Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.030990344 = product of:
  0.061980687 = sum of:
    0.061980687 = product of:
      0.123961374 = sum of:
        0.123961374 = weight(_text_:class in 1891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.123961374 = score(doc=1891,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.4328137 = fieldWeight in 1891, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1891)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The aim of this study is to explore to which extent searching by medical students in Medline produces information items useful for writing an essay measured by precision and relative recall as perceived by the students, the proportion of cited items, and their utilization on four dimensions of the essay writing task evaluated by external assessors. It also aims to study interrelations of search process and outcome. Design/methodology/approach - The study subjects were 42 third year medical students attending a class on Diagnostic and therapy. Searching in Medline was a part of their assignment of essay writing. The data consist of students' printed logs of Medline searches, students' assessments of the usefulness of the references retrieved, a questionnaire concerning the search process, and evaluation scores of the essays given by the teachers of the class. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated for answering the research questions. Findings - The paper finds that precision and relative recall were not associated with evaluation scores in three of the four dimensions assessed. Some of the process variables were associated with precision and with assessment scores in two of the four dimensions assessed. Citing rate was negatively associated with recall. It seems that precision and recall are only weakly, if at all, associated to the use of information in the documents retrieved for writing the essay. Precision and relative recall are not associated to the way information in the retrieved items is used for performing the task. Users evidently look for a sufficient number of documents containing enough information for progressing in their task. Precision and recall are not sufficient measures in evaluating IR systems, but they have to be completed by other measures indicating the impact of the system on users' task performance. Originality/value - The paper provides useful information on students' information search process.

0.022365354 = product of:
  0.044730708 = sum of:
    0.044730708 = product of:
      0.089461416 = sum of:
        0.089461416 = weight(_text_:class in 46) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.089461416 = score(doc=46,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.28640816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.31235638 = fieldWeight in 46, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6542544 = idf(docFreq=420, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=46)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We analyzed how effort in searching is associated with search output and task outcome. In a field study, we examined how students' search effort for an assigned learning task was associated with precision and relative recall, and how this was associated to the quality of learning outcome. The study subjects were 41 medical students writing essays for a class in medicine. Searching in Medline was part of their assignment. The data comprised students' search logs in Medline, their assessment of the usefulness of references retrieved, a questionnaire concerning the search process, and evaluation scores of the essays given by the teachers. Pearson correlation was calculated for answering the research questions. Finally, a path model for predicting task outcome was built. We found that effort in the search process degraded precision but improved task outcome. There were two major mechanisms reducing precision while enhancing task outcome. Effort in expanding Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms within search sessions and effort in assessing and exploring documents in the result list between the sessions degraded precision, but led to better task outcome. Thus, human effort compensated bad retrieval results on the way to good task outcome. Findings suggest that traditional effectiveness measures in information retrieval should be complemented with evaluation measures for search process and outcome.

0.012131936 = product of:
  0.024263872 = sum of:
    0.024263872 = product of:
      0.048527744 = sum of:
        0.048527744 = weight(_text_:22 in 1682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048527744 = score(doc=1682,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1682, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1682)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article focuses an analysing students' information needs in terms of conceptual understanding of the topic they propose to study and its consequences for the search process and outcome. The research subjects were 22 undergraduates of psychology attending a seminar for preparing a research proposal for a small empirical study. They were asked to make searches in the PsycINFO database for their task in the beginning and end of the seminar. A pre- and postsearch interview was conducted in both sessions. The students were asked to think aloud in the sessions. This was recorded, as were the transaction logs. The results show that during the preparation of research proposals different features of the students' conceptual structure were connected to the search success. Students' ability to cover their conceptual construct by query terms was the major feature affecting search success during the whole process. In the beginning also the number of concepts and the proportion of subconcepts in the construct contributed indirectly via search tactics to retrieving partly useful references. Students' ability to extract new query terms from retrieved items improved search results.

Date

19. 6.2003 17:22:33

0.008578574 = product of:
  0.017157149 = sum of:
    0.017157149 = product of:
      0.034314297 = sum of:
        0.034314297 = weight(_text_:22 in 1073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034314297 = score(doc=1073,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1073, 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=1073)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The study analyses how students' growing understanding of the topic and search experience were related to their choice of search tactics and terms while preparing a research proposal for a small empirical study. In addition to that, the findings of the study are used to test Vakkari's (2001) theory of task-based IR. The research subjects were 22 students of psychology attending a seminar for preparing the proposal. They made a search for their task in PsychINFO database at the beginning and end of the seminar. Data were collected in several ways. A pre- and post-search interview was conducted in both sessions. The students were asked to think aloud in the sessions. This was recorded as were the transaction logs. The results show that search experience was slightly related to the change of facets. Although the students' vocabulary of the topic grew generating an increased use of specific terms between the sessions, their use of search tactics and operators remained fairly constant. There was no correlation between the terms and tactics used and the total number of useful references found. By comparing these results with the findings of relevant earlier studies the conclusion was drawn that domain knowledge has an impact on searching assuming that users have a sufficient command of the system used. This implies that the tested theory of task-based IR is valid on condition that the searchers are experienced. It is suggested that the theory should be enriched by including search experience in its scope.

0.008578574 = product of:
  0.017157149 = sum of:
    0.017157149 = product of:
      0.034314297 = sum of:
        0.034314297 = weight(_text_:22 in 4573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034314297 = score(doc=4573,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4573, 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=4573)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

9.12.2018 16:22:25

0.008578574 = product of:
  0.017157149 = sum of:
    0.017157149 = product of:
      0.034314297 = sum of:
        0.034314297 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034314297 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17738017 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05065357 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 998, 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=998)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2023 18:15:06