Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

O'Brien, H.L.; Toms, E.G.: What is user engagement? : a conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology (2008) 0.03
```
0.030961553 = product of:
  0.061923105 = sum of:
    0.061923105 = sum of:
      0.02656075 = weight(_text_:online in 1721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02656075 = score(doc=1721,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05220068 = queryNorm
          0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 1721, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1721)
      0.035362355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035362355 = score(doc=1721,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05220068 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1721, 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=1721)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

The purpose of this article is to critically deconstruct the term engagement as it applies to peoples' experiences with technology. Through an extensive, critical multidisciplinary literature review and exploratory study of users of Web searching, online shopping, Webcasting, and gaming applications, we conceptually and operationally defined engagement. Building on past research, we conducted semistructured interviews with the users of four applications to explore their perception of being engaged with the technology. Results indicate that engagement is a process comprised of four distinct stages: point of engagement, period of sustained engagement, disengagement, and reengagement. Furthermore, the process is characterized by attributes of engagement that pertain to the user, the system, and user-system interaction. We also found evidence of the factors that contribute to nonengagement. Emerging from this research is a definition of engagement - a term not defined consistently in past work - as a quality of user experience characterized by attributes of challenge, positive affect, endurability, aesthetic and sensory appeal, attention, feedback, variety/novelty, interactivity, and perceived user control. This exploratory work provides the foundation for future work to test the conceptual model in various application areas, and to develop methods to measure engaging user experiences.

Date

21. 3.2008 13:39:22

Toms, E.G.: Free-Neets : delivering information to the community (1994) 0.02

0.01502503 = product of:
  0.03005006 = sum of:
    0.03005006 = product of:
      0.06010012 = sum of:
        0.06010012 = weight(_text_:online in 579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06010012 = score(doc=579,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.37936267 = fieldWeight in 579, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=579)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract: Computer-based systems are increasingly used by society for everyday activities. Yet these systems are rarely exploited to meet personal information needs. One development that may change this imbalance is the community online system. This paper examines one type of community online system, the Free-Net, and discusses its usefulness in delivering the information and services typically provided by community information centers

Bartlett, J.C.; Toms, E.G.: Developing a protocol for bioinformatics analysis : an integrated information behavior and task analysis approach (2005) 0.01

0.008840589 = product of:
  0.017681178 = sum of:
    0.017681178 = product of:
      0.035362355 = sum of:
        0.035362355 = weight(_text_:22 in 5256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035362355 = score(doc=5256,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5256, 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=5256)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date: 22. 7.2006 14:28:55

Dufour, C.; Bartlett, J.C.; Toms, E.G.: Understanding how webcasts are used as sources of information (2011) 0.01

0.008840589 = product of:
  0.017681178 = sum of:
    0.017681178 = product of:
      0.035362355 = sum of:
        0.035362355 = weight(_text_:22 in 4195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035362355 = score(doc=4195,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4195, 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=4195)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date: 22. 1.2011 14:16:14

Wildemuth, B.; Freund, L.; Toms, E.G.: Untangling search task complexity and difficulty in the context of interactive information retrieval studies (2014) 0.01

0.008840589 = product of:
  0.017681178 = sum of:
    0.017681178 = product of:
      0.035362355 = sum of:
        0.035362355 = weight(_text_:22 in 1786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035362355 = score(doc=1786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1786, 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=1786)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date: 6. 4.2015 19:31:22

Toms, E.G.; Freund, L.; Li, C.: WilRE: the Web Interactive information retrieval experimentation system prototype (2004) 0.01
```
0.0079682255 = product of:
  0.015936451 = sum of:
    0.015936451 = product of:
      0.031872902 = sum of:
        0.031872902 = weight(_text_:online in 2534) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031872902 = score(doc=2534,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 2534, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2534)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

We introduce WiIRE, a prototype system for conducting interactive information retrieval (IIR) experiments via the Internet. We conceived Wi IRE to increase validity while streamlining procedures and adding efficiencies to the conduct of IIR experiments. The system incorporates password-controlled access, online questionnaires, study instructions and tutorials, conditional interface assignment, and conditional query assignment as well as provision for data collection. As an initial evaluation, we used WiIRE inhouse to conduct a Web-based IIR experiment using an external search engine with customized search interfaces and the TREC 11 Interactive Track search queries. Our evaluation of the prototype indicated significant cost efficiencies in the conduct of IIR studies, and additionally had some novel findings about the human perspective: about half participants would have preferred some personal contact with the researcher, and participants spent a significantly decreasing amount of time on tasks over the course of a session.

Toms, E.G.: What motivates the browser? (1999) 0.01

0.007072471 = product of:
  0.014144942 = sum of:
    0.014144942 = product of:
      0.028289884 = sum of:
        0.028289884 = weight(_text_:22 in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028289884 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 292, 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=292)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date: 22. 3.2002 9:44:47

O'Brien, H.L.; Toms, E.G.: ¬The development and evaluation of a survey to measure user engagement (2010) 0.01
```
0.0066401875 = product of:
  0.013280375 = sum of:
    0.013280375 = product of:
      0.02656075 = sum of:
        0.02656075 = weight(_text_:online in 3312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02656075 = score(doc=3312,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05220068 = queryNorm
            0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 3312, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3312)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
```
Abstract

Facilitating engaging user experiences is essential in the design of interactive systems. To accomplish this, it is necessary to understand the composition of this construct and how to evaluate it. Building on previous work that posited a theory of engagement and identified a core set of attributes that operationalized this construct, we constructed and evaluated a multidimensional scale to measure user engagement. In this paper we describe the development of the scale, as well as two large-scale studies (N=440 and N=802) that were undertaken to assess its reliability and validity in online shopping environments. In the first we used Reliability Analysis and Exploratory Factor Analysis to identify six attributes of engagement: Perceived Usability, Aesthetics, Focused Attention, Felt Involvement, Novelty, and Endurability. In the second we tested the validity of and relationships among those attributes using Structural Equation Modeling. The result of this research is a multidimensional scale that may be used to test the engagement of software applications. In addition, findings indicate that attributes of engagement are highly intertwined, a complex interplay of user-system interaction variables. Notably, Perceived Usability played a mediating role in the relationship between Endurability and Novelty, Aesthetics, Felt Involvement, and Focused Attention.

Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

Authors

Years

Themes