Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.021128725 = product of:
  0.04225745 = sum of:
    0.04225745 = product of:
      0.06338617 = sum of:
        0.024351375 = weight(_text_:12 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024351375 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.1833526 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
        0.039034795 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039034795 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16815145 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Considers intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency in the selection of search terms. Based on an empirical study where 22 searchers from 4 different types of search environments analyzed altogether 12 search requests of 4 different types in 2 separate test situations between which 2 months elapsed. Statistically very significant differences in consistency were found according to the types of search environments and search requests. Consistency was also considered according to the extent of the scope of search concept. At level I search terms were compared character by character. At level II different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a rather simple evaluation of linguistic expressions. At level III, in addition to level II, the hierarchical approach of the search request was also controlled. At level IV different search terms were accepted as the same search concept with a broad interpretation of the search concept. Both intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency grew most immediately after a rather simple evaluation of linguistic impressions

0.005411417 = product of:
  0.010822834 = sum of:
    0.010822834 = product of:
      0.0324685 = sum of:
        0.0324685 = weight(_text_:12 in 999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0324685 = score(doc=999,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.24447013 = fieldWeight in 999, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=999)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Defines a search request as a verbal description of a client's information need, submitted by a client and processed by an intermediary interpreting the need. The requests differ from each other and this affects the results. 12 different properties of search requests have been idetified, but are not easy to measure. Examines the properties of specificity and concreteness; complexity; and thesaural and grammatical status. Presents a model of easy (simple, specific, clear) and difficult (complex, general and unclear) requests

0.0047349897 = product of:
  0.009469979 = sum of:
    0.009469979 = product of:
      0.028409937 = sum of:
        0.028409937 = weight(_text_:12 in 7740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028409937 = score(doc=7740,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.21391137 = fieldWeight in 7740, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7740)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The effect of extending the scope of search concepts on the intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency is considered. The scope of the search concept was extended on the basis of controlling the semantic relationships between search terms. The study is based on the empirical data where 12 searchers analyzed 8 search requests and selected search concepts and search terms for a search in a certain Finnish database in 2 separate test situations. Both intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency grew most with a rather simple evaluation of forms of search terms. The controlling of hierarchical, associative and coordinate relationships no longer affected consistency figures so much

0.0047349897 = product of:
  0.009469979 = sum of:
    0.009469979 = product of:
      0.028409937 = sum of:
        0.028409937 = weight(_text_:12 in 3869) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028409937 = score(doc=3869,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13281173 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.048018172 = queryNorm
            0.21391137 = fieldWeight in 3869, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.765864 = idf(docFreq=7562, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3869)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Considers factors lowering both intersearcher and intrasearcher consistency in online searching. 32 searchers with different backgrounds first analyzed 12 search requests, and after 2 months 8 of the same search requests, and formulated query statements from them for a search. Intersearcher consistency was the results of more than one factor. There were more differences between searchers ion the selection of search terms than in the selection of search concepts. The most important factor lowering intrasearcher consistency was that the same searcher selected different search terms to describe the same search concepts on various occasions