Search (322 results, page 2 of 17)

0.044283267 = product of:
  0.1328498 = sum of:
    0.1328498 = weight(_text_:search in 1007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1328498 = score(doc=1007,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.76030433 = fieldWeight in 1007, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1007)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Discusses information skills models and the search process of scientists

0.040462285 = product of:
  0.060693428 = sum of:
    0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04025957 = score(doc=625,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.230407 = 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)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=625)
    0.020433856 = product of:
      0.040867712 = sum of:
        0.040867712 = weight(_text_:22 in 625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040867712 = score(doc=625,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 625, 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=625)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Points to the trends in libraries and information services to shift away from the use of long established online hosts (such as DIALOG and STN) towards the use of CD-ROMs and direct access services, such as BIDS, Janet and CHEST, Illustrates the trend with statistics of host based MEDLINE searches conducted at the Barnes Library, Birmingham University; which show a decline from 526 searches in 1991/92 to 22 searches in 1995/96. Describes the process undertaken within the Information Services, Birminghampton University, to define a policy for the possible continuation of their mediated online searching service. Reports results of a questionnaire survey of other UK higher education institutions which confirmed their own feelings that the provision of such services was in decline, due largely to the shift towards end user access. With the increasing availability of nationally site licensed databases and locally available CD-ROMs, it is likely the researchers will ignore other commercial information services

0.040462285 = product of:
  0.060693428 = sum of:
    0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04025957 = score(doc=3612,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.230407 = fieldWeight in 3612, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3612)
    0.020433856 = product of:
      0.040867712 = sum of:
        0.040867712 = weight(_text_:22 in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040867712 = score(doc=3612,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3612, 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=3612)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In this paper results of a field study into the need for research information of different user groups are presented: scientists, policy makers and policy researchers, industry and media. Main questions of semi-structured interviews were: what kind of research information users need, what kind of research information resources are used and which information resources are missing at the moment. User groups are missing for a diversity of reasons the overview of research, experts and institutes in the different scientific fields. Especially for the accessibility and transparency of the scientific world these overviews are reported to be needed. Neither Google nor any of the research institutes or policy research organisations are able to present surveys for different science fields at the moment. Giving users the possibility to search, browse and navigate through accessible and more specialised layers of research information might give answers to different user groups simultaneously.

Date

2. 7.2005 12:22:50

0.040462285 = product of:
  0.060693428 = sum of:
    0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 2747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04025957 = score(doc=2747,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.230407 = fieldWeight in 2747, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2747)
    0.020433856 = product of:
      0.040867712 = sum of:
        0.040867712 = weight(_text_:22 in 2747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040867712 = score(doc=2747,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2747, 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=2747)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This study focuses on the task as a fundamental factor in the context of information seeking. The purpose of the study is to characterize kinds of tasks and to examine how different kinds of task give rise to different kinds of information-seeking behavior on the Web. For this, a model for information-seeking behavior was used employing dimensions of information-seeking strategies (ISS), which are based on several behavioral dimensions. The analysis of strategies was based on data collected through an experiment designed to observe users' behaviors. Three tasks were assigned to 30 graduate students and data were collected using questionnaires, search logs, and interviews. The qualitative and quantitative analysis of the data identified 14 distinct information-seeking strategies. The analysis showed significant differences in the frequencies and patterns of ISS employed between three tasks. The results of the study are intended to facilitate the development of task-based information-seeking models and to further suggest Web information system designs that support the user's diverse tasks.

Date

22. 3.2009 18:54:15

0.03842078 = product of:
  0.057631172 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 4720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=4720,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 4720, 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=4720)
    0.024081532 = product of:
      0.048163064 = sum of:
        0.048163064 = weight(_text_:22 in 4720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048163064 = score(doc=4720,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 4720, 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=4720)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This article characterises the questioning behaviour in reference interviews preceding delegated online searches of bibliographic databases and relates it to questioning behaviour in other types of interviews/settings. With one exception, the unit of analysis is the question (N=610), not the interview. The author uses A.C. Graesser's typology of questions to analyse type of question and M.D. White's typology of information categories to determine the question's content objective; this is the first application of Graesser's typology to interview questions in any setting. Graesser's categories allow for a more subtle understanding of the kind of information need underlying a question. Comparisons are made between questions asked by the information specialist and those asked by the client. Findings show that the information specialist dominates the interview, about half the questions were verification questions and about 22% were judgemental questions or requests; all but four types of questions from Graesser's categories appeared in the interviews, but no new question types were discovered. Clients often phrase questions as requests. In content, both clients and information specialists focus on the subject and service requested, but the clients ask also about search strategy and output features. Both parties ask predominantly short-answer questions. Results are related to interface design for retrieval systems.

Date

2.12.2005 14:48:22

0.037957087 = product of:
  0.113871254 = sum of:
    0.113871254 = weight(_text_:search in 3821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.113871254 = score(doc=3821,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6516894 = fieldWeight in 3821, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3821)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Key terms related to information searching and search models are defined. A historic context is provided to illustrate the evolution of the four main digital environments that users interact with in their search process to offer readers background information regarding the transition from manual information systems to computer-based information retrieval (IR) systems, as well as the transition from intermediary searching to end-user searching. Emphasis is placed on the review of different levels of information searching from search tactics/moves, search strategies, and usage patterns, to search models and associated factors in relation to task, user knowledge structure, IR system design, and social-organization context. Search models are further classified into two types, with one type illustrating information search process (ISP) and the other type emphasizing the factors that influence the process. In addition, unsolved problems and future research are discussed and suggested.

0.037582483 = product of:
  0.056373723 = sum of:
    0.03486581 = weight(_text_:search in 1175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03486581 = score(doc=1175,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19953834 = fieldWeight in 1175, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1175)
    0.021507913 = product of:
      0.043015826 = sum of:
        0.043015826 = weight(_text_:engines in 1175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043015826 = score(doc=1175,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.16840704 = fieldWeight in 1175, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1175)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Much progress has been made in aligning library services with changing (and increasingly digital and networked) research and learning environments. At times, however, this progress has been uneven, fragmented, and reactive. As libraries continue to engage with an ever-shifting information landscape, it is apparent that their efforts would be facilitated by a shared view of how library services should be organized and surfaced in these new settings and contexts. Recent discussions in a variety of areas underscore this point: * Institutional repositories: what is the role of the library in collecting, managing, and preserving institutional scholarly output, and what services should be offered to faculty and students in this regard? * Metasearch: how can the fragmented pieces of library collections be brought together to simplify and improve the search experience of the user? * E-learning and course management systems: how can library services be lifted out of traditional library environments and inserted into the emerging workflows of "e-scholars" and "e-learners"? * Exposing library collections to search engines: how can libraries surface their collections in the general Web search environment, and how can users be provisioned with better tools to navigate an increasingly complex information landscape? In each case, there is as yet no shared picture of the library to bring to bear on these questions; there is little consensus on the specific library services that should be expected in these environments, how they should be organized, and how they should be presented.

0.037090525 = product of:
  0.11127157 = sum of:
    0.11127157 = weight(_text_:search in 4989) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11127157 = score(doc=4989,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6368113 = fieldWeight in 4989, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4989)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Understanding search behavior is important and leads to more effective interfaces that support searchers throughout the search process. In this article, through an observational user study, we investigate the search behavior of 15 visually impaired and 15 sighted searchers while they complete complex search tasks online. We study complex search tasks because they are challenging, cognitively intensive and affect performance of searchers. We compare the behavior of the two groups of searchers at four stages of the information-seeking process namely, Query Formulation, Search Results Exploration, Query Reformulation, and Search Results Management. For each stage, we identify research questions to investigate the impact of speech-based screen readers on the information-seeking behavior of visually impaired users. Significant differences were observed during query formulation and in the use of query-level support features such as query suggestions and spelling suggestions. In addition, screen-reader users submitted a lower number of queries and displayed comparatively limited exploratory behavior during search results exploration. We investigate how a lack of visual cues affected visually impaired searchers' approach towards query reformulation and observed different strategies to manage and use information encountered during the search process. We discuss the implications that our findings have for the design of search interfaces and propose a set of design guidelines to consider when designing interfaces that are usable and accessible with screen readers. This work also enhances our understanding of search behavior when using an auditory interface and could be useful when designing audio-based information retrieval systems.

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.

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 3966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=3966,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 3966, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3966)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 5157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=5157,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 5157, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5157)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 5159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=5159,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 5159, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5159)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 5168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=5168,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 5168, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5168)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035364427 = product of:
  0.10609328 = sum of:
    0.10609328 = weight(_text_:search in 2967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10609328 = score(doc=2967,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.60717577 = fieldWeight in 2967, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2967)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the applicability to information behaviour contexts of the notion of a "search image", a mental entity highlighted in a significant anthropological study appearing in the 1990s. Design/methodology/approach - The paper considers search images of information-seekers by exploring hypothetical situations and using source material pertaining to areas such as information systems, information retrieval, information-seeking and the nature of libraries. Findings - Two types of search image are postulated - those taking the form of a visual memory of a particular source and those providing a detailed specification of material required in a certain situation. Research limitations/implications - The definition of a search image presented here has not been evolved through research featuring specially-undertaken fieldwork. New studies, incorporating individual interviews or think aloud protocols, should be conducted in order to address a series of emergent questions relating to search images. Practical implications - When more has been learned about the characteristics of search images of successful information-seekers, it may be possible to build into programmes of information literacy prompts that will help individuals to clarify in their minds what they require before embarking on an information search. Originality/value - Intended for information practitioners and academics alike, the paper forms the first attempt to apply a particular concept originating outside the discipline, i.e. that of a search image, to information-seeking situations. Attention to search images has the potential to increase one's understanding of how individuals find information, as well as to add a further dimension to information literacy instruction.

0.035364427 = product of:
  0.10609328 = sum of:
    0.10609328 = weight(_text_:search in 3417) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10609328 = score(doc=3417,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.60717577 = fieldWeight in 3417, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3417)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Literature examining information judgments and Internet search behaviors notes a number of major research gaps, including how users actually make these judgments outside of experiments or researcher-defined tasks, and how search behavior is impacted by a user's judgment of online information. Using the medical setting, where doctors face real consequences in applying the information found, we examine how information judgments employed by doctors to mitigate risk impact their cognitive search. Diaries encompassing 444 real clinical information search incidents, combined with semistructured interviews across 35 doctors, were analyzed via thematic analysis. Results show that doctors, though aware of the need for information quality and cognitive authority, rarely make evaluative judgments. This is explained by navigational bias in information searches and via predictive judgments that favor known sites where doctors perceive levels of information quality and cognitive authority. Doctors' mental models of the Internet sites and Web experience relevant to the task type enable these predictive judgments. These results suggest a model connecting online cognitive search and information judgment literatures. Moreover, this implies a need to understand cognitive search through longitudinal- or learning-based views for repeated search tasks, and adaptations to medical practitioner training and tools for online search.

0.035364427 = product of:
  0.10609328 = sum of:
    0.10609328 = weight(_text_:search in 3319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10609328 = score(doc=3319,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.60717577 = fieldWeight in 3319, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3319)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

No prior research has been identified that investigates the causal factors for workplace exploratory search task performance. The impact of user, task, and environmental factors on user satisfaction and task performance was investigated through a mixed methods study with 26 experienced information professionals using enterprise search in an oil and gas enterprise. Some participants found 75% of high-value items, others found none, with an average of 27%. No association was found between self-reported search expertise and task performance, with a tendency for many participants to overestimate their search expertise. Successful searchers may have more accurate mental models of both search systems and the information space. Organizations may not have effective exploratory search task performance feedback loops, a lack of learning. This may be caused by management bias towards technology, not capability, a lack of systems thinking. Furthermore, organizations may not "know" they "don't know" their true level of search expertise, a lack of knowing. A metamodel is presented identifying the causal factors for workplace exploratory search task performance. Semistructured qualitative interviews with search staff from the defense, pharmaceutical, and aerospace sectors indicates the potential transferability of the finding that organizations may not know their search expertise levels.

0.03371857 = product of:
  0.050577857 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 3010) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=3010,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 3010, 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=3010)
    0.017028214 = product of:
      0.03405643 = sum of:
        0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 3010) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03405643 = score(doc=3010,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3010, 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=3010)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The role of a modern librarian has become more and more demanding in the information age. One of the new challenges for the information specialists is what's usually called "the teaching librarian", meaning that the librarian or information specialist should be able to teach at least basic practical searching skills to the patrons in need for relevant information. Query Performance Analyser (QPA) is a tool for analysing and comparing the performance of individual queries. It has been developed in the department of information studies at the University of Tampere. It can be used in user training to demonstrate the characteristics of IR systems and different searching strategies. Usually users can't get any feedback about the effectiveness of their queries and therefore may have difficulties to perceive the actual fectiveness of a query formulated, or the effect changes between queries. QPA provides a instant visual feedback about the performance of a given query and gives the user a possibility to compare the effectiveness of multiple queries and the performance of different query formulation strategies. QPA is based on predefined search topics. They all contain a corpus of documents that are relevant to the given topic. The purpose of this paper is to give a brief insight to the infrastructure of QPA, the basic :Functionality of the QPA-based game, and to its implementation in IR education.

Date

22. 7.2009 11:03:43

0.03371857 = product of:
  0.050577857 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 3997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=3997,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 3997, 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=3997)
    0.017028214 = product of:
      0.03405643 = sum of:
        0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 3997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03405643 = score(doc=3997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3997, 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=3997)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to measure the efficiency of the system by which scientists worldwide communicate results to each other, providing one measure of the degree to which the system, including all media, functions well. A randomly selected and representative sample of 246 active research scientists worldwide was surveyed. The main measure was the reported rate of "late finds": scientific literature that would have been useful to scientists' projects if it had been found at the beginning of these projects. The main result was that 46% of the sample reported late finds (±6.25%, p0.05). Among respondents from European Union countries or other countries classified as "high income" by the World Bank, 42% reported late finds. Among respondents from low- and middle-income countries, 56% reported late finds. The 42% rate in high-income countries in 2009 can be compared with results of earlier surveys by Martyn (1964a, b, 1987). These earlier surveys found a rate of 22% late finds in 1963-1964 and a rate of 27% in 1985-1986. Respondents were also queried about search habits, but this study failed to support any explanations for this increase in the rate of late finds. This study also permits a crude estimate of the cost in time and money of the increase in late finds.

0.033549644 = product of:
  0.100648925 = sum of:
    0.100648925 = weight(_text_:search in 3607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.100648925 = score(doc=3607,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.5760175 = fieldWeight in 3607, 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=3607)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of a number of human individual differences on the web searching of a sample of the general public. Design/methodology/approach - In total, 91 members of the general public performed 195 controlled searches. Search activity and ratings of search difficulty and success were recorded and statistically analysed. The study was exploratory, and sought to establish whether there is a prima facie case for further systematic investigation of the selection and combination of variables studied here. Findings - Results revealed a number of interactions between individual differences, the use of different search strategies, and levels of perceived search difficulty and success. The findings also suggest that the open and closed nature of searches may affect these interactions. A conceptual model of these relationships is presented. Practical implications - Better understanding of factors affecting searching may help one to develop more effective search support, whether in the form of personalised search interfaces and mechanisms, adaptive systems, training or help systems. However, the findings reveal a complexity and variability suggesting that there is little immediate prospect of developing any simple model capable of driving such systems. Originality/value - There are several areas of this research that make it unique: the study's focus on a sample of the general public; its use of search logs linked to personal data; its development of a novel search strategy classifier; its temporal modelling of how searches are transformed over time; and its illumination of four different types of experienced searcher, linked to different search behaviours and outcomes.

0.0328718 = product of:
  0.0986154 = sum of:
    0.0986154 = weight(_text_:search in 7480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0986154 = score(doc=7480,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.5643796 = fieldWeight in 7480, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7480)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to look at the public libraries, university libraries and special libraries and information bureaus as online search environments in Finland at the beginning of the 1990s. Their challenges and opportunities are looked at by paying attention to their general and specific environments. The changes in the general environment of libraries are described briefly. The differences of specific online search environements are analyzed by paying attention to (i) the age of organisations and the establishment of onlines searches, (ii) the size of organisations and the division of labour in online searching, (iii) the available online information retrieval resources, (iv) the number of online searches, (v) the online searching policies, i.e. the participation of the clients in the search process and the adopted fee policy, and (vi) the clients of online searches. Public libraries, university libraries and special libraries and information bureaus clearly differ from each other as online search environments. So also do their challenges and opportunities differ. A common challenge for all search environments is, however, an ever clearer way to relate the costs of onlines earches to the profits received from them