Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × theme_ss:"Benutzerstudien"
  1. Niu, X.; Hemminger, B.: Analyzing the interaction patterns in a faceted search interface (2015) 0.02
    0.023291955 = product of:
      0.04658391 = sum of:
        0.04658391 = product of:
          0.09316782 = sum of:
            0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 1824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09316782 = score(doc=1824,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 1824, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1824)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Since the adoption of faceted search in a small number of academic libraries in 2006, faceted search interfaces have gained popularity in academic and public libraries. This article clarifies whether faceted search improves the interactions between searchers and library catalogs and sheds light on ways that facets are used during a library search. To study searchers' behaviors in natural situations, we collected from the servers a data set with more than 1.5 million useful search logs. Logs were parsed, statistically analyzed, and manually studied using visualization tools to gain a general understanding of how facets are used in the search process. A user experiment with 24 subjects was conducted to further understand contextual information, such as the searchers' motivations and perceptions. The results indicate that most searchers were able to understand the concept of facets naturally and easily. The faceted search was not able to shorten the search time but was able to improve the search accuracy. Facets were used more for open-ended tasks and difficult tasks that require more effort to learn, investigate, and explore. Overall, the results weaved a detailed "story" about the ways that people use facets and the ways that facets help people use library catalogs.
  2. Unkel, J.; Haas, A.: ¬The effects of credibility cues on the selection of search engine results (2017) 0.02
    0.023291955 = product of:
      0.04658391 = sum of:
        0.04658391 = product of:
          0.09316782 = sum of:
            0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 3752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09316782 = score(doc=3752,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 3752, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3752)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Web search engines act as gatekeepers when people search for information online. Research has shown that search engine users seem to trust the search engines' ranking uncritically and mostly select top-ranked results. This study further examines search engine users' selection behavior. Drawing from the credibility and information research literature, we test whether the presence or absence of certain credibility cues influences the selection probability of search engine results. In an observational study, participants (N?=?247) completed two information research tasks on preset search engine results pages, on which three credibility cues (source reputation, message neutrality, and social recommendations) as well as the search result ranking were systematically varied. The results of our study confirm the significance of the ranking. Of the three credibility cues, only reputation had an additional effect on selection probabilities. Personal characteristics (prior knowledge about the researched issues, search engine usage patterns, etc.) did not influence the preference for search results linked with certain credibility cues. These findings are discussed in light of situational and contextual characteristics (e.g., involvement, low-cost scenarios).
  3. Lian, T.; Chen, Z.; Lin, Y.; Ma, J.: Temporal patterns of the online video viewing behavior of smart TV viewers (2018) 0.02
    0.023291955 = product of:
      0.04658391 = sum of:
        0.04658391 = product of:
          0.09316782 = sum of:
            0.09316782 = weight(_text_:light in 4219) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09316782 = score(doc=4219,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2920221 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.31904373 = fieldWeight in 4219, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.7753086 = idf(docFreq=372, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4219)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In recent years, millions of households have shifted from traditional TVs to smart TVs for viewing online videos on TV screens. In this article, we perform extensive analyses on a large-scale online video viewing log on smart TVs. Because time influences almost every aspect of our lives, our aim is to understand temporal patterns of the online video viewing behavior of smart TV viewers at the crowd level. First, we measure the amount of time per hour spent in watching online videos on smart TV by each household on each day. By applying clustering techniques, we identify eight daily patterns whose peak hours occur in different segments of the day. The differences among households can be characterized by three types of temporal habits. We also uncover five periodic weekly patterns. There seems to be a circadian rhythm at the crow level. Further analysis confirms that there exists a holiday effect in the online video viewing behavior on smart TVs. Finally, we investigate the popularity variations of different video categories over the day. The obtained insights shed light on how we can partition a day to improve the performance of time-aware video recommendations for smart TV viewers.
  4. Okoli, C.; Mehdi, M.; Mesgari, M.; Nielsen, F.A.; Lanamäki, A.: Wikipedia in the eyes of its beholders : a systematic review of scholarly research on Wikipedia readers and readership (2014) 0.01
    0.010276065 = product of:
      0.02055213 = sum of:
        0.02055213 = product of:
          0.04110426 = sum of:
            0.04110426 = weight(_text_:22 in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04110426 = score(doc=1540,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1540, 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=1540)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    18.11.2014 13:22:03
  5. Westman, S.; Laine-Hernandez, M.; Oittinen, P.: Development and evaluation of a multifaceted magazine image categorization model (2011) 0.01
    0.008563388 = product of:
      0.017126776 = sum of:
        0.017126776 = product of:
          0.034253553 = sum of:
            0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 4193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034253553 = score(doc=4193,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4193, 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=4193)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2011 14:09:26
  6. Mizrachi, D.; Bates, M.J.: Undergraduates' personal academic information management and the consideration of time and task-urgency (2013) 0.01
    0.008563388 = product of:
      0.017126776 = sum of:
        0.017126776 = product of:
          0.034253553 = sum of:
            0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 1003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034253553 = score(doc=1003,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1003, 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=1003)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Young undergraduate college students are often described as "digital natives," presumed to prefer living and working in completely digital information environments. In reality, their world is part-paper/part-digital, in constant transition among successive forms of digital storage and communication devices. Studying for a degree is the daily work of these young people, and effective management of paper and digital academic materials and resources contributes crucially to their success in life. Students must also constantly manage their work against deadlines to meet their course and university requirements. This study, following the "Personal Information Management" (PIM) paradigm, examines student academic information management under these various constraints and pressures. A total of 41 18- to 22-year-old students were interviewed and observed regarding the content, structure, and uses of their immediate working environment within their dormitory rooms. Students exhibited remarkable creativity and variety in the mixture of automated and manual resources and devices used to support their academic work. The demands of a yearlong procession of assignments, papers, projects, and examinations increase the importance of time management activities and influence much of their behavior. Results provide insights on student use of various kinds of information technology and their overall planning and management of information associated with their studies.
  7. Aloteibi, S.; Sanderson, M.: Analyzing geographic query reformulation : an exploratory study (2014) 0.01
    0.008563388 = product of:
      0.017126776 = sum of:
        0.017126776 = product of:
          0.034253553 = sum of:
            0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 1177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034253553 = score(doc=1177,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1177, 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=1177)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    26. 1.2014 18:48:22
  8. Beaudoin, J.E.: Content-based image retrieval methods and professional image users (2016) 0.01
    0.008563388 = product of:
      0.017126776 = sum of:
        0.017126776 = product of:
          0.034253553 = sum of:
            0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 2637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034253553 = score(doc=2637,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2637, 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=2637)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 1.2016 12:32:25
  9. Monchaux, S.; Amadieu, F.; Chevalier, A.; Mariné, C.: Query strategies during information searching : effects of prior domain knowledge and complexity of the information problems to be solved (2015) 0.01
    0.008563388 = product of:
      0.017126776 = sum of:
        0.017126776 = product of:
          0.034253553 = sum of:
            0.034253553 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034253553 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2680, 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=2680)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    25. 1.2016 18:46:22
  10. Griesbaum, J.; Mahrholz, N.; Kiedrowski, K. von Löwe; Rittberger, M.: Knowledge generation in online forums : a case study in the German educational domain (2015) 0.01
    0.0068507106 = product of:
      0.013701421 = sum of:
        0.013701421 = product of:
          0.027402842 = sum of:
            0.027402842 = weight(_text_:22 in 4440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027402842 = score(doc=4440,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17706616 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050563898 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 4440, 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=4440)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22