Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Toms, E.G."
  1. Wildemuth, B.; Freund, L.; Toms, E.G.: Untangling search task complexity and difficulty in the context of interactive information retrieval studies (2014) 0.08
    0.078451425 = product of:
      0.11767714 = sum of:
        0.100648925 = weight(_text_:search in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.100648925 = score(doc=1786,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.5760175 = fieldWeight in 1786, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1786)
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1786, 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=1786)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - One core element of interactive information retrieval (IIR) experiments is the assignment of search tasks. The purpose of this paper is to provide an analytical review of current practice in developing those search tasks to test, observe or control task complexity and difficulty. Design/methodology/approach - Over 100 prior studies of IIR were examined in terms of how each defined task complexity and/or difficulty (or related concepts) and subsequently interpreted those concepts in the development of the assigned search tasks. Findings - Search task complexity is found to include three dimensions: multiplicity of subtasks or steps, multiplicity of facets, and indeterminability. Search task difficulty is based on an interaction between the search task and the attributes of the searcher or the attributes of the search situation. The paper highlights the anomalies in our use of these two concepts, concluding with suggestions for future methodological research related to search task complexity and difficulty. Originality/value - By analyzing and synthesizing current practices, this paper provides guidance for future experiments in IIR that involve these two constructs.
    Date
    6. 4.2015 19:31:22
  2. Toms, E.G.; O'Brien, H.L.: Understanding the information and communication technology needs of the e-humanist (2008) 0.05
    0.04626411 = product of:
      0.06939616 = sum of:
        0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 1731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03354964 = score(doc=1731,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 1731, 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=1731)
        0.03584652 = product of:
          0.07169304 = sum of:
            0.07169304 = weight(_text_:engines in 1731) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07169304 = score(doc=1731,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.2806784 = fieldWeight in 1731, 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=1731)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to understand the needs of humanists with respect to information and communication technology (ICT) in order to prescribe the design of an e-humanist's workbench. Design/methodology/approach - A web-based survey comprising over 60 questions gathered the following data from 169 humanists: profile of the humanist, use of ICT in teaching, e-texts, text analysis tools, access to and use of primary and secondary sources, and use of collaboration and communication tools. Findings - Humanists conduct varied forms of research and use multiple techniques. They rely on the availability of inexpensive, quality-controlled e-texts for their research. The existence of primary sources in digital form influences the type of research conducted. They are unaware of existing tools for conducting text analyses, but expressed a need for better tools. Search engines have replaced the library catalogue as the key access tool for sources. Research continues to be solitary with little collaboration among scholars. Research limitations/implications - The results are based on a self-selected sample of humanists who responded to a web-based survey. Future research needs to examine the work of the scholar at a more detailed level, preferably through observation and/or interviewing. Practical implications - The findings support a five-part framework that could serve as the basis for the design of an e-humanist's workbench. Originality/value - The paper examines the needs of the humanist, founded on an integration of information science research and humanities computing for a more comprehensive understanding of the humanist at work.
  3. Toms, E.G.; Freund, L.; Li, C.: WilRE: the Web Interactive information retrieval experimentation system prototype (2004) 0.02
    0.023243874 = product of:
      0.06973162 = sum of:
        0.06973162 = weight(_text_:search in 2534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06973162 = score(doc=2534,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.39907667 = fieldWeight in 2534, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2534)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    We introduce WiIRE, a prototype system for conducting interactive information retrieval (IIR) experiments via the Internet. We conceived Wi IRE to increase validity while streamlining procedures and adding efficiencies to the conduct of IIR experiments. The system incorporates password-controlled access, online questionnaires, study instructions and tutorials, conditional interface assignment, and conditional query assignment as well as provision for data collection. As an initial evaluation, we used WiIRE inhouse to conduct a Web-based IIR experiment using an external search engine with customized search interfaces and the TREC 11 Interactive Track search queries. Our evaluation of the prototype indicated significant cost efficiencies in the conduct of IIR studies, and additionally had some novel findings about the human perspective: about half participants would have preferred some personal contact with the researcher, and participants spent a significantly decreasing amount of time on tasks over the course of a session.
  4. Toms, E.G.; Taves, A.R.: Measuring user perceptions of Web site reputation (2004) 0.02
    0.015815454 = product of:
      0.04744636 = sum of:
        0.04744636 = weight(_text_:search in 2565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04744636 = score(doc=2565,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.27153727 = fieldWeight in 2565, 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=2565)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In this study, we compare a search tool, TOPIC, with three other widely used tools that retrieve information from the Web: AltaVista, Google, and Lycos. These tools use different techniques for outputting and ranking Web sites: external link structure (TOPIC and Google) and semantic content analysis (AltaVista and Lycos). TOPIC purports to output, and highly rank within its hit list, reputable Web sites for searched topics. In this study, 80 participants reviewed the output (i.e., highly ranked sites) from each tool and assessed the quality of retrieved sites. The 4800 individual assessments of 240 sites that represent 12 topics indicated that Google tends to identify and highly rank significantly more reputable Web sites than TOPIC, which, in turn, outputs more than AltaVista and Lycos, but this was not consistent from topic to topic. Metrics derived from reputation research were used in the assessment and a factor analysis was employed to identify a key factor, which we call 'repute'. The results of this research include insight into the factors that Web users consider in formulating perceptions of Web site reputation, and insight into which search tools are outputting reputable sites for Web users. Our findings, we believe, have implications for Web users and suggest the need for future research to assess the relationship between Web page characteristics and their perceived reputation.
  5. Bartlett, J.C.; Toms, E.G.: Developing a protocol for bioinformatics analysis : an integrated information behavior and task analysis approach (2005) 0.01
    0.0056760716 = product of:
      0.017028214 = sum of:
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 5256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=5256,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5256, 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=5256)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 7.2006 14:28:55
  6. O'Brien, H.L.; Toms, E.G.: What is user engagement? : a conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology (2008) 0.01
    0.0056760716 = product of:
      0.017028214 = sum of:
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 1721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=1721,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1721, 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=1721)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    21. 3.2008 13:39:22
  7. Dufour, C.; Bartlett, J.C.; Toms, E.G.: Understanding how webcasts are used as sources of information (2011) 0.01
    0.0056760716 = product of:
      0.017028214 = sum of:
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 4195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=4195,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4195, 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=4195)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2011 14:16:14
  8. Toms, E.G.: What motivates the browser? (1999) 0.00
    0.0045408574 = product of:
      0.013622572 = sum of:
        0.013622572 = product of:
          0.027245143 = sum of:
            0.027245143 = weight(_text_:22 in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027245143 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 292, 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=292)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2002 9:44:47