Search (216 results, page 1 of 11)

0.10279694 = product of:
  0.20559388 = sum of:
    0.20559388 = sum of:
      0.14955764 = weight(_text_:searching in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.14955764 = score(doc=1628,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.7151132 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
      0.05603624 = weight(_text_:22 in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05603624 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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

0.08118117 = product of:
  0.16236234 = sum of:
    0.16236234 = sum of:
      0.11333063 = weight(_text_:searching in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11333063 = score(doc=760,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.541893 = fieldWeight in 760, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=760)
      0.049031712 = weight(_text_:22 in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049031712 = score(doc=760,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = 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)

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.

0.057231586 = product of:
  0.11446317 = sum of:
    0.11446317 = sum of:
      0.06543146 = weight(_text_:searching in 6966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06543146 = score(doc=6966,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.31286204 = fieldWeight in 6966, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6966)
      0.049031712 = weight(_text_:22 in 6966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049031712 = score(doc=6966,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6966, 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=6966)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Describes the technique used to study hypertext systems from a very general point of view, focus on monitoring searchers' behaviour, predict the estimation of the ultimate goals of the searchers, and estimate the searchers' determination to find these goals. The components are combined via a Markov chain approach so as to study information retrieval in general and hypertext (hypermedia) in particular. Demonstrates how these estimations can be used to assist searchers during their searching process and presents the derivation of a relevance function for documents, based on these estimations

Source

Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon

0.050559208 = product of:
  0.101118416 = sum of:
    0.101118416 = sum of:
      0.06609576 = weight(_text_:searching in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06609576 = score(doc=2680,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.3160384 = fieldWeight in 2680, 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=2680)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = 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)

Abstract

This study addresses the impact of domain expertise (i.e. of prior knowledge of the domain) on the performance and query strategies used by users while searching for information. Twenty-four experts (psychology students) and 24 non-experts (students from other disciplines) had to search for psychology information from the Universalis website in order to perform six information problems of varying complexity: two simple problems (the keywords required to complete the task were provided in the problem statement), two more difficult problems (the keywords required had to be inferred) and two impossible problems (no answer was provided by the website). The results showed that participants with prior knowledge in the domain (experts in psychology) performed better (i.e. reached more correct answers after shorter search times) than non-experts. This difference was stronger as the complexity of the problems increased. This study also showed that experts and non-experts displayed different query strategies. Experts reformulated the impossible problems more often than non-experts, because they produced new queries with psychology-related keywords. The participants rarely used thematic category tool and when they did so this did not enhance their performance.

Date

25. 1.2016 18:46:22

0.049055643 = product of:
  0.09811129 = sum of:
    0.09811129 = sum of:
      0.05608411 = weight(_text_:searching in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05608411 = score(doc=917,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.26816747 = fieldWeight in 917, 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=917)
      0.04202718 = weight(_text_:22 in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04202718 = score(doc=917,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 917, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=917)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

I started my professional career in library and information science because of my great interest in knowledge organization. The more experience I gained in the profession, the more I realized how crucial it is to understand which organization would be best for each group of users. This in turn requires an understanding of how users seek information. And so now my focus is an studying information seeking and searching behavior. Throughout the relatively long course of changing my focus, I followed Pauline Cochrane's writings. Now I can say that she has been among the first to have a "user-centered approach" to knowledge organization, and she has used the term three years before it became a mainstream phrase. The following is a short discussion about the usercentered approach which was presented in a workshop in 1997.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.046389237 = product of:
  0.092778474 = sum of:
    0.092778474 = sum of:
      0.06476036 = weight(_text_:searching in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06476036 = score(doc=296,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.30965313 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
      0.02801812 = weight(_text_:22 in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02801812 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 296, 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=296)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Previous empirical studies of searcher behaviour have drawn attention to a wide variety of factors that affect performance; for instance, the display of retrieved results can alter search strategies (Allen 1991, 1994), the information need type influences search behaviour, (Elkerton et al 1984, Marchionini 1995); while the task complexity, reflected in the information need can affect user's search behaviour (Large et al 1994). Furthermore, information source selection (Bassilli 1977), and the user's model of the system and domain impact on the search process (Michel 1994); while motivation (Solomon 1993, Jacobsen et al 1992) and the importance of the information need (Wendt 1969) also influence search duration and the effort a user will employ. Rouse and Rouse (1984) in a review of empirical studies, summarise a wide variety of variables that can effect searching behaviour, including payoff, costs of searching, resource available, amount of information sought, characteristics of the data and conflicts between documents. It appears that user behaviour is inconsistent in the search strategies adopted even for the same search need and system (Davidson 1977, Iivonen 1995). Theories of searcher behaviour have been proposed that provide explanations of aspects of end-user behaviour, such as the evolution of the user's information need and the problems of articulating a query, [Bates (1979, 1989), Markey and Atherton 1978], effective search strategies in browsing and goal directed searches [Marchionini 1995, Belkin (1987, 1993)], the linguistic problem of matching search terms with indexing terms or content of target documents through an expert intermediary (Ingwersen 1982) or cognitive aspects of IR (Kulthau 1984, Ingwersen 1996).

Date

22. 3.2002 9:54:13

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 2339, 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=2339)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2339, 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=2339)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Over the last 4 years, the Information Interaction Laboratory at Rutgers' School of communication, Information and Library Studies has performed a series of investigations concerned with various aspects of people's interactions with advanced information retrieval (IR) systems. We have benn especially concerned with understanding not just what people do, and why, and with what effect, but also with what they would like to do, and how they attempt to accomplish it, and with what difficulties. These investigations have led to some quite interesting conclusions about the nature and structure of people's interactions with information, about support for cooperative human-computer interaction in query reformulation, and about the value of visualization of search results for supporting various forms of interaction with information. In this discussion, I give an overview of the research program and its projects, present representative results from the projects, and discuss some implications of these results for support of subject searching in information retrieval systems

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 1257, 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=1257)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1257, 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=1257)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In conjunction with the American Society for Information Science and Technology's (ASIST) annual meeting in fall 2001, the Special Interest Group an Information Needs, Seeking, and Use (SIG USE) sponsored a research symposium an "Effective Methods for Studying Information Seeking and Use." The symposium was intended to address the SIG's goal of promoting studies of human information behavior by focusing an the research methods that can most effectively be used to study information needs, information seeking, information use, and other human information behaviors. The symposium included the presentation of six refereed articles, which were revised based an the discussion at the symposium and are included here. The six articles describe the application of a variety of research methods, singly or in combination. Some of the methods are most appropriate for studying individuals and their interactions with information, while others can be applied to studying group behaviors. The studies were conducted in a variety of settings, from a Web-searching laboratory to an archive, from hospitals to the great outdoors (i.e., forest and river sites). Each method or set of methods was applied to a particular user group, including young children, teenagers, and adults. Each article makes a unique contribution to our repertoire of research methods, as briefly reviewed here.

Date

20. 1.2003 9:37:22

0.040879704 = product of:
  0.08175941 = sum of:
    0.08175941 = sum of:
      0.04673676 = weight(_text_:searching in 6117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04673676 = score(doc=6117,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 6117, 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=6117)
      0.035022654 = weight(_text_:22 in 6117) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035022654 = score(doc=6117,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 6117, 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=6117)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Several previous studies have measured differences in the information search success of novices and experts. However, the definitions of novices and experts have varied greatly between the studies, and so have the measures used for search success. Instead of dividing the searchers into different groups based on their expertise, we chose to model search success with task completion speed, TCS. Towards this goal, 22 participants performed three fact-finding tasks and two broader tasks in an observational user study. In our model, there were two variables related to the Web experience of the participants. Other variables included, for example, the speed of query iteration, the length of the queries, the proportion of precise queries, and the speed of evaluating result documents. Our results showed that the variables related to Web experience had expected effects on TCS. The increase in the years of Web use was related to improvement in TCS in the broader tasks, whereas the less frequent Web use was related to a decrease in TCS in the fact-finding tasks. Other variables having significant effects on TCS in either of the task types were the speed of composing queries, the average number of query terms per query, the proportion of precise queries, and the participants' own evaluation of their search skills. In addition to the statistical models, we present several qualitative findings of the participants' search strategies. These results give valuable insight into the successful strategies in Web search beyond the previous knowledge of the expert-novice differences.

0.040447365 = product of:
  0.08089473 = sum of:
    0.08089473 = sum of:
      0.05287661 = weight(_text_:searching in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05287661 = score(doc=3231,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.2528307 = fieldWeight in 3231, 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=3231)
      0.02801812 = weight(_text_:22 in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02801812 = score(doc=3231,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18104185 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051699217 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3231, 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=3231)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

ADEPT is a 5-year project whose goals are to develop, deploy, and evaluate inquiry learning capabilities for the Alexandria Digital Library, an extant digital library of primary sources in geography. We interviewed nine geography faculty members who teach undergraduate courses about their information seeking for research and teaching and their use of information resources in teaching. These data were supplemented by interviews with four faculty members from another ADEPT study about the nature of knowledge in geography. Among our key findings are that geography faculty are more likely to encounter useful teaching resources while seeking research resources than vice versa, although the influence goes in both directions. Their greatest information needs are for research data, maps, and images. They desire better searching by concept or theme, in addition to searching by location and place name. They make extensive use of their own research resources in their teaching. Among the implications for functionality and architecture of geographic digital libraries for educational use are that personal digital libraries are essential, because individual faculty members have personalized approaches to selecting, collecting, and organizing teaching resources. Digital library services for research and teaching should include the ability to import content from common office software and to store content in standard formats that can be exported to other applications. Digital library services can facilitate sharing among faculty but cannot overcome barriers such as intellectual property rights, access to proprietary research data, or the desire of individuals to maintain control over their own resources. Faculty use of primary and secondary resources needs to be better understood if we are to design successful digital libraries for research and teaching.

Date

3. 6.2005 20:40:22

0.040068425 = product of:
  0.08013685 = sum of:
    0.08013685 = product of:
      0.1602737 = sum of:
        0.1602737 = weight(_text_:searching in 2417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1602737 = score(doc=2417,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.76635236 = fieldWeight in 2417, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2417)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

W.S. Cooper's utility theory was used to evaluate end user and mediated searching of online and CD-ROM databases. The searches were conducted by 510 end users, using MEDLINE. The relevance of the references and the usefulness of the documents retrieved were examnied. The study also assessed the perceived value to end users of the information retrieved. Mediated online searching cost 3 times as much as end user CD-ROM searching, but was only about twice as effective in terms of user satisfaction; user convenience should be a high priority for the information provider and mediated CD-ROM searching may be the best compromise currently available as regards cost effectiveness and successful information retrieval for end users

0.03738941 = product of:
  0.07477882 = sum of:
    0.07477882 = product of:
      0.14955764 = sum of:
        0.14955764 = weight(_text_:searching in 2284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14955764 = score(doc=2284,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.7151132 = fieldWeight in 2284, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2284)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.03738941 = product of:
  0.07477882 = sum of:
    0.07477882 = product of:
      0.14955764 = sum of:
        0.14955764 = weight(_text_:searching in 7930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14955764 = score(doc=7930,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.7151132 = fieldWeight in 7930, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7930)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.036948655 = product of:
  0.07389731 = sum of:
    0.07389731 = product of:
      0.14779462 = sum of:
        0.14779462 = weight(_text_:searching in 2280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.14779462 = score(doc=2280,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.70668334 = fieldWeight in 2280, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2280)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Searching behaviour in a university library is studied using a holistic approach, encompassing the use of bibliographic tools and shelf browsing. The present study is designed as the first half of a 'before and after' study to permit the evaluation of the impact of a future online catalogue on users' searching behaviour. A combined methodology was devised: searchers were encouraged to talk aloud during their search, and this information, together with some probing and real time expert interpretation, enabled the experimente to record the searching activity on a highly structured observation form. The study reveals the extent of subject searching activity, and suggests that this may have been underestimated in previous studies. The analysis of expressed topics, search formulation strategy and documents retrieved reveals the adaptive nature of the subject searching process, whereby the user adapts to the structure of the available tools. The information retrieval task in a traditional library system is tailored by the system to a single, one dimensional, sequential process. It is suggested that a major obstacle to subject searching effectiveness may lie in the lack of interaction between the different possible approaches in the searching process: the indexing language, the classification, and the titles. It is to be hoped that a future online searching environment will encourage a more truly interactive approach to subject searching.

0.0365773 = product of:
  0.0731546 = sum of:
    0.0731546 = product of:
      0.1463092 = sum of:
        0.1463092 = weight(_text_:searching in 3289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1463092 = score(doc=3289,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.6995808 = fieldWeight in 3289, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3289)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

As more sophisticated searching capabilities become available on OPACs, librarians must wonder whether providing them is worthwhile. In order to determine whether users and nonusers of capabilities such as keyword and Boolean searching actually know how to use them properly, a survey was conducted of users of the NOTIS in Indiana State University Library. Results show a low degree of knowledge about keyword searching and points to the need for a built-in, easily used capability that does not require users to learn all the difficult precepts to be paid to automated aids to determining correct terminology for searching

0.0365773 = product of:
  0.0731546 = sum of:
    0.0731546 = product of:
      0.1463092 = sum of:
        0.1463092 = weight(_text_:searching in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1463092 = score(doc=245,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.6995808 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A study of the "real world" Web information searching behavior of 206 college students over a 10-month period showed that, contrary to expectations, the users adopted a more passive or browsing approach to Web information searching and became more eclectic in their selection of Web hosts as they gained experience. The study used a longitudinal transaction log analysis of the URLs accessed during 5,431 user days of Web information searching to detect changes in information searching behavior associated with increased experience of using the Web. The findings have implications for the design of future Web information retrieval tools

0.03304788 = product of:
  0.06609576 = sum of:
    0.06609576 = product of:
      0.13219152 = sum of:
        0.13219152 = weight(_text_:searching in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13219152 = score(doc=600,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.6320768 = fieldWeight in 600, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=600)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Recent studies show that humans engage in multitasking behaviors as they seek and search information retrieval (IR) systems for information on more than one topic at the same time. For example, a Web search session by a single user may consist of searching on single topics or multitasking. Findings are presented from four separate studies of the prevalence of multitasking information seeking and searching by Web, IR system, and library users. Incidence of multitasking identified in the four different studies included: (1) users of the Excite Web search engine who completed a survey form, (2) Excite Web search engine users filtered from an Excite transaction log from 20 December 1999, (3) mediated on-line databases searches, and (4) academic library users. Findings include: (1) multitasking information seeking and searching is a common human behavior, (2) users may conduct information seeking and searching on related or unrelated topics, (3) Web or IR multitasking search sessions are longer than single topic sessions, (4) mean number of topics per Web search ranged of 1 to more than 10 topics with a mean of 2.11 topic changes per search session, and (4) many Web search topic changes were from hobbies to shopping and vice versa. A more complex model of human seeking and searching levels that incorporates multitasking information behaviors is presented, and a theoretical framework for human information coordinating behavior (HICB) is proposed. Multitasking information seeking and searching is developing as major research area that draws together IR and information seeking studies toward a focus on IR within the context of human information behavior. Implications for models of information seeking and searching, IR/Web systems design, and further research are discussed.

0.03271573 = product of:
  0.06543146 = sum of:
    0.06543146 = product of:
      0.13086292 = sum of:
        0.13086292 = weight(_text_:searching in 489) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13086292 = score(doc=489,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.6257241 = fieldWeight in 489, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=489)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article reports on a transaction log study of the BIS online catalog at North Caroline State University. Transaction logs were used to gather data on failure rates, usage patterns, and causes of problems. The result show that 54 percent of the searches analyzed failed. Subject searching was the most often used but least successful search. Problems experienced by patrons searching BIS were often due to a misunderstanding of how to operate the system, typographical errors, and the use of uncontrolled vocabulary. As in earlier studies, transaction logs analysis proved to be a fruitful and practical methodology for studying users' searching behaviour in an online catalog.

0.03271573 = product of:
  0.06543146 = sum of:
    0.06543146 = product of:
      0.13086292 = sum of:
        0.13086292 = weight(_text_:searching in 1853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13086292 = score(doc=1853,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.6257241 = fieldWeight in 1853, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1853)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reports results of a survey of the online searching techniques of 50 university students, undergraduate and graduate, using the OPAC and CD-ROM databases at the Hayden Library, Arizona State University. The type of searching, use of library staff and online help screens, exposure to library user training, and length of time at the terminal for citation versus abstract products were recorded and analyzed. Results indicate that: a balance of online help products and library staff interaction is needed when providing help for users; careful attention needs to be paid to increasing the number of terminals and connections as abstracts are added to the databases being offered on the networks; and that even with exposure to more advanced searching techniques, users till rely on simple subject searching to locate required materials

0.03271573 = product of:
  0.06543146 = sum of:
    0.06543146 = product of:
      0.13086292 = sum of:
        0.13086292 = weight(_text_:searching in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13086292 = score(doc=3871,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.2091384 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051699217 = queryNorm
            0.6257241 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Examines the searching behaviour of Guardian journalists searching FT PROFILE online system. Using transactional log analysis compares the searching styles of journalists with those of Guardian librarians. In some respects end users conform to the picture that professionals have of them - they search with a very limited range of commands - but in other respects they confound that image - they are very quick and economical searchers. Their behaviour relates to their general information seeking behaviour, and their searching styles would be seen in this regard