Search (14 results, page 1 of 1)

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 1073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=1073,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 1073, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1073)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 1073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=1073,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1073, 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=1073)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The study analyses how students' growing understanding of the topic and search experience were related to their choice of search tactics and terms while preparing a research proposal for a small empirical study. In addition to that, the findings of the study are used to test Vakkari's (2001) theory of task-based IR. The research subjects were 22 students of psychology attending a seminar for preparing the proposal. They made a search for their task in PsychINFO database at the beginning and end of the seminar. Data were collected in several ways. A pre- and post-search interview was conducted in both sessions. The students were asked to think aloud in the sessions. This was recorded as were the transaction logs. The results show that search experience was slightly related to the change of facets. Although the students' vocabulary of the topic grew generating an increased use of specific terms between the sessions, their use of search tactics and operators remained fairly constant. There was no correlation between the terms and tactics used and the total number of useful references found. By comparing these results with the findings of relevant earlier studies the conclusion was drawn that domain knowledge has an impact on searching assuming that users have a sufficient command of the system used. This implies that the tested theory of task-based IR is valid on condition that the searchers are experienced. It is suggested that the theory should be enriched by including search experience in its scope.

0.037096158 = product of:
  0.074192315 = sum of:
    0.074192315 = product of:
      0.14838463 = sum of:
        0.14838463 = weight(_text_:searching in 4288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14838463 = score(doc=4288,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.7095045 = fieldWeight in 4288, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4288)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The rationale for using information systems is to find information that helps us in our daily activities, be they tasks or interests. Systems are expected to support us in searching for and identifying useful information. Although the activities and tasks performed by humans generate information needs and searching, they have attracted little attention in studies of information searching. Such studies have concentrated an search tasks rather than the activities that trigger them. It is obvious that our understanding of information searching is only partial, if we are not able to connect aspects of searching to the related task. The expected contribution of information to the task is reflected in relevance assessments of the information items found, and in the search tactics and use of the system in general. Taking the task into account seems to be a necessary condition for understanding and explaining information searching, and, by extension, for effective systems design.

0.019828727 = product of:
  0.039657455 = sum of:
    0.039657455 = product of:
      0.07931491 = sum of:
        0.07931491 = weight(_text_:searching in 4435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07931491 = score(doc=4435,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.37924606 = fieldWeight in 4435, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4435)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study explored how the expression of search facets and relevance feedback (RF) by users was related to search success in interactive and automatic query expansion in the course of the search process. Search success was measured both in the number of relevant documents retrieved, whether identified by users or not. Research design consisted of 26 users searching for four TREC topics in Okapi IR system, half of the searchers using interactive and half automatic query expansion based on RF. The search logs were recorded, and the users filled in questionnaires for each topic concerning various features of searching. The results showed that the exhaustivity of the query was the most significant predictor of search success. Interactive expansion led to better search success than automatic expansion if all retrieved relevant items were counted, but there was no difference between the methods if only those items recognised relevant by users were observed. The analysis showed that the difference was facilitated by the liberal relevance criterion used in TREC not favouring highly relevant documents in evaluation.

0.019828727 = product of:
  0.039657455 = sum of:
    0.039657455 = product of:
      0.07931491 = sum of:
        0.07931491 = weight(_text_:searching in 1732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07931491 = score(doc=1732,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.37924606 = fieldWeight in 1732, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1732)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper sets out to examine the degree to which General Finnish Thesaurus (GFT) and FinMeSH cover various semantic expressions of medical concepts in patients' questions and physicians' answers concerning cardiovascular diseases. The former represents lay persons' information needs. Design/methodology/approach - A total of 50 question-answer pairs were collected in a medical web site. Concepts and their expressions (terms) with their semantic relations were identified in questions and answers. Findings - FinMeSH covered 65 per cent and GFT 41 per cent of all medical terms in texts. The expressions of patients and physicians matched better with FinMeSH than GFT regardless of the type of expression. The difference in favour of FinMeSH was typically about 25 per cent-units. Originality/value - The low fit with users' vocabularies makes GFT a poor tool for supporting searching, whereas the relatively high fit of FinMeSH suggests that it is a reasonable tool in assisting searching. Conclusions concerning the bridging of these two thesauri are discussed.

0.019828727 = product of:
  0.039657455 = sum of:
    0.039657455 = product of:
      0.07931491 = sum of:
        0.07931491 = weight(_text_:searching in 2850) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07931491 = score(doc=2850,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.37924606 = fieldWeight in 2850, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2850)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study analyzes to which degree the question types addressed to a digital reference service run by a consortium of public libraries have changed between the Years 1999 and 2006. The data consist of representative samples of reference questions to a Finnish Ask a Librarian digital reference service in the years studied. Questions were classified based on a taxonomy refining earlier major taxonomies. The proportion of ready reference questions had increased from 33 to 45% whereas the proportion of subject-based research questions had decreased from 57 to 47%. Among the former, fact-finding questions had especially increased, and among the latter, topical search questions had decreased. These changes in the popularity of question types are likely related to the way people are searching on the Internet. It is concluded that the Internet has somewhat reduced the traditional role of public libraries in mediated topical searching.

0.01652394 = product of:
  0.03304788 = sum of:
    0.03304788 = product of:
      0.06609576 = sum of:
        0.06609576 = weight(_text_:searching in 46) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06609576 = score(doc=46,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.3160384 = fieldWeight in 46, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=46)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We analyzed how effort in searching is associated with search output and task outcome. In a field study, we examined how students' search effort for an assigned learning task was associated with precision and relative recall, and how this was associated to the quality of learning outcome. The study subjects were 41 medical students writing essays for a class in medicine. Searching in Medline was part of their assignment. The data comprised students' search logs in Medline, their assessment of the usefulness of references retrieved, a questionnaire concerning the search process, and evaluation scores of the essays given by the teachers. Pearson correlation was calculated for answering the research questions. Finally, a path model for predicting task outcome was built. We found that effort in the search process degraded precision but improved task outcome. There were two major mechanisms reducing precision while enhancing task outcome. Effort in expanding Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms within search sessions and effort in assessing and exploring documents in the result list between the sessions degraded precision, but led to better task outcome. Thus, human effort compensated bad retrieval results on the way to good task outcome. Findings suggest that traditional effectiveness measures in information retrieval should be complemented with evaluation measures for search process and outcome.

0.014021028 = product of:
  0.028042056 = sum of:
    0.028042056 = product of:
      0.05608411 = sum of:
        0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 4493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05608411 = score(doc=4493,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 4493, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4493)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The aim of this article is threefold: (1) to give a summary of empirical results reported earlier on relations between students' problem stages in the course of writing their research proposals for a master's thesis and the information sought, choice of search terms and tactics and relevance assessments of the information found for that task; (2) to show how the findings of the study refine Kuhlthau's model of the information search process in the field of information retrieval (IR); and (3) to construe a tentative theory of a task-based IR process based on the supported hypotheses. The results of the empirical studies show that there is a close connection between the students' problem stages (mental model) in the task performance and the information sought, the search tactics used and the assessment of the relevance and utility of the information found. The corroborated hypotheses expand the ideas in Kuhlthau's model in the domain of IR. A theory of task-based information searching based on the empirical findings of the study is presented.

0.013219153 = product of:
  0.026438305 = sum of:
    0.026438305 = product of:
      0.05287661 = sum of:
        0.05287661 = weight(_text_:searching in 1891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05287661 = score(doc=1891,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.2528307 = fieldWeight in 1891, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1891)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The aim of this study is to explore to which extent searching by medical students in Medline produces information items useful for writing an essay measured by precision and relative recall as perceived by the students, the proportion of cited items, and their utilization on four dimensions of the essay writing task evaluated by external assessors. It also aims to study interrelations of search process and outcome. Design/methodology/approach - The study subjects were 42 third year medical students attending a class on Diagnostic and therapy. Searching in Medline was a part of their assignment of essay writing. The data consist of students' printed logs of Medline searches, students' assessments of the usefulness of the references retrieved, a questionnaire concerning the search process, and evaluation scores of the essays given by the teachers of the class. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated for answering the research questions. Findings - The paper finds that precision and relative recall were not associated with evaluation scores in three of the four dimensions assessed. Some of the process variables were associated with precision and with assessment scores in two of the four dimensions assessed. Citing rate was negatively associated with recall. It seems that precision and recall are only weakly, if at all, associated to the use of information in the documents retrieved for writing the essay. Precision and relative recall are not associated to the way information in the retrieved items is used for performing the task. Users evidently look for a sufficient number of documents containing enough information for progressing in their task. Precision and recall are not sufficient measures in evaluating IR systems, but they have to be completed by other measures indicating the impact of the system on users' task performance. Originality/value - The paper provides useful information on students' information search process.

0.012382377 = product of:
  0.024764754 = sum of:
    0.024764754 = product of:
      0.049529508 = sum of:
        0.049529508 = weight(_text_:22 in 1682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049529508 = score(doc=1682,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1682, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1682)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article focuses an analysing students' information needs in terms of conceptual understanding of the topic they propose to study and its consequences for the search process and outcome. The research subjects were 22 undergraduates of psychology attending a seminar for preparing a research proposal for a small empirical study. They were asked to make searches in the PsycINFO database for their task in the beginning and end of the seminar. A pre- and postsearch interview was conducted in both sessions. The students were asked to think aloud in the sessions. This was recorded, as were the transaction logs. The results show that during the preparation of research proposals different features of the students' conceptual structure were connected to the search success. Students' ability to cover their conceptual construct by query terms was the major feature affecting search success during the whole process. In the beginning also the number of concepts and the proportion of subconcepts in the construct contributed indirectly via search tactics to retrieving partly useful references. Students' ability to extract new query terms from retrieved items improved search results.

Date

19. 6.2003 17:22:33

0.01168419 = product of:
  0.02336838 = sum of:
    0.02336838 = product of:
      0.04673676 = sum of:
        0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04673676 = score(doc=299,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 299, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=299)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Research in information science aims to comprehend the facilitation of access to information for supporting purposeful action. The major themes to be addressed have been how information is organized for access, how it is retrieved from storage, and how it is sought out and used for various purposes. Two central research areas in the field are information retrieval (IR) and information seeking (IS) (Vakkari & Rochester, 1998). Although intuitively the fields seem to be overlapping, their research communities have been active in their own enclosures. Few researchers have visited the neighboring side. However, there are researchers (Bates, 1989; Belkin & Vickery, 1986; Belkin, 1993; Ellis, 1989; Ingwersen, 1992, 1996; Järvelin 1987; Kuhlthau, 1993; Marchionini, 1995; Saracevic & Kantor, 1988) who have stressed the need to connect results from both research traditions. IR can be seen as a part of a broader process of information seeking. By IS is understood a process of searching, obtaining and using information for a purpose (e.g., form a solution for a task) when a person does not have sufficient prior knowledge. By 1R is understood the use of an information system for obtaining relevant information for a purpose (e.g., a task). This implies that information systems are a specific means among other sources and channels for obtaining information.

0.01168419 = product of:
  0.02336838 = sum of:
    0.02336838 = product of:
      0.04673676 = sum of:
        0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04673676 = score(doc=590,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Currently, there exists little evidence concerning how various characteristics of research cultures are associated with patterns of use of electronic library resources. The present study addresses this gap by exploring how research-group membership, across-fields scattering of literature, and degree of establishment of research area are related to patterns of digital library use. The analytic dimensions are derived from Richard Whitley's ([1984]) theory of the social and intellectual organization of academic fields. The article represents a first attempt to operationalize Whitley's concepts in a large-scale study of e-resources use. The data used in the study were gathered in 2004 by the Finnish Electronic Library (FinElib) through a nationwide Web-based user questionnaire (N = 900). Membership in a research group significantly increased searching in journal databases, the importance of colleagues as sources of information about electronic articles and journals, and the use of alert services. A significant interaction effect was found between degree of across-fields scattering of relevant resources and degree of establishment of research fields. A high degree of across-fields scattering of relevant literature increased the number of journal databases used mainly in less established research areas whereas it influenced the use of journal databases less in established fields. This research contributes to our picture concerning the complex set of interacting factors influencing patterns of use of e-resources.

0.01168419 = product of:
  0.02336838 = sum of:
    0.02336838 = product of:
      0.04673676 = sum of:
        0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04673676 = score(doc=260,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 260, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=260)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Few studies have investigated how search behavior affects complex writing tasks. We analyze a dataset of 150 long essays whose authors searched the ClueWeb09 corpus for source material, while all querying, clicking, and writing activity was meticulously recorded. We model the effect of search and writing behavior on essay quality using path analysis. Since the boil-down and build-up writing strategies identified in previous research have been found to affect search behavior, we model each writing strategy separately. Our analysis shows that the search process contributes significantly to essay quality through both direct and mediated effects, while the author's writing strategy moderates this relationship. Our models explain 25-35% of the variation in essay quality through rather simple search and writing process characteristics alone, a fact that has implications on how search engines could personalize result pages for writing tasks. Authors' writing strategies and associated searching patterns differ, producing differences in essay quality. In a nutshell: essay quality improves if search and writing strategies harmonize-build-up writers benefit from focused, in-depth querying, while boil-down writers fare better with a broader and shallower querying strategy.

0.008755663 = product of:
  0.017511327 = sum of:
    0.017511327 = product of:
      0.035022654 = sum of:
        0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 4573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035022654 = score(doc=4573,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4573, 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=4573)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

9.12.2018 16:22:25

0.008755663 = product of:
  0.017511327 = sum of:
    0.017511327 = product of:
      0.035022654 = sum of:
        0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035022654 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 998, 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=998)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2023 18:15:06