against deadlines to meet their course and university requirements. This study, following the "Personal Information Management" (PIM) paradigm, examines student academic information management under these various constraints and pressures. A total of 41 18- to 22-year-old students were interviewed and observed regarding the content, structure, and uses of their immediate working environment within their dormitory rooms. Students exhibited remarkable creativity and variety in the mixture of automated and manual resources and devices used to support their academic work. The demands of a yearlong procession of assignments, papers, projects, and examinations increase the importance of time management activities and influence much of their behavior. Results provide insights on student use of various kinds of information technology and their overall planning and management of information associated with their studies.

0.016793182 = product of:
  0.058776136 = sum of:
    0.020357117 = weight(_text_:management in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020357117 = score(doc=2591,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 2591, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2591)
    0.03841902 = product of:
      0.07683804 = sum of:
        0.07683804 = weight(_text_:states in 2591) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07683804 = score(doc=2591,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.34416074 = fieldWeight in 2591, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2591)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

This study examined the success and information seeking behaviors of seventh-grade science students and graduate students in information science in using Yahooligans! Web search engine/directory. It investigated these users' cognitive, affective, and physical behaviors as they sought the answer for a fact-finding task. It analyzed and compared the overall patterns of children's and graduate students' Web activities, including searching moves, browsing moves, backtracking moves, looping moves, screen scrolling, target location and deviation moves, and the time they took to complete the task. The authors applied Bilal's Web Traversal Measure to quantify these users' effectiveness, efficiency, and quality of moves they made. Results were based on 14 children's Web sessions and nine graduate students' sessions. Both groups' Web activities were captured online using Lotus ScreenCam, a software package that records and replays online activities in Web browsers. Children's affective states were captured via exit interviews. Graduate students' affective states were extracted from the journal writings they kept during the traversal process. The study findings reveal that 89% of the graduate students found the correct answer to the search task as opposed to 50% of the children. Based on the Measure, graduate students' weighted effectiveness, efficiency, and quality of the Web moves they made were much higher than those of the children. Regardless of success and weighted scores, however, similarities and differences in information seeking were found between the two groups. Yahooligans! poor structure of keyword searching was a major factor that contributed to the "breakdowns" children and graduate students experienced. Unlike children, graduate students were able to recover from "breakdowns" quickly and effectively. Three main factors influenced these users' performance: ability to recover from "breakdowns", navigational style, and focus on task. Children and graduate students made recommendations for improving Yahooligans! interface design. Implications for Web user training and system design improvements are made.

Source

Information processing and management. 38(2002) no.5, S.649-670

0.0156718 = product of:
  0.0548513 = sum of:
    0.035624955 = weight(_text_:management in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035624955 = score(doc=760,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 760, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=760)
    0.019226344 = product of:
      0.03845269 = sum of:
        0.03845269 = weight(_text_:22 in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03845269 = score(doc=760,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 760, 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=760)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

The degree of variability in the percentage of subject searching in an online public access catalog (OPAC) among branch libraries of one university was studied. A full semester's worth of transactions was analyzed, not sampled. The time units used were hour of the day, day of the week, and week of the semester. The findings show that subject searching varies from a low of 22% to a high of 74% over the hours of a day. Variability for the days of the week ranged from 17% to 64%, and for the weeks of the semester variability ranged from 12% to 70%. Valuable management information on the utilization of the OPAC within each brach library and among all the branch libraries is provided through numerous charts and graphs.

0.0150679685 = product of:
  0.105475776 = sum of:
    0.105475776 = weight(_text_:industry in 3899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.105475776 = score(doc=3899,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2351482 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.4485502 = fieldWeight in 3899, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3899)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

As libraries face increasing competition in providing information, we must insure that our library systems are usable, effective, efficient, and perhaps even enticing. How do librarians know that systems give users what they need and want? One way is usability testing. Usability testing has been around the computer industry for at least a decade, but library use of the method is relatively new. It has been a common perception that library systems were designed for librarians. Even if the user was considered, it was from the perspective of librarians who worked with the user. Those perceptions were anecdotal, and librarians frequently disagreed with one another about user behavior and knowledge.

0.014241929 = product of:
  0.0996935 = sum of:
    0.0996935 = weight(_text_:united in 3423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0996935 = score(doc=3423,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.43829006 = fieldWeight in 3423, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3423)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This paper reports the results of a survey of information needs and information seeking behaviour of a national sample of the UK population. The project was funded by the BLR&IC and comprised a survey by questionnaire covering all regions of the United Kingdom. 1.294 responses were received giving a valid and demographically respresentative response rate of 45,7%. Major findings include: that the majority of respondents had sought information in the past (59,4%) and that an even greater number predicted a future need for information (78,4%). Over three quarters of respondents said that they would use public libraries and between half and three quarters would approach CABx, post offices, government departments or family and friends. Face to face communicationss and reading a book were the most popular means of accessing information but a wide variety of other preferred options were cited. Only a small proportion expressed a preference for using a computer to seek information and there was a clear emphasis on public libraries as an appropriate location for accessing computerised information. A highly significant majority (79,2%) believed that access to information was very important for exercising their rights as citizens. Many significant variables, in terms of age, gender, status and region were found. In particular it was felt significant that young people were less sure of the importance of being able to access information

0.012915401 = product of:
  0.0904078 = sum of:
    0.0904078 = weight(_text_:industry in 3186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0904078 = score(doc=3186,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2351482 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.3844716 = fieldWeight in 3186, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3186)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.011632639 = product of:
  0.08142847 = sum of:
    0.08142847 = weight(_text_:management in 4487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08142847 = score(doc=4487,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 4487, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4487)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Source

Information processing and management. 25(1989), S.727-735

0.011632639 = product of:
  0.08142847 = sum of:
    0.08142847 = weight(_text_:management in 4488) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08142847 = score(doc=4488,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 4488, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4488)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Source

Information processing and management. 25(1989), S.737-744

0.011632639 = product of:
  0.08142847 = sum of:
    0.08142847 = weight(_text_:management in 6891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08142847 = score(doc=6891,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 6891, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6891)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Source

Information processing and management. 26(1990), S.503-510

0.011194143 = product of:
  0.0391795 = sum of:
    0.025446396 = weight(_text_:management in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025446396 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
    0.013733104 = product of:
      0.027466208 = sum of:
        0.027466208 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027466208 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = 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)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Date

25. 1.2016 18:46:22

Source

Information processing and management. 51(2015) no.5, S.557-569