Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.02643904 = product of:
  0.1321952 = sum of:
    0.1321952 = weight(_text_:books in 5461) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1321952 = score(doc=5461,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.5339854 = fieldWeight in 5461, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5461)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Purpose Despite the social, educational and therapeutic benefits of book clubs, little is known about which books participants are likely to have read. In response, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the public bookshelves of those that have joined a group within the Goodreads social network site. Design/methodology/approach Books listed as read by members of 50 large English-language Goodreads groups - with a genre focus or other theme - were compiled by author and title. Findings Recent and youth-oriented fiction dominate the 50 books most read by book club members, whilst almost half are works of literature frequently taught at the secondary and postsecondary level (literary classics). Whilst J.K. Rowling is almost ubiquitous (at least 63 per cent as frequently listed as other authors in any group, including groups for other genres), most authors, including Shakespeare (15 per cent), Goulding (6 per cent) and Hemmingway (9 per cent), are little read by some groups. Nor are individual recent literary prize winners or works in languages other than English frequently read. Research limitations/implications Although these results are derived from a single popular website, knowing more about what book club members are likely to have read should help participants, organisers and moderators. For example, recent literary prize winners might be a good choice, given that few members may have read them. Originality/value This is the first large scale study of book group members' reading patterns. Whilst typical reading is likely to vary by group theme and average age, there seems to be a mainly female canon of about 14 authors and 19 books that Goodreads book club members are likely to have read.

0.018695224 = product of:
  0.09347612 = sum of:
    0.09347612 = weight(_text_:books in 3789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09347612 = score(doc=3789,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.37758467 = fieldWeight in 3789, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3789)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

We examined the search behaviors of diverse fiction readers in different search scenarios. The aim was to understand how fiction readers with varied reading preferences are selecting interesting novels in library catalogs. We conducted a controlled user study with 80 participants. Two reader groups were elicited according to similar reading preference patterns. The readers enjoyed the entertainment, escape, and comfort that reading as a pleasurable activity offered. The aesthetic readers valued the artistic and aesthetic pleasures, widening vocabulary, and ability to express oneself through fiction books. We compared the search queries and search actions between the 2 reader groups. Our results demonstrated that preference patterns were associated with readers' search behavior, that is, the number of viewed search result pages, opened book pages, dwell time on book pages, and the type of search queries. Based on the findings, we present 3 search tactics for fiction books in library catalogs: i) focused querying, ii) topical browsing, and iii) similarity-based tactic. The most popular search tactic in each search scenario was "focused querying" with known author in both reader groups.

0.01321952 = product of:
  0.0660976 = sum of:
    0.0660976 = weight(_text_:books in 5266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0660976 = score(doc=5266,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051222645 = queryNorm
        0.2669927 = fieldWeight in 5266, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5266)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)