Search (20 results, page 1 of 1)

0.021656003 = product of:
  0.08662401 = sum of:
    0.08662401 = sum of:
      0.041942354 = weight(_text_:research in 1682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041942354 = score(doc=1682,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046639 = queryNorm
          0.31521314 = fieldWeight in 1682, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1682)
      0.044681653 = weight(_text_:22 in 1682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.044681653 = score(doc=1682,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.16332182 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046639 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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

0.016979462 = product of:
  0.067917846 = sum of:
    0.067917846 = sum of:
      0.036323145 = weight(_text_:research in 1073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.036323145 = score(doc=1073,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046639 = queryNorm
          0.2729826 = fieldWeight in 1073, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1073)
      0.0315947 = weight(_text_:22 in 1073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0315947 = score(doc=1073,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16332182 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046639 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.016979462 = product of:
  0.067917846 = sum of:
    0.067917846 = sum of:
      0.036323145 = weight(_text_:research in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.036323145 = score(doc=998,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046639 = queryNorm
          0.2729826 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
      0.0315947 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0315947 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16332182 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046639 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The paper reports a longitudinal analysis of the topical and methodological development of Library and Information Science (LIS). Its focus is on the effects of researchers' disciplines on these developments. The study extends an earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) by a coordinated dataset representing a content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 1995, 2005, and 2015. It is novel in its coverage of authors' disciplines, topical and methodological aspects in a coordinated dataset spanning two decades thus allowing trend analysis. The findings include a shrinking trend in the share of LIS from 67 to 36% while Computer Science, and Business and Economics increase their share from 9 and 6% to 21 and 16%, respectively. The earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) for the year 2015 identified three topical clusters of LIS research, focusing on topical subfields, methodologies, and contributing disciplines. Correspondence analysis confirms their existence already in 1995 and traces their development through the decades. The contributing disciplines infuse their concepts, research questions, and approaches to LIS and may also subsume vital parts of LIS in their own structures of knowledge production.

Date

22. 6.2023 18:15:06

0.00869419 = product of:
  0.03477676 = sum of:
    0.03477676 = product of:
      0.06955352 = sum of:
        0.06955352 = weight(_text_:research in 1309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06955352 = score(doc=1309,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.5227218 = fieldWeight in 1309, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1309)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This article first analyzes library and information science (LIS) research articles published in core LIS journals in 2005. It also examines the development of LIS from 1965 to 2005 in light of comparable data sets for 1965, 1985, and 2005. In both cases, the authors report (a) how the research articles are distributed by topic and (b) what approaches, research strategies, and methods were applied in the articles. In 2005, the largest research areas in LIS by this measure were information storage and retrieval, scientific communication, library and information-service activities, and information seeking. The same research areas constituted the quantitative core of LIS in the previous years since 1965. Information retrieval has been the most popular area of research over the years. The proportion of research on library and information-service activities decreased after 1985, but the popularity of information seeking and of scientific communication grew during the period studied. The viewpoint of research has shifted from library and information organizations to end users and development of systems for the latter. The proportion of empirical research strategies was high and rose over time, with the survey method being the single most important method. However, attention to evaluation and experiments increased considerably after 1985. Conceptual research strategies and system analysis, description, and design were quite popular, but declining. The most significant changes from 1965 to 2005 are the decreasing interest in library and information-service activities and the growth of research into information seeking and scientific communication.

0.00741443 = product of:
  0.02965772 = sum of:
    0.02965772 = product of:
      0.05931544 = sum of:
        0.05931544 = weight(_text_:research in 590) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05931544 = score(doc=590,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.44577867 = fieldWeight in 590, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=590)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.0069355643 = product of:
  0.027742257 = sum of:
    0.027742257 = product of:
      0.055484515 = sum of:
        0.055484515 = weight(_text_:research in 949) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055484515 = score(doc=949,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.41698778 = fieldWeight in 949, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=949)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose This paper analyses the research in Library and Information Science (LIS) and reports on (1) the status of LIS research in 2015 and (2) on the evolution of LIS research longitudinally from 1965 to 2015. Design/methodology/approach The study employs a quantitative intellectual content analysis of articles published in 30+ scholarly LIS journals, following the design by Tuomaala et al. (2014). In the content analysis, we classify articles along eight dimensions covering topical content and methodology. Findings The topical findings indicate that the earlier strong LIS emphasis on L&I services has declined notably, while scientific and professional communication has become the most popular topic. Information storage and retrieval has given up its earlier strong position towards the end of the years analyzed. Individuals are increasingly the units of observation. End-user's and developer's viewpoints have strengthened at the cost of intermediaries' viewpoint. LIS research is methodologically increasingly scattered since survey, scientometric methods, experiment, case studies and qualitative studies have all gained in popularity. Consequently, LIS may have become more versatile in the analysis of its research objects during the years analyzed. Originality/value Among quantitative intellectual content analyses of LIS research, the study is unique in its scope: length of analysis period (50 years), width (8 dimensions covering topical content and methodology) and depth (the annual batch of 30+ scholarly journals).

0.0064210845 = product of:
  0.025684338 = sum of:
    0.025684338 = product of:
      0.051368676 = sum of:
        0.051368676 = weight(_text_:research in 767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051368676 = score(doc=767,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.38605565 = fieldWeight in 767, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=767)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The study analyses contributions to Library and Information Science (LIS) by researchers representing various disciplines. How are such contributions associated with the choice of research topics and methodology? The study employs a quantitative content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 2015. Each article is seen as a contribution to LIS by the authors' disciplines, which are inferred from their affiliations. The unit of analysis is the article-discipline pair. Of the contribution instances, the share of LIS is one third. Computer Science contributes one fifth and Business and Economics one sixth. The latter disciplines dominate the contributions in information retrieval, information seeking, and scientific communication indicating strong influences in LIS. Correspondence analysis reveals three clusters of research, one focusing on traditional LIS with contributions from LIS and Humanities and survey-type research; another on information retrieval with contributions from Computer Science and experimental research; and the third on scientific communication with contributions from Natural Sciences and Medicine and citation analytic research. The strong differentiation of scholarly contributions in LIS hints to the fragmentation of LIS as a discipline.

0.005931544 = product of:
  0.023726176 = sum of:
    0.023726176 = product of:
      0.047452353 = sum of:
        0.047452353 = weight(_text_:research in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047452353 = score(doc=302,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.35662293 = fieldWeight in 302, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=302)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Sums up the results and discussions of the information needs and seeking (INS) conference listing the trends pointing favourably to improvements in the field and listing the problems and crucial shortcomings on INS research that still need to be addressed

Source

Information seeking in context: Proceedings of an International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, 14-16 August 1996, Tampere, Finland. Ed.: P. Vakkari u.a

0.005861622 = product of:
  0.023446487 = sum of:
    0.023446487 = product of:
      0.046892975 = sum of:
        0.046892975 = weight(_text_:research in 299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046892975 = score(doc=299,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.352419 = fieldWeight in 299, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=299)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

Source

Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen

0.0051368675 = product of:
  0.02054747 = sum of:
    0.02054747 = product of:
      0.04109494 = sum of:
        0.04109494 = weight(_text_:research in 643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04109494 = score(doc=643,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.3088445 = fieldWeight in 643, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=643)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Information Retrieval (IR) is a research area both within Computer Science and Information Science. It has by and large two communities: a Computer Science oriented experimental approach and a user-oriented Information Science approach with a Social Science background. The communities hold a critical stance towards each other (e.g., Ingwersen, 1996), the latter suspecting the realism of the former, and the former suspecting the usefulness of the latter. Within Information Science the study of information seeking (IS) also has a Social Science background. There is a lot of research in each of these particular areas of information seeking and retrieval (IS&R). However, the three communities do not really communicate with each other. Why is this, and could the relationships be otherwise? Do the communities in fact belong together? Or perhaps each community is better off forgetting about the existence of the other two? We feel that the relationships between the research areas have not been properly analyzed. One way to analyze the relationships is to examine what each research area is trying to find out: which phenomena are being explained and how. We believe that IS&R research would benefit from being analytic about its frameworks, models and theories, not just at the level of meta-theories, but also much more concretely at the level of study designs. Over the years there have been calls for more context in the study of IS&R. Work tasks as well as cultural activities/interests have been proposed as the proper context for information access. For example, Wersig (1973) conceptualized information needs from the tasks perspective. He argued that in order to learn about information needs and seeking, one needs to take into account the whole active professional role of the individuals being investigated. Byström and Järvelin (1995) analysed IS processes in the light of tasks of varying complexity. Ingwersen (1996) discussed the role of tasks and their descriptions and problematic situations from a cognitive perspective on IR. Most recently, Vakkari (2003) reviewed task-based IR and Järvelin and Ingwersen (2004) proposed the extension of IS&R research toward the task context. Therefore there is much support to the task context, but how should it be applied in IS&R?

0.0039493376 = product of:
  0.01579735 = sum of:
    0.01579735 = product of:
      0.0315947 = sum of:
        0.0315947 = weight(_text_:22 in 4573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0315947 = score(doc=4573,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16332182 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

9.12.2018 16:22:25

0.003707215 = product of:
  0.01482886 = sum of:
    0.01482886 = product of:
      0.02965772 = sum of:
        0.02965772 = weight(_text_:research in 3328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02965772 = score(doc=3328,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.22288933 = fieldWeight in 3328, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3328)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This small-scale empirical study focuses an students' anticipated and assessed contribution of references retrieved during the preparation of research proposals. It explores how the expected contribution of types of information before searches differs from the assessed contribution of relevant references found by the types of information. Twenty-two psychology undergraduates searched the PsychINFO database for references at the initial and end stages of a seminar for preparing proposals. Data about their subject knowledge, search goals, and utility assessments were collected using several methods. They were asked to predict and assess the utility of information types provided by relevant references for the proposals. At the beginning of the process, they found fewer general types of information and more specific types of information than they expected. However, the students tended to accept references according to their expectations. By the end of the process, the expected importance of general information types declined and the importance of specific information types increased. At the end of the task, students became more proficient at recognizing the utility and topicality of references. They also became more critical in accepting found information to match their expectations.

0.0036699555 = product of:
  0.014679822 = sum of:
    0.014679822 = product of:
      0.029359644 = sum of:
        0.029359644 = weight(_text_:research in 4710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029359644 = score(doc=4710,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.22064918 = fieldWeight in 4710, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4710)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Describes a study whose aim was to analyse theory growth in information science by using a case from information seeking studies. Scientific growth is identified with the growth of theories. Differentiates 3 contexts of theoretical work: unit theories, theoretical research programmes and metatheories. States that for analysis if theory growth, tools based on the current theory of science are needed. Introduces tools for the analysis of theory growth and theory reconstruction and applies them to analysis of a theory on information seeking

0.0031456763 = product of:
  0.012582705 = sum of:
    0.012582705 = product of:
      0.02516541 = sum of:
        0.02516541 = weight(_text_:research in 4435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02516541 = score(doc=4435,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.18912788 = fieldWeight in 4435, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4435)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.0031456763 = product of:
  0.012582705 = sum of:
    0.012582705 = product of:
      0.02516541 = sum of:
        0.02516541 = weight(_text_:research in 4493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02516541 = score(doc=4493,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.18912788 = fieldWeight in 4493, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4493)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.0031456763 = product of:
  0.012582705 = sum of:
    0.012582705 = product of:
      0.02516541 = sum of:
        0.02516541 = weight(_text_:research in 2850) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02516541 = score(doc=2850,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.18912788 = fieldWeight in 2850, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2850)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.0026213971 = product of:
  0.010485589 = sum of:
    0.010485589 = product of:
      0.020971177 = sum of:
        0.020971177 = weight(_text_:research in 46) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020971177 = score(doc=46,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.15760657 = fieldWeight in 46, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=46)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.0026213971 = product of:
  0.010485589 = sum of:
    0.010485589 = product of:
      0.020971177 = sum of:
        0.020971177 = weight(_text_:research in 260) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020971177 = score(doc=260,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.15760657 = fieldWeight in 260, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=260)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.0020971175 = product of:
  0.00838847 = sum of:
    0.00838847 = product of:
      0.01677694 = sum of:
        0.01677694 = weight(_text_:research in 1891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01677694 = score(doc=1891,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.12608525 = fieldWeight in 1891, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1891)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.0020971175 = product of:
  0.00838847 = sum of:
    0.00838847 = product of:
      0.01677694 = sum of:
        0.01677694 = weight(_text_:research in 1797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01677694 = score(doc=1797,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13306029 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046639 = queryNorm
            0.12608525 = fieldWeight in 1797, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.8529835 = idf(docFreq=6931, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1797)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Findings - The results indicate that both WikiMap and WNavis supported users to identify concepts and their relations better compared to the baseline. In topical tasks WNavis over performed both WikiMap and the baseline system. Although there were no time differences in finding concepts or answering topical questions, the test systems provided users with a greater gain per time unit. The users of WNavis leaned on the hierarchy tree instead of other tools, whereas WikiMap users used the topic map. Research limitations/implications - The findings have implications for the design of IR support tools in knowledge-intensive web sites that help users to explore topics and concepts. Originality/value - The authors explored to what extent the use of each IV support tool contributed to successful exploration of topics in search tasks. The authors propose extended task-based evaluation measures to understand how each application provides useful context for users to accomplish the tasks and attain the search goals. That is, the authors not only evaluate the output of the search results, e.g. the number of relevant items retrieved, but also the outcome provided by the system for assisting users to attain the search goal.