Search (115 results, page 1 of 6)

0.10919636 = product of:
  0.16379453 = sum of:
    0.1207787 = weight(_text_:search in 2131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1207787 = score(doc=2131,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.691221 = fieldWeight in 2131, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2131)
    0.043015826 = product of:
      0.08603165 = sum of:
        0.08603165 = weight(_text_:engines in 2131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08603165 = score(doc=2131,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.33681408 = fieldWeight in 2131, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2131)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Reports results of a study, conducted at Hawaii University, Department of Information and Computer Science, to understand the novide searchers' experience in learning to use a WWW search engine. Without prior searching instruction, undergraduate novives wrote structured self reports during their first session on a Web search engine. Users choose their own topics and followed written instructions that prompted them to describe thoughts and feelings during specified stages of the search; pre search formulation; search statement formulation; search strategy; and evaluation of the results. The sentences in the self reports were numbered and then coded according to their affective or cognitive function. The affective sentences reveal how users set goals and limit the scope of the cognitive operations. Search acts appear to be governed by an affective filter that organizes incoming information and provides criteria for ranking cognitive relevance to search goal. Content analysis identifies reasons users have for rating self confidence, stress level, satisfaction, usefulness, and success with future searches

0.08261599 = product of:
  0.12392397 = sum of:
    0.053679425 = weight(_text_:search in 6546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053679425 = score(doc=6546,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.30720934 = fieldWeight in 6546, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6546)
    0.07024455 = product of:
      0.1404891 = sum of:
        0.1404891 = weight(_text_:engines in 6546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1404891 = score(doc=6546,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.5500151 = fieldWeight in 6546, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=6546)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This research continues to explore the user's evaluation of Web search engines using a methodology proposed by Su (1997) and tested in a pilot study (Su, Chen, & Dong, 1998). It seeks to generate useful insight for system design and improvement, and for engine choice. The researchers were interested in how undergraduate students used four selected engines to retrieve information for their studies or personal interests and how they evaluated the interaction and search results retrieved by the four engines. Measures used were based on five evaluation criteria: relevance, efficiency, utility, user satisfaction, and connectivity. Thirty-six undergraduate juniors and seniors were recruited from the disciplines of sciences, social sciences and humanities. Each searched his/her own topic on all four engines in an assigned order and each made relevance judgements of retrieved items in relation to his/her information need or problem. The study found some significant differences among the four engines but none dominated in every aspect of the multidimensional evaluation. Alta Vista had the highest number of relevant and partially relevant documents, the best relative recall and the highest precision ratio based on PR1, Alter Vista had significantly better scores for these three measures than for Lycos. Infoseek had the highest satisfaction rating for response time. Both Infoseek and Excite had significantly higher satisfaction ratings for response time than Lycos. Excite had the best score for output display. Excite and Alta Vista had significantly better scores for output display than Lycos. Excite had the best rating for time saving while Alta Vista achieved the best score for value of search results as a whole and for overall performance. Alta Vista and Excite had significantly better ratings for these three measures than Lycos. Lycos achieved the best relevance ranking performance. Further work will provide more complete picture for engine comparison and choice by taking into account participant characteristics and identify factors contributing to the user's satisfaction to gain better insight for system design and improvement

0.07096409 = product of:
  0.10644613 = sum of:
    0.08135357 = weight(_text_:search in 1255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08135357 = score(doc=1255,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.46558946 = fieldWeight in 1255, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1255)
    0.025092565 = product of:
      0.05018513 = sum of:
        0.05018513 = weight(_text_:engines in 1255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05018513 = score(doc=1255,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19647488 = fieldWeight in 1255, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1255)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

As digital libraries become a major source of information for many people, we need to know more about how people seek and retrieve information in digital environments. Quite commonly, users with a problem-at-hand and associated question-in-mind repeatedly search a literature for answers, and seek information in stages over extended periods from a variety of digital information resources. The process of repeatedly searching over time in relation to a specific, but possibly an evolving information problem (including changes or shifts in a variety of variables), is called the successive search phenomenon. The study outlined in this paper is currently investigating this new and little explored line of inquiry for information retrieval, Web searching, and digital libraries. The purpose of the research project is to investigate the nature, manifestations, and behavior of successive searching by users in digital environments, and to derive criteria for use in the design of information retrieval interfaces and systems supporting successive searching behavior. This study includes two related projects. The first project is based in the School of Library and Information Sciences at the University of North Texas and is funded by a National Science Foundation POWRE Grant <http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/show?award=9753277>. The second project is based at the Department of Information Studies at the University of Sheffield (UK) and is funded by a grant from the British Library <http://www.shef. ac.uk/~is/research/imrg/uncerty.html> Research and Innovation Center. The broad objectives of each project are to examine the nature and extent of successive search episodes in digital environments by real users over time. The specific aim of the current project is twofold: * To characterize progressive changes and shifts that occur in: user situational context; user information problem; uncertainty reduction; user cognitive styles; cognitive and affective states of the user, and consequently in their queries; and * To characterize related changes over time in the type and use of information resources and search strategies particularly related to given capabilities of IR systems, and IR search engines, and examine changes in users' relevance judgments and criteria, and characterize their differences. The study is an observational, longitudinal data collection in the U.S. and U.K. Three questionnaires are used to collect data: reference, client post search and searcher post search questionnaires. Each successive search episode with a search intermediary for textual materials on the DIALOG Information Service is audiotaped and search transaction logs are recorded. Quantitative analysis includes statistical analysis using Likert scale data from the questionnaires and log-linear analysis of sequential data. Qualitative methods include: content analysis, structuring taxonomies; and diagrams to describe shifts and transitions within and between each search episode. Outcomes of the study are the development of appropriate model(s) for IR interactions in successive search episodes and the derivation of a set of design criteria for interfaces and systems supporting successive searching.

0.06276114 = product of:
  0.094141714 = sum of:
    0.08051914 = weight(_text_:search in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08051914 = score(doc=296,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.460814 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
    0.013622572 = product of:
      0.027245143 = sum of:
        0.027245143 = weight(_text_:22 in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027245143 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

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

Date

22. 3.2002 9:54:13

0.047206 = product of:
  0.070809 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 7914, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7914)
    0.0238395 = product of:
      0.047679 = sum of:
        0.047679 = weight(_text_:22 in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047679 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7914, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7914)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The library of the Cité des Sciences et de l'industrie attracts 4.000 visitors daily of whom 25% consult the GEAC system OPAC. Describes a 1992 survey consisting of online questions followed by an interview. The questionnaires were adapted from ones used in the UK and utilised OLIVE (Online Interactive Validation and Evaluation). While difficulties arose from users' inconsistency in their replies and failures to answer questions, it has become clear that subject access is unsatisfactory, sometimes because of mistyping by the searcher but also because of the vocabulary problems and lack of guidance in search strategies

Source

International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 22(1993) no.4, S.68-71

0.047206 = product of:
  0.070809 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=1795,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 1795, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1795)
    0.0238395 = product of:
      0.047679 = sum of:
        0.047679 = weight(_text_:22 in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047679 = score(doc=1795,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1795, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1795)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Presents a recently composite view of several user studies in information retrieval. Contains personal conclusions and speculations based on these studies, rather than formal statistical results, which so often are not comparable from 1 experiment to another. Suggests a taxonomy of user characteristics for such studies, in order to make results comparable. Discusses methods and effects of user training, then manner of expression of a query or information need, conduct of a search, use of the system command language or its equivalent, analysis by the user of retrieved information, and user satisfaction with outcome. Concludes with suggestions for system design and experimental methodology

Source

Canadian journal of information and library science. 19(1994) no.4, S.1-22

0.044283267 = product of:
  0.1328498 = sum of:
    0.1328498 = weight(_text_:search in 6608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1328498 = score(doc=6608,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.76030433 = fieldWeight in 6608, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6608)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes an experiment in which secondary students from 6 schools on the island of Oahu, Hawaii, were tested for their ability to interpret and construct search statements in a presearch activity. Students read brief instructions on concept analysis, Boolean operators, and search statement format. One group used a worksheet. A 10item quiz tested students' knowledge of term selection and search logic and obtained self confidence ratings after answering each question. Search statements were analyzed according to a typology of search statement errors. On average, each student made 2 errors per search statement. Students with higher self confidence ratings had significantly higher scores on all measures

0.042437315 = product of:
  0.12731194 = sum of:
    0.12731194 = weight(_text_:search in 3877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12731194 = score(doc=3877,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.72861093 = fieldWeight in 3877, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3877)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports from a study investigating the extent to which academic end users conduct multiple search sessions, over time woth OPAC or CD-ROM databases at different stages of their information seeking related to a current research project. Interviews were conducted using a questionnaire with 200 academic end users at Rutgers University Alexander Library, NJ and University of North Texas, to investigate the occurrence of multiple search sessions. Results show that at the time of the survey interview, 57% of end users had conducted multiple search sessions during their research project and 86% of end users conducted their 1st search session at the beginning stage of their information seeking process. 49% of end users had conducted between 1 and 6 search sessions and 8% more than 6 search sessions. 70% of multiple search sessionss end users had modified their search terms since their 1st search session. Discusses the implications of the findings for end user training, information retrieval systems design and further research

0.04142321 = product of:
  0.12426962 = sum of:
    0.12426962 = weight(_text_:search in 7824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12426962 = score(doc=7824,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.71119964 = fieldWeight in 7824, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7824)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports selected results from a large study, conducted at Rutgers University, NJ, which observed, under real life conditions the interactions between users, intermediaries and information retrieval systems before and during online searching. Examines the stages of the search process at which search terms from different sources were selected and how the search terms selected at different stages of the search process contributed to the retrieval of relevant items as judged by users. Notes the sequences in which terms were selected and analyzes the sequences to determine the types and frequencies of changes that occur in such sequences. Results indicate that there are regular patterns in search term selection during the online search process. Discusses the implications of these findings

0.04001028 = product of:
  0.12003084 = sum of:
    0.12003084 = weight(_text_:search in 2679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12003084 = score(doc=2679,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.68694097 = fieldWeight in 2679, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2679)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes how librarians at Bowling Green State University, USA, used the McKinley Search Voyeur World wide Web site to observe a sample of searches currently entered by users of the McKinley Magellan search engine, in order to try to establish how library patrons search for information. Discusses search errors revealed by this research and provides a list of tips for successful WWW searching

0.038350433 = product of:
  0.1150513 = sum of:
    0.1150513 = weight(_text_:search in 5592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1150513 = score(doc=5592,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.65844285 = fieldWeight in 5592, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5592)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports results of a survey of 675 CD-ROM users at State University of New York at Albany Libraries, obtaining data from both questionnaires and actual search strategies. The primary aim was to investigate the effect of prior user training or assistance on CD-ROM search strategy. A statistically significant but weak relationship was found between prior rtraining and level of search skill. Other measures such as user status, department affiliation of major, age, sex, and number of previous CD-ROM uses were compared to search skill. Only user status and department affiliation or major were significantly correlated to search skill. Concludes that additional research is needed on the effectiveness of various types of CD-ROM training

0.038350433 = product of:
  0.1150513 = sum of:
    0.1150513 = weight(_text_:search in 3265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1150513 = score(doc=3265,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.65844285 = fieldWeight in 3265, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3265)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Considers what elicitation or requests for information search intermediaries make of users with information requests during an information retrieval interaction - including prior to and during an information retrieval interaction - and for what purpose. Reports a study of elicitations during 40 mediated information retrieval interactions. Identifies a total of 1.557 search intermediary elicitations within 15 purpose categories. The elicitation purposes of search intermediaries included requests for information on search terms and strategies, database selection, search procedures, system's outputs and relevance of retrieved items, and users' knowledge and previous information seeking. Investigates the transition sequences from 1 type of search intermediary elicitation to another. Compares these findings with results from a study of end user questions

0.037957087 = product of:
  0.113871254 = sum of:
    0.113871254 = weight(_text_:search in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.113871254 = score(doc=190,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6516894 = fieldWeight in 190, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=190)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 2993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=2993,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 2993, 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=2993)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 6040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=6040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 6040, 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=6040)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 5128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=5128,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 5128, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5128)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Identifies 6 types of searches on the basis of paudsing behaviour by using cluster analysis. The 6 types of search were highly associated with search fleuncy and the construction of a mental model. Examines learning during multiple searches on the basis of the 6 types. Finds that searchers gain more experience, increase their searching proficiency and become more fluent at searching while online. The changes of search level in multiple searches showed that most searchers moved towards greater fleuncy

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 5805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=5805,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 5805, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5805)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Discusses a multiple search session model of end users' interaction with information retrieval systems based on results from an exploratory study investigating end users' search sessions over time with OPACs or CD-ROM databases at different stages of their information seeking related to a current research project. Interviews were conducted with 200 academic end users to investigate the occurrence of multiple search sessions

0.035786286 = product of:
  0.10735885 = sum of:
    0.10735885 = weight(_text_:search in 7930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10735885 = score(doc=7930,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 7930, 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=7930)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.035364427 = product of:
  0.10609328 = sum of:
    0.10609328 = weight(_text_:search in 2423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10609328 = score(doc=2423,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.60717577 = fieldWeight in 2423, 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=2423)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Search statements in this revision process can be viewed as a 'move' in the overall search strategy. Very little is known about how end users develop and revise their search strategies. A study was conducted to analyse the moves made in 244 data base searches conducted by 26 medical students at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Students search INQUIRER, a data base of facts and concepts in microbiology. The searches were conducted during a 3-week period in spring 1990 and were recorded by the INQUIRER system. Each search statement was categorised, using Fidel's online searching moves (S. Online review 9(1985) S.61-74) and Bates' search tactics (s. JASIS 30(1979) S.205-214). Further analyses indicated that the most common moves were Browse/Specity, Select Exhaust, Intersect, and Vary, and that selection of moves varied by student and by problem. Analysis of search tactics (combinations of moves) identified 5 common search approaches. The results of this study have implcations for future research on search behaviours, for thedesign of system interfaces and data base structures, and for the training of end users

0.035008997 = product of:
  0.10502698 = sum of:
    0.10502698 = weight(_text_:search in 2348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10502698 = score(doc=2348,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.6010733 = fieldWeight in 2348, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2348)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

An analysis of transaction logs from an academic library online catalog describes instances in which users have tried both controlled and uncontrolled (title keyword) vocabulary subject access during the same search session. Eight hypotheses were tested. Over 6.6% of all dial access search sessions contained both methods of subject access. Over 58% of the isolated sessions began with an uncontrolled vocabulary attempt. Over 76% contained only one vocabulary shift. On average, user persistence was greater during controlled vocabulary search logs, but search output was greater during uncontrolled vocabulary search logs. Several recommendations regarding catalog design and instruction are made.