Search (81 results, page 1 of 5)

0.08730605 = product of:
  0.116408065 = sum of:
    0.034465462 = weight(_text_:digital in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034465462 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17432621 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
    0.015314223 = weight(_text_:library in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015314223 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.11620321 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
    0.06662838 = sum of:
      0.039465316 = weight(_text_:project in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039465316 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.18654276 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
      0.027163066 = weight(_text_:22 in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027163066 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1628, 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=1628)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to propose the Collaborative Search System that attempts to achieve collaboration by implicitly identifying and reflecting search behaviour of collaborators in an academic network that is automatically and dynamically formed. By using the constructed Collaborative Hit Matrix (CHM), results are obtained that are based on the search behaviour and earned preferences of specialist communities of researchers, which are relevant to the user's need and reduce the time spent on bad links. Design/methodology/approach - By using the Digital Bibliography Library Project (DBLP), the research communities are formed implicitly and dynamically based on the users' research presence in the search environment and in the publication scenario, which is also used to assign users' roles and establish links between the users. The CHM, to store the hit count and hit list of page results for queries, is also constructed and updated after every search session to enhance the collaborative search among the researchers. Findings - The implicit researchers community formation, the assignment and dynamic updating of roles of the researchers based on research, search presence and search behaviour on the web as well as the usage of these roles during Collaborative Web Search have highly improved the relevancy of results. The CHM that holds the collaborative responses provided by the researchers on the search query results to support searching distinguishes this system from others. Thus the proposed system considerably improves the relevancy and reduces the time spent on bad links, thus improving recall and precision. Originality/value - The research findings illustrate the better performance of the system, by connecting researchers working in the same field and allowing them to help each other in a web search environment.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.07371725 = product of:
  0.1474345 = sum of:
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=281,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 281, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=281)
    0.12446317 = sum of:
      0.083718576 = weight(_text_:project in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.083718576 = score(doc=281,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.39571697 = fieldWeight in 281, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=281)
      0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0407446 = score(doc=281,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 281, 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=281)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This study grew out of a need for better research based understanding of information seeking and use in a specific context. Several researchers in library and information studies (LIS) pointed out the predominance of research on information needs and information seeking and expressed a need for the study of information use (i.a. Kuhlthau 1993; Vakkari 1997; Wilson 1981). The role of context for information seeking behaviour has been stressed (i.a. Dervin 1997; Wilson 1981, 1994). The complex process of information seeking and use in learning contexts needs further exploration, according to i.a. Kuhlthau (1993). My research project investigated how students used information and what they learnt from the information they retrieved and used for an assignment. The aim of the project was to study information seeking through an explorative investigation of the interaction between information seeking and use and learning outcomes.

Date

22. 3.2002 9:53:10

0.07159196 = product of:
  0.14318392 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=644,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 644, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=644)
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 644) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=644,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 644, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=644)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

While the search interfaces used by common academic digital libraries provide easy access to a wealth of peer-reviewed literature, their interfaces provide little support for exploratory browsing. When faced with a complex search task (such as one that requires knowledge discovery), exploratory browsing is an important first step in an exploratory search process. To more effectively support exploratory browsing, we have designed and implemented a novel academic digital library search interface (KLink Search) with two new features: visually linked keywords and an interactive workspace. To study the potential value of these features, we have conducted a controlled laboratory study with 32 participants, comparing KLink Search to a baseline digital library search interface modeled after that used by IEEE Xplore. Based on subjective opinions, objective performance, and behavioral data, we show the value of adding lightweight visual and interactive features to academic digital library search interfaces to support exploratory browsing.

0.062224608 = product of:
  0.124449216 = sum of:
    0.086163655 = weight(_text_:digital in 3831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.086163655 = score(doc=3831,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4358155 = fieldWeight in 3831, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3831)
    0.03828556 = weight(_text_:library in 3831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03828556 = score(doc=3831,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 3831, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3831)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Vocabulary as a central concept in digital libraries: interdisciplinary concepts, challenges, and opportunities : proceedings of the Third International Conference an Conceptions of Library and Information Science (COLIS3), Dubrovnik, Croatia, 23-26 May 1999. Ed. by T. Arpanac et al

0.057791512 = product of:
  0.115583025 = sum of:
    0.061256893 = weight(_text_:library in 1448) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061256893 = score(doc=1448,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.46481284 = fieldWeight in 1448, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1448)
    0.054326132 = product of:
      0.108652264 = sum of:
        0.108652264 = weight(_text_:22 in 1448) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108652264 = score(doc=1448,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 1448, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1448)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

22. 5.2005 19:53:09

Source

Library quarterly. 40(1970), S.391-408

0.05604878 = product of:
  0.11209756 = sum of:
    0.085297674 = weight(_text_:digital in 3465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.085297674 = score(doc=3465,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.43143538 = fieldWeight in 3465, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3465)
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 3465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=3465,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 3465, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3465)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Recent work in automatic question answering has called for question taxonomies as a critical component of the process of machine understanding of questions. There is a long tradition of classifying questions in library reference services, and digital reference services have a strong need for automation to support scalability. Digital reference and question answering systems have the potential to arrive at a highly fruitful symbiosis. To move towards this goal, an extensive review was conducted of bodies of literature from several fields that deal with questions, to identify question taxonomies that exist in these bodies of literature. In the course of this review, five question taxonomies were identified, at four levels of linguistic analysis.

0.050567575 = product of:
  0.10113515 = sum of:
    0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053599782 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 3924, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3924)
    0.047535364 = product of:
      0.09507073 = sum of:
        0.09507073 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09507073 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3924, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3924)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Library and information science research. 22(2000) no.4, S.371-382

0.04399944 = product of:
  0.08799888 = sum of:
    0.060926907 = weight(_text_:digital in 307) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060926907 = score(doc=307,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.3081681 = fieldWeight in 307, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=307)
    0.027071979 = weight(_text_:library in 307) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027071979 = score(doc=307,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.2054202 = fieldWeight in 307, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=307)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This is the first study that compares types of orientation tactics that blind and sighted users applied in their initial interactions with a digital library (DL) and the associated factors. Multiple methods were employed for data collection: questionnaires, think-aloud protocols, and transaction logs. The paper identifies seven types of orientation tactics applied by the two groups of users. While sighted users focused on skimming DL content, blind users concentrated on exploring DL structure. Moreover, the authors discovered 13 types of system, user, and interaction factors that led to the use of orientation tactics. More system factors than user factors affect blind users' tactics in browsing DL structures. The findings of this study support the social model that the sight-centered design of DLs, rather than blind users' disability, prohibits them from effectively interacting with a DL. Simultaneously, the results reveal the limitation of existing interactive information retrieval models that do not take people with disabilities into consideration. DL design implications are discussed based on the identified factors.

0.042092286 = product of:
  0.08418457 = sum of:
    0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 5827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051698197 = score(doc=5827,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 5827, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5827)
    0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 5827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032486375 = score(doc=5827,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 5827, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5827)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

We describe how to support the process of collaborative browsing and how to integrate support for the social aspects of information searching activities into information systems and particularly their interfaces. The use of library resources is often stereotyped as a solitary activity. However, informal observations indicate significant collaboration between users despite the fact that existing systems fail to support this. We describe the Ariadne system which does attempt to support collaboration by providing a visualization of the search process. Storage of search histories as digital object allows them to be manipulated and communicated. An explicit representation of a search history supports discussion of search strategies and concepts by explicit pointing to prior activities even when one of the participants may be a novice lacking the appropriate vocabulary. Several different types of activity, synchronous and asynchronous, remote and co-located, can be supported by search process re-use. We outline some of the issues of privacy concerned with the storage of users' searches

Footnote

Paper presented at ELVIRA '96: 3rd International Conference on Electronic Library and Visual Information Research held on 30 April - 2 May, 1996, Milton Keynes

0.037334766 = product of:
  0.07466953 = sum of:
    0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051698197 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 3564, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3564)
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 3564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=3564,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 3564, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3564)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Query formation and expansion is an integral part of nearly every effort to search for information. In the work reported here we investigate the effects of domain knowledge and feedback an search term selection and reformation. We explore differences between experts and novices as they generate search terms over 10 successive trials and under two feedback conditions. Search attempts were coded an quantitative dimensions such as the number of unique terms and average time per trial, and as a whole in an attempt to characterize the user's conceptual map for the topic under differing conditions of participant-defined domain expertise. Nine distinct strategies were identified. Differences emerged as a function of both expertise and feedback. In addition, strategic behavior varied depending an prior search conditions. The results are considered from both a theoretical and design perspective, and have direct implications for digital library usability and metadata generation, and query expansion systems.

0.037334766 = product of:
  0.07466953 = sum of:
    0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 3821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051698197 = score(doc=3821,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 3821, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3821)
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 3821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=3821,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 3821, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3821)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.030029371 = product of:
  0.060058743 = sum of:
    0.043081827 = weight(_text_:digital in 5842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043081827 = score(doc=5842,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 5842, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5842)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 5842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=5842,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5842, 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=5842)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose A new approach to investigate serendipitous knowledge discovery (SKD) of health information is developed and tested to evaluate the information flow-serendipitous knowledge discovery (IF-SKD) model. The purpose of this paper is to determine the degree to which IF-SKD reflects physicians' information behaviour in a clinical setting and explore how the information system, Spark, designed to support physicians' SKD, meets its goals. Design/methodology/approach The proposed pre-experimental study design employs an adapted version of the McCay-Peet's (2013) and McCay-Peet et al.'s (2015) serendipitous digital environment (SDE) questionnaire research tool to address the complexity associated with defining the way in which SKD is understood and applied in system design. To test the IF-SKD model, the new data analysis approach combining confirmatory factor analysis, data imputation and Monte Carlo simulations was developed. Findings The piloting of the proposed novel analysis approach demonstrated that small sample information behaviour survey data can be meaningfully examined using a confirmatory factor analysis technique. Research limitations/implications This method allows to improve the reliability in measuring SKD and the generalisability of findings. Originality/value This paper makes an original contribution to developing and refining methods and tools of research into information-system-supported serendipitous discovery of information by health providers.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.028900167 = product of:
  0.11560067 = sum of:
    0.11560067 = weight(_text_:digital in 4440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11560067 = score(doc=4440,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.58470786 = fieldWeight in 4440, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4440)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Collating data from a number of log and questionnaire studies conducted largely into the use of a range of consumer health digital information platforms, Centre for Information Behaviour and the Evaluation of Research (Ciber) researchers describe some new thoughts on characterising (and naming) information seeking behaviour in the digital environment, and in so doing, suggest a new typology of digital users. The characteristic behaviour found is one of bouncing in which users seldom penetrate a site to any depth, tend to visit a number of sites for any given information need and seldom return to sites they once visited. They tend to "feed" for information horizontally, and whether they search a site of not depends heavily on "digital visibility", which in turn creates all the conditions for "bouncing". The question whether this type of information seeking represents a form of "dumbing down or up", and what it all means for publishers, librarians and information providers, who might be working on other, possible outdated usage paradigms, is discussed.

0.022024449 = product of:
  0.044048898 = sum of:
    0.027071979 = weight(_text_:library in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027071979 = score(doc=2603,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.2054202 = fieldWeight in 2603, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2603)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2603, 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=2603)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to report the result of follow-up research on end-users' conceptions of information visibility on the web and their conceptualizations of success and failure in web searching. Design/methodology/approach - The data were collected by a questionnaire followed by a brief interview with the participants. The questionnaire was developed based on the information visibility model suggested by the author in the original study. Fifty-two library and information sciences students from Tarbiat Mollem University (TMU) and Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS) in Tehran took part in the study. Findings - The model of information visibility can enable web users to gain a better understanding of their information seeking (IS) outcomes and it can assist them to improve their information literacy skills. The model can provide a theoretical framework to investigate web users' IS behavior and can be used as a diagnostic tool to explore the contextual and conceptual elements affecting the visibility of information for end-users. Research limitations/implications - The paper suggests a visibility learning diary (VLD), which might be useful to measure the efficiency of information literacy training courses. Originality/value - The contextual and conceptual approach of the paper provides a deeper insight into the issue of information visibility, which has received little attention by IS and information retrieval researchers until now.

Date

1. 1.2009 10:22:40

Source

Library hi tech. 26(2008) no.3, S.440-453

0.021540914 = product of:
  0.086163655 = sum of:
    0.086163655 = weight(_text_:digital in 1525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.086163655 = score(doc=1525,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4358155 = fieldWeight in 1525, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1525)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Serendipity occurs when unexpected circumstances and an "aha" moment of insight result in a valuable, unanticipated outcome. Designing digital information environments to support serendipity can not only provide users with new knowledge, but also propel them in directions they might not otherwise have traveled in-surprising and delighting them along the way. As serendipity involves unexpected circumstances it cannot be directly controlled, but it can be potentially influenced. However, to the best of our knowledge, no previous work has focused on providing a rich empirical understanding of how it might be influenced. We interviewed 14 creative professionals to identify their self-reported strategies aimed at increasing the likelihood of serendipity. These strategies form a framework for examining ways existing digital environments support serendipity and for considering how future environments can create opportunities for it. This is a new way of thinking about how to design for serendipity; by supporting the strategies found to increase its likelihood rather than attempting to support serendipity as a discrete phenomenon, digital environments not only have the potential to help users experience serendipity but also encourage them to adopt the strategies necessary to experience it more often.

0.02082137 = product of:
  0.08328548 = sum of:
    0.08328548 = sum of:
      0.049331643 = weight(_text_:project in 3340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049331643 = score(doc=3340,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.23317845 = fieldWeight in 3340, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3340)
      0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 3340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033953834 = score(doc=3340,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3340, 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=3340)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Keeping up to date with research developments is a central activity of academic researchers, but researchers face difficulties in managing the rapid growth of available scientific information. This study examined how researchers stay up to date, using the information journey model as a framework for analysis and investigating which dimensions influence information behaviors. We designed a 2-round study involving semistructured interviews and prototype testing with 61 researchers with 3 levels of seniority (PhD student to professor). Data were analyzed following a semistructured qualitative approach. Five key dimensions that influence information behaviors were identified: level of seniority, information sources, state of the project, level of familiarity, and how well defined the relevant community is. These dimensions are interrelated and their values determine the flow of the information journey. Across all levels of professional expertise, researchers used similar hard (formal) sources to access content, while soft (interpersonal) sources were used to filter information. An important "pain point" that future information tools should address is helping researchers filter information at the point of need.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.1, S.22-35

0.018534917 = product of:
  0.07413967 = sum of:
    0.07413967 = weight(_text_:library in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07413967 = score(doc=2939,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.5625664 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Libraries, private and public, offer valuable resources to library patrons. As of today, the only way to locate information archived exclusively in libraries is through their catalogs. Library patrons, however, often find it difficult to formulate a proper query, which requires using specific keywords assigned to different fields of desired library catalog records, to obtain relevant results. These improperly formulated queries often yield irrelevant results or no results at all. This negative experience in dealing with existing library systems turns library patrons away from directly querying library catalogs; instead, they rely on Web search engines to perform their searches first, and upon obtaining the initial information (e.g., titles, subject headings, or authors) on the desired library materials, they query library catalogs. This searching strategy is an evidence of failure of today's library systems. In solving this problem, we propose an enhanced library system, which allows partial, similarity matching of (a) tags defined by ordinary users at a folksonomy site that describe the content of books and (b) unrestricted keywords specified by an ordinary library patron in a query to search for relevant library catalog records. The proposed library system allows patrons posting a query Q using commonly used words and ranks the retrieved results according to their degrees of resemblance with Q while maintaining the query processing time comparable with that achieved by current library search engines.

0.018278074 = product of:
  0.073112294 = sum of:
    0.073112294 = weight(_text_:digital in 2561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073112294 = score(doc=2561,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 2561, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2561)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

During the fall 2001 semester 15 first-year undergraduates were interviewed about their information-seeking behavior. Undergraduates completed a short-answer questionnaire, the Measure of Epistemological Reflection, measuring their epistemological beliefs and searched the Web and an online public access catalog using tasks from the Reflective Judgment Interview that assessed their reflective judgment level. Undergraduates talked aloud while searching digital environments about the decisions they were making about the information they encountered while transaction analyses software (Lotus ScreenCam) recorded both their search moves and their decision-making through verbal protocol analysis. Analyses included examining the relationship between undergraduates' epistemological beliefs and reflective judgment and how they searched for information in these digital environments. Results indicated that there was a relationship between epistemological beliefs and reflective judgment and information-seeking behavior. Undergraduates' at higher stages of epistemological development exhibited the ability to handle conflicting information sources and to recognize authoritative information sources.

0.018278074 = product of:
  0.073112294 = sum of:
    0.073112294 = weight(_text_:digital in 1320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073112294 = score(doc=1320,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 1320, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1320)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

User studies provide libraries with invaluable insight into their users' information needs and behaviors, allowing them to develop services that correspond to these needs. This insight has become even more important for libraries since the advent of the Internet. The Internet has brought about a development of information technologies and electronic information sources that have had a great impact on both the ways users search for information and the ways libraries manage information. Although humanists represent an important group of users for academic libraries, research studies into their information-seeking behavior since the advent of the Internet have been quite scarce (Ellis & Oldman, 2005) in the past decade. This study presents updated research on a group of humanists, Jewish studies scholars living in Israel, as information users in the digital age based on two categories: (a) the use of formal and informal information channels, and (b) the use of information technologies and their impact on humanistic research.

0.017619558 = product of:
  0.035239115 = sum of:
    0.021657582 = weight(_text_:library in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021657582 = score(doc=1188,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.16433616 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
    0.013581533 = product of:
      0.027163066 = sum of:
        0.027163066 = weight(_text_:22 in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027163066 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1188, 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=1188)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

Imprint

Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science

Source

Saving the time of the library user through subject access innovation: Papers in honor of Pauline Atherton Cochrane. Ed.: W.J. Wheeler