Search (18 results, page 1 of 1)

0.06863054 = product of:
  0.102945805 = sum of:
    0.06709928 = weight(_text_:search in 197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06709928 = score(doc=197,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.3840117 = fieldWeight in 197, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=197)
    0.03584652 = product of:
      0.07169304 = sum of:
        0.07169304 = weight(_text_:engines in 197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07169304 = score(doc=197,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2806784 = fieldWeight in 197, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=197)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The authors report the findings of a study that analyzes and compares the query logs of PsycINFO for psychology and the two history databases of ABC-Clio: Historical Abstracts and America: History and Life to establish the sociological nature of information need, searching, and seeking in history versus psychology. Two problems are addressed: (a) What level of query log analysis - by individual query terms, by co-occurrence of word pairs, or by multiword terms (MWTs) - best serves as data for categorizing the queries to these two subject-bound databases; and (b) how can the differences in the nature of the queries to history versus psychology databases aid in our understanding of user search behavior and the information needs of their respective users. The authors conclude that MWTs provide the most effective snapshot of user searching behavior for query categorization. The MWTs to ABC-Clio indicate specific instances of historical events, people, and regions, whereas the MWTs to PsycINFO indicate concepts roughly equivalent to descriptors used by PsycINFO's own classification scheme. The average length of queries is 3.16 terms for PsycINFO and 3.42 for ABC-Clio, which breaks from findings for other reference and scholarly search engine studies, bringing query length closer in line to findings for general Web search engines like Excite.

0.044422872 = product of:
  0.066634305 = sum of:
    0.037957087 = weight(_text_:search in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037957087 = score(doc=647,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.21722981 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
    0.028677218 = product of:
      0.057354435 = sum of:
        0.057354435 = weight(_text_:engines in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057354435 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.22454272 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Humans have used electronic information retrieval (IR) systems for more than 50 years as they evolved from experimental systems to full-scale Web search engines and digital libraries. The fields of library and information science (LIS), cognitive science, human factors and computer science have historically been the leading disciplines in conducting research that seeks to model human interaction with IR systems for all kinds of information related behaviors. As technology problems have been mastered, the theoretical and applied framework for studying human interaction with IR systems has evolved from systems-centered to more user-centered, or cognitive-centered approaches. However, cognitive information retrieval (CIR) research that focuses on user interaction with IR systems is still largely under-funded and is often not included at computing and systems design oriented conferences. But CIR-focused research continues, and there are signs that some IR systems designers in academia and the Web search business are realizing that user behavior research can provide valuable insights into systems design and evaluation. The goal of our book is to provide an overview of new CIR research directions. This book does not provide a history of the research field of CIR. Instead, the book confronts new ways of looking at the human information condition with regard to our increasing need to interact with IR systems. The need has grown due to a number of factors, including the increased importance of information to more people in this information age. Also, IR was once considered document-oriented, but has now evolved to include multimedia, text, and other information objects. As a result, IR systems and their complexity have proliferated as users and user purposes for using them have also proliferated. Human interaction with IR systems can often be frustrating as people often lack an understanding of IR system functionality.

0.037011288 = product of:
  0.05551693 = sum of:
    0.026839713 = weight(_text_:search in 625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026839713 = score(doc=625,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.15360467 = fieldWeight in 625, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=625)
    0.028677218 = product of:
      0.057354435 = sum of:
        0.057354435 = weight(_text_:engines in 625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057354435 = score(doc=625,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.22454272 = fieldWeight in 625, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=625)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The article reports a field study which examined the mental models of 80 undergraduates seeking information for either a history or psychology course essay when they were in an early, exploration stage of researching their essay. This group is presently at a disadvantage when using thesaurus-type schemes in indexes and online search engines because there is a disconnect between how domain novice users of IR systems represent a topic space and how this space is represented in the standard IR system thesaurus. The study attempted to (a) ascertain the coding language used by the 80 undergraduates in the study to mentally represent their topic and then (b) align the mental models with the hierarchical structure found in many thesauri. The intervention focused the undergraduates' thinking about their topic from a topic statement to a thesis statement. The undergraduates were asked to produce three mental model diagrams for their real-life course essay at the beginning, middle, and end of the interview, for a total of 240 mental model diagrams, from which we created a 12-category mental model classification scheme. Findings indicate that at the end of the intervention, (a) the percentage of vertical mental models increased from 24 to 35% of all mental models; but that (b) 3rd-year students had fewer vertical mental models than did 1st-year undergraduates in the study, which is counterintuitive. The results indicate that there is justification for pursuing our research based on the hypothesis that rotating a domain novice's mental model into a vertical position would make it easier for him or her to cognitively connect with the thesaurus's hierarchical representation of the topic area.

0.035505608 = product of:
  0.10651682 = sum of:
    0.10651682 = weight(_text_:search in 4985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10651682 = score(doc=4985,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6095997 = fieldWeight in 4985, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4985)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Inhalt: The importance of information need -- The history of information need -- The framework for our discussion -- Modeling the user in information search -- Information seeking's conceptualization of information need during information search -- Information use -- Adaptation : internal information flows and knowledge generation -- A theory of information need -- How information need works -- The user's situation in the pre-focus search -- The situation of user's information need in pre-focus information search -- The selection concept -- A review of the user's pre-focus information search -- How information need works in a focusing search -- Circles 1 to 5 : how information need works -- Corroborating research -- Applying information need -- The astrolabe : an information system for stage 3 information exploration -- Conclusion.

0.03438644 = product of:
  0.051579658 = sum of:
    0.037957087 = weight(_text_:search in 642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037957087 = score(doc=642,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.21722981 = fieldWeight in 642, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=642)
    0.013622572 = product of:
      0.027245143 = sum of:
        0.027245143 = weight(_text_:22 in 642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027245143 = score(doc=642,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 642, 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=642)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Information retrieval (IR) research has developed considerably since the 1950's to include consideration of more cognitive, interactive and iterative processes during the interaction between humans and IR or Web systems (Ingwersen, 1992, 1996). Interactive search sessions by humans with IR systems have been depicted as interactive IR models (Saracevic, 1997). Human-IR system interaction is also modeled as taking place within the context of broader human information behavior (HIB) processes (Spink et al., 2002). Research into the human or cognitive (user modeling) aspects of IR is a growing body of research on user interactivity, task performance and measures for observing user interactivity. The task context and situational characteristics of users' searches and evaluation have also been identified as key elements in a user's interaction with an IR system (Cool and Spink, 2002; Vakkari, 2003). Major theorized interactive IR models have been proposed relating to the single search episode, including Ingwersen's (1992,1996) Cognitive Model of IR Interaction, Belkin et al.'s (1995) Episodic Interaction Model, and Saracevic's (1996,1997) Stratified Model of IR Interaction. In this chapter we examine Saracevic's Stratified Model of IR Interaction and extend the model within the framework of cognitive IR (CIR) to depict CIR as a multitasking process. This chapter provides a new direction for CIR research by conceptualizing IR with a multitasking context. The next section of the chapter defines the concept of multitasking in the cognitive sciences and Section 3 discusses the emerging understanding of multitasking information behavior. In Section 4, cognitive IR is depicted within a multitasking framework using Saracevic's (1996, 1997) Stratified Model of IR Interaction. In Section 5, we link information searching and seeking models together, via Saracevic's Stratified Model of IR Interaction, but starting with a unitask model of HIB. We begin to model multitasking in cognitive IR in Section 6. In Sections 7 and 8, we increase the complexity of our developing multitasking model of cognitive IR by adding coordinating mechanisms, including feedback loops. Finally, in Section 9, we conclude the chapter and indicate future directions for further research.

Date

19. 1.2007 12:55:22

0.027117856 = product of:
  0.08135357 = sum of:
    0.08135357 = weight(_text_:search in 627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08135357 = score(doc=627,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.46558946 = fieldWeight in 627, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=627)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

When assisting undergraduate students in accessing materials, academic librarians must balance the task of conducting reference interviews with instructing students on how to use databases (OPACs, CD-ROM and online databases). Presents a method for connecting these tasks via the construction of a search strategy which is wholly dependent on the user's information needs. Using this method, the librarian assesses and explicitly labels the student's information need (using a diagnostoc tool based on Kuhlthau's and Taylor's concept of 'focus'), then assigns the most appropriate online search strategy for the satisfaction of this need

0.022366427 = product of:
  0.06709928 = sum of:
    0.06709928 = weight(_text_:search in 5656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06709928 = score(doc=5656,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.3840117 = fieldWeight in 5656, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5656)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.019369897 = product of:
  0.058109686 = sum of:
    0.058109686 = weight(_text_:search in 1237) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058109686 = score(doc=1237,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.33256388 = fieldWeight in 1237, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1237)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The study reported here tested the efficacy of an information retrieval system output summary and visualization scheme for undergraduates taking a Vietnam War history who were in Kuhlthau's Stage 3 of researching a history essay. The visualization scheme consisted of (a) the undergraduate's own visualization of his or her essay topic, drawn by the student an the bottom half of a sheet of paper, and (b) a visualization of the information space (determined by index term counting) an the tophalf of the same page. To test the visualization scheme, students enrolled in a Vietnam War history course were randomly assigned to either the visualization scheme group, who received a high recall search output, or the nonvisualization group, who received a high precision search output. The dependent variable was the mark awarded the essay by the course instructor. There was no significant difference between the mean marks for the two groups. We were pleasantly surprised with this result given the bad reputation of high recall as a practical search strategy. We hypothesize that a more proactive visualization system is needed that takes the student through the process of using the visualization scheme, including steps that induce student cognition about task-subject objectives.

0.019369897 = product of:
  0.058109686 = sum of:
    0.058109686 = weight(_text_:search in 2575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058109686 = score(doc=2575,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.33256388 = fieldWeight in 2575, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2575)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

When accessing an information retrieval system, it has long been said that undergraduates who are in an exploratory stage of researching their essay topic should use a high recall search strategy; what prevents them from doing so is the information overload factor associated with showing the undergraduate a long list of citations. One method of overcoming information overload is summarizing and visualizing the citation list. This paper examines five summarization and visualization schemes for presenting information retrieval (IR) citation output, then discusses whether these schemes are appropriate for undergraduates and other domain novice users. We ask and answer four questions: (1) What is the message these schemes try to communicate and (2) is this message appropriate for domain novice users like undergraduates? (3) How do these schemes communicate their message and (4) is how they communicate the message appropriate for a domain novice? We conclude that (i) the most appropriate message for information space visualizations for domain novice users is associative thinking, and (ii) the message should be communicated with a standardized look that remains relatively constant over time so that the shape and form of the visualization can become familiar and thus useful to students as they navigate their way through the information space produced by a high recall search strategy.

0.017893143 = product of:
  0.053679425 = sum of:
    0.053679425 = weight(_text_:search in 6918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053679425 = score(doc=6918,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.30720934 = fieldWeight in 6918, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6918)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Proposes a reference interview strategy that will allow the reference librarian to: efficiently assess the information need of undergraduates undertaking a social science assignment, label the information need, and assign the most appropriate online search strategy to satisfy this need

0.015815454 = product of:
  0.04744636 = sum of:
    0.04744636 = weight(_text_:search in 4474) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04744636 = score(doc=4474,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.27153727 = fieldWeight in 4474, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4474)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article proposes a theory of information need for information retrieval (IR). Information need traditionally denotes the start state for someone seeking information, which includes information search using an IR system. There are two perspectives on information need. The dominant, computer science perspective is that the user needs to find an answer to a well-defined question which is easy for the user to formulate into a query to the system. Ironically, information science's best known model of information need (Taylor, 1968) deems it to be a "black box"-unknowable and nonspecifiable by the user in a query to the information system. Information science has instead devoted itself to studying eight adjacent or surrogate concepts (information seeking, search and use; problem, problematic situation and task; sense making and evolutionary adaptation/information foraging). Based on an analysis of these eight adjacent/surrogate concepts, we create six testable propositions for a theory of information need. The central assumption of the theory is that while computer science sees IR as an information- or answer-finding system, focused on the user finding an answer, an information science or user-oriented theory of information need envisages a knowledge formulation/acquisition system.

0.015003856 = product of:
  0.04501157 = sum of:
    0.04501157 = weight(_text_:search in 480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04501157 = score(doc=480,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.25760287 = fieldWeight in 480, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=480)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

What is the uniquely human factor in finding and using information to produce new knowledge? Is there an underlying aspect of our thinking that cannot be imitated by the AI-equipped machines that will increasingly dominate our lives? This book answers these questions, and tells us about our consciousness - its drive or intention in seeking information in the world around us, and how we are able to construct new knowledge from this information. The book is divided into three parts, each with an introduction and a conclusion that relate the theories and models presented to the real-world experience of someone using a search engine. First, Part I defines the exceptionality of human consciousness and its need for new information and how, uniquely among all other species, we frame our interactions with the world. Part II then investigates the problem of finding our real information need during information searches, and how our exceptional ability to frame our interactions with the world blocks us from finding the information we really need. Lastly, Part III details the solution to this framing problem and its operational implications for search engine design for everyone whose objective is the production of new knowledge. In this book, Charles Cole deliberately writes in a conversational style for a broader readership, keeping references to research material to the bare minimum. Replicating the structure of a detective novel, he builds his arguments towards a climax at the end of the book. For our video-game, video-on-demand times, he has visualized the ideas that form the book's thesis in over 90 original diagrams. And above all, he establishes a link between information need and knowledge production in evolutionary psychology, and thus bases his arguments in our origins as a species: how we humans naturally think, and how we naturally search for new information because our consciousness drives us to need it.

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 71(2020) no.1, S.118-120 (Heidi Julien). - Vgl. auch den Beitrag: Cole, C.: A rebuttal of the book review of the book titled "The Consciousness' Drive: Information Need and the Search for Meaning": mapping cognitive and document spaces. In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.2, S.242.

0.012652363 = product of:
  0.037957087 = sum of:
    0.037957087 = weight(_text_:search in 2389) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037957087 = score(doc=2389,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.21722981 = fieldWeight in 2389, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2389)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This is the second part of a two-part special topic JASIST issue an information seeking. The first part presented papers an the topics of health information seeking and everyday life information seeking or ELIS (i.e., information seeking outside of work or school). This second issue presents papers an the topics of information retrieval and information seeking in industry environments. Information retrieval involves a specific kind of information seeking, as the user is in direct contact with an information interface and with potential sources of information from the system's database. The user conducts the search using various strategies, tactics, etc., but there is also the possibility that information processes will occur resulting in a change in the way the user thinks about the topic of the search. If this occurs, the user is, in effect, using the found data, turning it into an informational element of some kind. Such processes can be facilitated in the design of the information retrieval system. Information seeking in industry environments takes up more and more of our working day. Even companies producing industrial products are in fact mainly producing informational elements of some kind, often for the purpose of making decisions or as starting positions for further information seeking. While there may be company mechanisms in place to aid such information seeking, and to make it more efficient, if better information seeking structures were in place, not only would workers waste less time in informational pursuits, but they would also find things, discover new processes, etc., that would benefit the corporation's bottom line. In Figure l, we plot the six papers in this issue an an information behavior continuum, following a taxonomy of information behavior terms from Spink and Cole (2001). Information Behavior is a broad term covering all aspects of information seeking, including passive or undetermined information behavior. Information-Seeking Behavior is usually thought of as active or conscious information behavior. Information-Searching Behavior describes the interactive elements between a user and an information system. Information-Use Behavior is about the user's acquisition and incorporation of data in some kind of information process. This leads to the production of information, but also back to the broad range of Information Behavior in the first part of the continuum. Though we plot all papers in this issue along this continuum, they take into account more than their general framework. The three information retrieval reports veer from the traditional information-searching approach of usersystem interaction, while the three industry environment articles veer from the traditional information-seeking approach of specific context information-seeking studies.

0.011183213 = product of:
  0.03354964 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 1078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=1078,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 1078, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1078)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In this article and two other articles which conceptualize a future stage of the research program (Leide, Cole, Large, & Beheshti, submitted for publication; Cole, Leide, Large, Beheshti, & Brooks, in preparation), we map-out a domain novice user's encounter with an IR system from beginning to end so that appropriate classification-based visualization schemes can be inserted into the encounter process. This article describes the visualization of a navigation classification scheme only. The navigation classification scheme uses the metaphor of a ship and ship's navigator traveling through charted (but unknown to the user) waters, guided by a series of lighthouses. The lighthouses contain mediation interfaces linking the user to the information store through agents created for each. The user's agent is the cognitive model the user has of the information space, which the system encourages to evolve via interaction with the system's agent. The system's agent is an evolving classification scheme created by professional indexers to represent the structure of the information store. We propose a more systematic, multidimensional approach to creating evolving classification/indexing schemes, based on where the user is and what she is trying to do at that moment during the search session.

0.011183213 = product of:
  0.03354964 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 1819) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=1819,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 1819, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1819)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The article reports a field study investigating the temporality of the information behavior of 44 grade 8 students from initiation to completion of their school inquiry-based history project. The conceptual framework for the study is Kuhlthau's 6-stage information-search process (ISP) model. The objective of the study is to test and extend ISP model concepts. As per other ISP model studies, our study measured the evolution of the feelings, thoughts, and actions of the study participants over the 3-month period of their class project. The unique feature of this study is the unlimited access the researchers had to a real-life history class, resulting in 12 separate measuring periods. We report 2 important findings of the study. First, through factor analysis, we determined 5 factors that define the temporality of completing an inquiry-based project for these grade 8 students. The second main finding is the importance of the students' consultations with their classmates, siblings, parents, and teachers in the construction of the knowledge necessary to complete their project.

0.011183213 = product of:
  0.03354964 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 2265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=2265,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 2265, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2265)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article reports on a field study of the information behavior of Grade 8 students researching an inquiry-based class history project. Kuhlthau's 7-stage Information Search Process (ISP) model forms the conceptual framework for the study. The aim of the study was to define an end game for the ISP model by answering the following question: How do the student participants' feelings, thoughts, and information behavior lead to the construction of new knowledge? Study findings tentatively indicate that knowledge construction results from an iterative process between the student and information, which can be divided into 3 phases. In the first phase, the students formulate questions from their previous knowledge to start knowledge construction; in the second phase, newly found topic information causes students to ask questions; and in the third phase, the students answer the questions asked by this newly found topic information. Based on these results and Kuhlthau's own ISP stage 7 assessment definition of the ISP model end game, we propose a model of knowledge construction inserted as an extra row in the ISP model framework.

0.0068112854 = product of:
  0.020433856 = sum of:
    0.020433856 = product of:
      0.040867712 = sum of:
        0.040867712 = weight(_text_:22 in 3675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040867712 = score(doc=3675,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3675, 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=3675)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 5.1999 14:51:49

0.0056760716 = product of:
  0.017028214 = sum of:
    0.017028214 = product of:
      0.03405643 = sum of:
        0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03405643 = score(doc=667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 667, 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=667)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 3.2013 19:41:17