Search (160 results, page 1 of 8)

0.13008177 = product of:
  0.19512266 = sum of:
    0.06606405 = weight(_text_:wide in 177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06606405 = score(doc=177,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 177, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=177)
    0.1290586 = sum of:
      0.087791964 = weight(_text_:web in 177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.087791964 = score(doc=177,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050763648 = queryNorm
          0.5299281 = fieldWeight in 177, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=177)
      0.041266643 = weight(_text_:22 in 177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041266643 = score(doc=177,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17776565 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050763648 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 177, 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=177)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This study investigated Simon's behavioral decisionmaking theories of bounded rationality and satisficing in relation to young people's decision making in the World Wide Web, and considered the role of personal preferences in Web-based decisions. It employed a qualitative research methodology involving group interviews with 22 adolescent females. Data analysis took the form of iterative pattern coding using QSR NUD*IST Vivo qualitative data analysis software. Data analysis revealed that the study participants did operate within the limits of bounded rationality. These limits took the form of time constraints, information overload, and physical constraints. Data analysis also uncovered two major satisficing behaviors-reduction and termination. Personal preference was found to play a major role in Web site evaluation in the areas of graphic/multimedia and subject content preferences. This study has related implications for Web site designers and for adult intermediaries who work with young people and the Web

0.11197935 = product of:
  0.16796902 = sum of:
    0.1321281 = weight(_text_:wide in 423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1321281 = score(doc=423,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.5874411 = fieldWeight in 423, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=423)
    0.035840917 = product of:
      0.071681835 = sum of:
        0.071681835 = weight(_text_:web in 423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.071681835 = score(doc=423,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 423, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=423)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

0.09331613 = product of:
  0.13997419 = sum of:
    0.110106766 = weight(_text_:wide in 1762) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.110106766 = score(doc=1762,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.48953426 = fieldWeight in 1762, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1762)
    0.029867431 = product of:
      0.059734862 = sum of:
        0.059734862 = weight(_text_:web in 1762) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059734862 = score(doc=1762,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 1762, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1762)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

0.088259995 = product of:
  0.13238999 = sum of:
    0.07707474 = weight(_text_:wide in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07707474 = score(doc=245,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.342674 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
    0.05531526 = product of:
      0.11063052 = sum of:
        0.11063052 = weight(_text_:web in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11063052 = score(doc=245,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.6677857 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

A study of the "real world" Web information searching behavior of 206 college students over a 10-month period showed that, contrary to expectations, the users adopted a more passive or browsing approach to Web information searching and became more eclectic in their selection of Web hosts as they gained experience. The study used a longitudinal transaction log analysis of the URLs accessed during 5,431 user days of Web information searching to detect changes in information searching behavior associated with increased experience of using the Web. The findings have implications for the design of future Web information retrieval tools

0.08780101 = product of:
  0.13170151 = sum of:
    0.07785724 = weight(_text_:wide in 968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07785724 = score(doc=968,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.34615302 = fieldWeight in 968, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=968)
    0.053844277 = product of:
      0.10768855 = sum of:
        0.10768855 = weight(_text_:web in 968) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10768855 = score(doc=968,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.65002745 = fieldWeight in 968, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=968)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The Web and especially major Web search engines are essential tools in the quest to locate online information for many people. This paper reports results from research that examines characteristics and changes in Web searching from nine studies of five Web search engines based in the US and Europe. We compare interactions occurring between users and Web search engines from the perspectives of session length, query length, query complexity, and content viewed among the Web search engines. The results of our research shows (1) users are viewing fewer result pages, (2) searchers on US-based Web search engines use more query operators than searchers on European-based search engines, (3) there are statistically significant differences in the use of Boolean operators and result pages viewed, and (4) one cannot necessary apply results from studies of one particular Web search engine to another Web search engine. The wide spread use of Web search engines, employment of simple queries, and decreased viewing of result pages may have resulted from algorithmic enhancements by Web search engine companies. We discuss the implications of the findings for the development of Web search engines and design of online content.

0.08177226 = product of:
  0.12265839 = sum of:
    0.07785724 = weight(_text_:wide in 6714) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07785724 = score(doc=6714,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.34615302 = fieldWeight in 6714, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6714)
    0.044801146 = product of:
      0.08960229 = sum of:
        0.08960229 = weight(_text_:web in 6714) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08960229 = score(doc=6714,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.5408555 = fieldWeight in 6714, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6714)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In this paper, we report on the second part of an empirical study designed to observe how users interact with World Wide Web resources. Applying a holistic approach, the researches examine users' cognitive, affective, and physical behaviors during user-Web interaction in order to understand better the nature of information retrieval on the Web, the needs of Web users, and the problem-solving strategies Web users employ. From analyses and the participant verbalizations collected during monitored searches, the researchers developed a taxonomy of problem solving strategies. The coding scheme was developed based on a content analysis of the integrated process data. Information from triangulation follow-up with participants via anonymously completed questionnaires, the taxonomy, and analyses of search transcripts were collected to determine 1) what problems users encountered during the interaction and how users solved these problems; and 2) which problem-solving strategies Web users considered and selected for finding factual information. The focus of the coding was on the participants' cognitive, affective, and physical behaviors in response to the components of the problems encountered, which included problems of the following types: Web interfaces, users' mental models, and the Web information sources. Searching behavior and problem-solving patterns are described and interpreted within the relevant situational context and the problems users encountered are identified and analyzed. Both the problems users faced and their problem-solving approaches endeavored evidence a strong reliance on mental models of the features available on sites, the location of those features, and other interface design concepts

0.08125104 = product of:
  0.12187655 = sum of:
    0.088085406 = weight(_text_:wide in 2679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088085406 = score(doc=2679,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.3916274 = fieldWeight in 2679, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2679)
    0.033791143 = product of:
      0.06758229 = sum of:
        0.06758229 = weight(_text_:web in 2679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06758229 = score(doc=2679,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.4079388 = fieldWeight in 2679, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2679)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

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

0.07552472 = product of:
  0.11328708 = sum of:
    0.07707474 = weight(_text_:wide in 694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07707474 = score(doc=694,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.342674 = fieldWeight in 694, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=694)
    0.036212336 = product of:
      0.07242467 = sum of:
        0.07242467 = weight(_text_:web in 694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07242467 = score(doc=694,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 694, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=694)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Two studies are presented that investigate information seeking behaviour on the Internet. In study one, soccer fans' information seeking on the World Wide Web is investigated. In study two, access rates to a cancer information Web site are analysed. It is tentatively argued that there is a tendency for people to access information more commonly avoided in "real life", although in the case of football fans, the tendency to "bask in reflected glory" remains when online, while cutting off reflected failure is minimised. Implications for understanding and researching psychological processes of Web browsing behaviour are discussed.

0.07109466 = product of:
  0.106641985 = sum of:
    0.07707474 = weight(_text_:wide in 24) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07707474 = score(doc=24,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.342674 = fieldWeight in 24, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=24)
    0.02956725 = product of:
      0.0591345 = sum of:
        0.0591345 = weight(_text_:web in 24) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0591345 = score(doc=24,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 24, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=24)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Im Rahmen eines Projektseminars am Institut für Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft der Humboldt Universität zu Berlin wurden an wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken Benutzerbefragungen durchgeführt. Wir haben die Antworten auf eine Frage zum Informationsverhalten bibliotheksübergreifend statistisch ausgewertet. Neben Unterschieden zwischen Fächern stellen wir fest, dass sich das Informationsverhalten junger Bibliotheksnutzer oft erheblich von dem älterer Nutzer unterscheidet. Das Verhalten von Bibliotheksnutzern hinsichtlich der Häufigkeit der Nutzung von Bibliotheksangeboten und dem World Wide Web (WWW) ist vorwiegend ähnlich. Nutzer mit konträrem Verhalten sind unterrepräsentiert gegenüber denen, die beides, Bibliothek und Web, oft oder beides wenig nutzen.

0.07075695 = product of:
  0.10613542 = sum of:
    0.06606405 = weight(_text_:wide in 4598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06606405 = score(doc=4598,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 4598, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4598)
    0.04007137 = product of:
      0.08014274 = sum of:
        0.08014274 = weight(_text_:web in 4598) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08014274 = score(doc=4598,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.48375595 = fieldWeight in 4598, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4598)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Searching for information on the WWW basically comes down to locating an appropriate Web site and to retrieving relevant information from that site. This study examined the effect of a user's WWW experience on both phases of the search process. 35 students from 2 schools for Dutch pre-university education were observed while performing 3 search tasks. The results indicate that subjects with WWW-experience are more proficient in locating Web sites than are novice WWW-users. The observed differences were ascribed to the experts' superior skills in operating Web search engines. However, on tasks that required subjects to locate information on specific Web sites, the performance of experienced and novice users was equivalent - a result that is in line with hypertext research. Based on these findings, implications for training and supporting students in searching for information on the WWW are identified. Finally, the role of the subjects' level of domain expertise is discussed and directions for future research are proposed

0.061088912 = product of:
  0.091633365 = sum of:
    0.055053383 = weight(_text_:wide in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055053383 = score(doc=5229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
    0.03657998 = product of:
      0.07315996 = sum of:
        0.07315996 = weight(_text_:web in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07315996 = score(doc=5229,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Thirty-one patrons, who were selected by Slone to provide a range of age and experience, agreed when approached while using the catalog of the Wake County library system to try searching via the Internet. Fifteen searched the Wake County online catalog in this manner and 16 searched the World Wide Web, including that catalog. They were subjected to brief pre-structured taped interviews before and after their searches and observed during the searching process resulting in a log of behaviors, comments, pages accessed, and time spent. Data were analyzed across participants and categories. Web searches were characterized as linking, URL, search engine, within a site domain, and searching a web catalog; and participants by the number of these techniques used. Four used only one, 13 used two, 11 used three, two used four, and one all five. Participant experience was characterized as never used, used search engines, browsing experience, email experience, URL experience, catalog experience, and finally chat room/newsgroup experience. Sixteen percent of the participants had never used the Internet, 71% had used search engines, 65% had browsed, 58% had used email, 39% had used URLs, 39% had used online catalogs, and 32% had used chat rooms. The catalog was normally consulted before the web, where both were used, and experience with an online catalog assists in web use. Scrolling was found to be unpopular and practiced halfheartedly.

0.059333354 = product of:
  0.08900003 = sum of:
    0.062285792 = weight(_text_:wide in 2766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.062285792 = score(doc=2766,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.2769224 = fieldWeight in 2766, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2766)
    0.026714243 = product of:
      0.053428486 = sum of:
        0.053428486 = weight(_text_:web in 2766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053428486 = score(doc=2766,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.32250395 = fieldWeight in 2766, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2766)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Thesauri have been important information and knowledge organisation tools for more than three decades. The recent emergence and phenomenal growth of the World Wide Web has created new opportunities to introduce thesauri as information search and retrieval aids to end user communities. While the number of web-based and hypertextual thesauri continues to grow, few investigations have yet been carried out to evaluate how end-users, for whom all these efforts are ostensibly made, interact with and make use of thesauri for query building and expansion. The present paper reports a pilot study carried out to determine the extent to which a thesaurus-enhanced search interface to a web-based database aided end-users in their selection of search terms. The study also investigated the ways in which users interacted with the thesaurus structure, terms, and interface. Thesaurusbased searching and browsing behaviours adopted by users while interacting with the thesaurus-enhanced search interface were also examined. 1. Introduction The last decade has witnessed the emergence of a broad range of applications for knowledge structures in general and thesauri in particular. A number of researchers have predicted that thesauri will increasingly be used in retrieval rather than for indexing (Milstead, 1998; Aitchison et al., 1997) and that their application in information retrieval systems will become more diverse due to the growth of fulltext databases accessed over the Internet (Williamson, 2000). Some researchers have emphasised the need for tailoring the structure and content of thesauri as tools for end-user searching (Bates, 1986; Strong and Drott, 1986; Anderson and Rowley, 1991; Lopez-Huertas, 1997) while others have suggested thesaurus-enhanced user interfaces to support query formulation and expansion (Pollitt et.al., 1994; Jones et.al., 1995; Beaulieu, 1997). The recent phenomenal growth of the World Wide Web has created new opportunities to introduce thesauri as information search and retrieval aids to end user communities. While the number of web-based and hypertextual thesauri continues to grow, few investigations have been carried out to evaluate the ways in which end-users interact with and make use of online thesauri for query building and expansion. The work reported here expands an a pilot study (Shiri and Revie, 2001) carried out to investigate user - thesaurus interaction in the domains of biology and veterinary medicine.

0.059162788 = product of:
  0.08874418 = sum of:
    0.044042703 = weight(_text_:wide in 993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044042703 = score(doc=993,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.1958137 = fieldWeight in 993, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=993)
    0.044701476 = product of:
      0.08940295 = sum of:
        0.08940295 = weight(_text_:web in 993) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08940295 = score(doc=993,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.5396523 = fieldWeight in 993, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=993)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The performance and capabilities of Web search engines is an important and significant area of research. Millions of people world wide use Web search engines very day. This paper reports the results of a major study examining the overlap among results retrieved by multiple Web search engines for a large set of more than 10,000 queries. Previous smaller studies have discussed a lack of overlap in results returned by Web search engines for the same queries. The goal of the current study was to conduct a large-scale study to measure the overlap of search results on the first result page (both non-sponsored and sponsored) across the four most popular Web search engines, at specific points in time using a large number of queries. The Web search engines included in the study were MSN Search, Google, Yahoo! and Ask Jeeves. Our study then compares these results with the first page results retrieved for the same queries by the metasearch engine Dogpile.com. Two sets of randomly selected user-entered queries, one set was 10,316 queries and the other 12,570 queries, from Infospace's Dogpile.com search engine (the first set was from Dogpile, the second was from across the Infospace Network of search properties were submitted to the four single Web search engines). Findings show that the percent of total results unique to only one of the four Web search engines was 84.9%, shared by two of the three Web search engines was 11.4%, shared by three of the Web search engines was 2.6%, and shared by all four Web search engines was 1.1%. This small degree of overlap shows the significant difference in the way major Web search engines retrieve and rank results in response to given queries. Results point to the value of metasearch engines in Web retrieval to overcome the biases of individual search engines.

0.055989675 = product of:
  0.08398451 = sum of:
    0.06606405 = weight(_text_:wide in 6988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06606405 = score(doc=6988,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 6988, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6988)
    0.017920459 = product of:
      0.035840917 = sum of:
        0.035840917 = weight(_text_:web in 6988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035840917 = score(doc=6988,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 6988, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6988)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

0.051405042 = product of:
  0.15421513 = sum of:
    0.15421513 = sum of:
      0.071681835 = weight(_text_:web in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.071681835 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050763648 = queryNorm
          0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
      0.082533285 = weight(_text_:22 in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.082533285 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17776565 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050763648 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

9. 2.2008 17:52:22

0.0507819 = product of:
  0.07617284 = sum of:
    0.055053383 = weight(_text_:wide in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055053383 = score(doc=4042,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
    0.021119464 = product of:
      0.04223893 = sum of:
        0.04223893 = weight(_text_:web in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04223893 = score(doc=4042,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Although technology can often correct spelling errors, the complex tasks of information searching and retrieval in an online public access catalog (OPAC) are made more difficult by these errors in users' input and bibliographic records. This study examines the search behaviors of 38 university students, divided into groups with either easy-to-spell or difficult-to-spell search terms, who were asked to find items in the OPAC with these search terms. Search behaviors and strategy use in the OPAC and on the World Wide Web (WWW) were examined. In general, students used familiar Web resources to check their spelling or discover more about the assigned topic. Students with difficult-to-spell search terms checked spelling more often, changed search strategies to look for the general topic and had fewer successful searches. Students unable to find the correct spelling of a search term were unable to complete their search. Students tended to search the OPAC as they would search a search engine, with few search terms or complex search strategies. The results of this study have implications for spell checking, user-focused OPAC design, and cataloging. Students' search behaviors are discussed by expanding Thatcher's (2006) Information-Seeking Process and Tactics for the WWW model to include OPACs.

0.050694227 = product of:
  0.07604134 = sum of:
    0.062285792 = weight(_text_:wide in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.062285792 = score(doc=296,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.2769224 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
    0.013755548 = product of:
      0.027511096 = sum of:
        0.027511096 = weight(_text_:22 in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027511096 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17776565 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = 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

0.050199326 = product of:
  0.15059797 = sum of:
    0.15059797 = sum of:
      0.09557578 = weight(_text_:web in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09557578 = score(doc=2905,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050763648 = queryNorm
          0.5769126 = fieldWeight in 2905, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2905)
      0.05502219 = weight(_text_:22 in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05502219 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17776565 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050763648 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2905, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2905)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Der Artikel betrachtet anhand einer Studie zum Benutzerverhalten bei der Online-Katalogrecherche den gegenwärtigen Stellenwert und das zukünftige Potential der Web-OPACs. Dabei werden zunächst die Ergebnisse einer quantitativen Logfile-Analyse sowie qualitativer Benutzertests erörtert, bevor aktuelle Entwicklungen der Webtechnologie, die unter den Schlagworten Web 2.0 und Web 3.0 propagiert werden, im Zusammenhang mit der Online-Recherche und der Entwicklung neuartiger Suchverfahren kurz diskutiert werden.

Date

22. 2.2009 18:50:43

0.046658065 = product of:
  0.069987096 = sum of:
    0.055053383 = weight(_text_:wide in 5170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055053383 = score(doc=5170,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 5170, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5170)
    0.014933716 = product of:
      0.029867431 = sum of:
        0.029867431 = weight(_text_:web in 5170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029867431 = score(doc=5170,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5170, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5170)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Meho and Tibbo show that the Ellis model of information seeking applies to a web environment by way of a replication of his study in this case using behavior of social science faculty studying stateless nations, a group diverse in skills, origins, and research specialities. Data were collected by way of e-mail interviews. Material on stateless nations was limited to papers in English on social science topics published between 1998 and 2000. Of these 251 had 212 unique authors identified as academic scholars and had sufficient information to provide e-mail addresses. Of the 139 whose addresses were located, 9 who were physically close were reserved for face to face interviews, and of the remainder 60 agreed to participate and responded to the 25 open ended question interview. Follow up questions generated a 75% response. Of the possible face to face interviews five agreed to participate and provided 26 thousand words as opposed to 69 thousand by the 45 e-mail participants. The activities of the Ellis model are confirmed but four additional activities are also identified. These are accessing, i.e. finding the material identified in indirect sources of information; networking, or the maintaining of close contacts with a wide range of colleagues and other human sources; verifying, i.e. checking the accuracy of new information; and information managing, the filing and organizing of collected information. All activities are grouped into four stages searching, accessing, processing, and ending.

0.046658065 = product of:
  0.069987096 = sum of:
    0.055053383 = weight(_text_:wide in 722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055053383 = score(doc=722,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22492146 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050763648 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 722, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=722)
    0.014933716 = product of:
      0.029867431 = sum of:
        0.029867431 = weight(_text_:web in 722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029867431 = score(doc=722,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1656677 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050763648 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 722, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=722)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

There is very little qualitative data on what impact the Internet is having on information seeking in the workplace. Using open-ended interviews, questionnaires and observation, the impact of the Internet on the British Media was assessed. The focus was largely on newspapers, with The Guardian being covered in some depth. Over 300 journalists and media librarians were surveyed. It was found that amongst traditional journalists use was light. Poor access to the Internet - and good access to other information resources - were largely the reasons for this. Of the journalists it was mainly the older and more senior journalists and the New Media journalists who used the Internet. Librarians were also significant users. Searching the World Wide Web was the principal Internet activity and use was generally conservative in character. Newspapers and official sites were favoured, and searches were mainly of a fact-checking nature. Email was used on a very limited scale and was not regarded as a serious journalistic tool. Non-users were partly put off by the Internet's potential for overloading them with information and its reputation for producing information of suspect quality. Users generally dismissed these concerns, dealing with potential overload and quality problems largely by using authoritative sites and exploiting the lower quality data where it was needed. Where the Internet has been used it has not been at the expense of other information sources or communication channels, but online hosts seem to be at most risk in the future.