Search (152 results, page 1 of 8)

0.10588712 = product of:
  0.21177424 = sum of:
    0.016974261 = weight(_text_:subject in 2639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016974261 = score(doc=2639,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.15806471 = fieldWeight in 2639, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2639)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 2639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=2639,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2639, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2639)
    0.01899904 = product of:
      0.03799808 = sum of:
        0.03799808 = weight(_text_:schemes in 2639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03799808 = score(doc=2639,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.2364941 = fieldWeight in 2639, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2639)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.03395232 = product of:
      0.06790464 = sum of:
        0.06790464 = weight(_text_:bliss in 2639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06790464 = score(doc=2639,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21478812 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.31614712 = fieldWeight in 2639, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2639)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.06790464 = weight(_text_:bliss in 2639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06790464 = score(doc=2639,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21478812 = queryWeight, product of:
          7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.31614712 = fieldWeight in 2639, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          7.1535926 = idf(docFreq=93, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2639)
    0.020110816 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020110816 = score(doc=2639,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17204987 = fieldWeight in 2639, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2639)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 2639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=2639,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2639, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2639)
  0.5 = coord(7/14)

Content

1. Introduction The title of this paper is taken from a TV show which has gained considerable popularity in North America: A Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, in which a group of gay men subject a helpless straight male to a complete fashion makeover. In facet analysis, this would probably be seen as an "operation upon" something, and the Bliss Bibliographic Classification would place it roughly two-thirds of the way along its facet order, after "types" and "materials," but before "space" and "time." But the link between gay communities and facet analysis extends beyond the facetious title. As Web-based information resources for gay and lesbian users continue to grow, Web sites that cater to, or at least refrain from discriminating against gay and lesbian users are faced with a daunting challenge when trying to organize these diverse resources in a way that facilitates congenial browsing. And principles of faceted classification, with their emphasis an clear and consistent principles of subdivision and their care in defining the order of subdivisions, offer an important opportunity to use time-honoured classification principles to serve the growing needs of these communities. If faceted organization schemes are to work, however, we need to know more about gay and lesbian users, and how they categorize themselves and their information sources. This paper presents the results of an effort to learn more.

0.032918133 = product of:
  0.15361795 = sum of:
    0.059409913 = weight(_text_:subject in 315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059409913 = score(doc=315,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5532265 = fieldWeight in 315, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=315)
    0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047104023 = score(doc=315,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 315, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=315)
    0.047104023 = weight(_text_:classification in 315) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047104023 = score(doc=315,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49260917 = fieldWeight in 315, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=315)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 4(1984) no.3, S.75-83

0.030351074 = product of:
  0.106228754 = sum of:
    0.0474445 = weight(_text_:subject in 2280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0474445 = score(doc=2280,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4418043 = fieldWeight in 2280, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2280)
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 2280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=2280,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 2280, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2280)
    0.02513852 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02513852 = score(doc=2280,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 2280, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2280)
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 2280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=2280,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 2280, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2280)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

Searching behaviour in a university library is studied using a holistic approach, encompassing the use of bibliographic tools and shelf browsing. The present study is designed as the first half of a 'before and after' study to permit the evaluation of the impact of a future online catalogue on users' searching behaviour. A combined methodology was devised: searchers were encouraged to talk aloud during their search, and this information, together with some probing and real time expert interpretation, enabled the experimente to record the searching activity on a highly structured observation form. The study reveals the extent of subject searching activity, and suggests that this may have been underestimated in previous studies. The analysis of expressed topics, search formulation strategy and documents retrieved reveals the adaptive nature of the subject searching process, whereby the user adapts to the structure of the available tools. The information retrieval task in a traditional library system is tailored by the system to a single, one dimensional, sequential process. It is suggested that a major obstacle to subject searching effectiveness may lie in the lack of interaction between the different possible approaches in the searching process: the indexing language, the classification, and the titles. It is to be hoped that a future online searching environment will encourage a more truly interactive approach to subject searching.

0.027802365 = product of:
  0.12974437 = sum of:
    0.0759112 = weight(_text_:subject in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0759112 = score(doc=1605,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.7068869 = fieldWeight in 1605, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1605)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=1605,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1605, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1605)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1605) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=1605,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1605, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1605)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

A survey of catalogue use in 1993 at Utrecht University in the Netherlands showed considerable dissatisfaction with the online catalogue's subject search facilities. Of those who used subject searching 64% preferred subject headings against only 2% who chose classification schedules. Library users make little use of the existing facilities for assistance and leaflets which are available in the library. It has, therefore, been decided to provide a programme of instruction in library use and to move towards a unified system of subject access to the library's catalogue

Footnote

"What do users want? Subject access to collections at Utrecht University Library"

0.0268396 = product of:
  0.0939386 = sum of:
    0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021217827 = score(doc=617,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 617, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=617)
    0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023791125 = score(doc=617,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 617, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=617)
    0.02513852 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02513852 = score(doc=617,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 617, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=617)
    0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023791125 = score(doc=617,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 617, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=617)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

The study adopts a naturalistic approach to investigate users' interaction with a browsable MeSH (medical subject headings) display designed to facilitate query construction for the PubMed bibliographic database. The purpose of the study is twofold: first, to test the usefulness of a browsable interface utilizing the principle of faceted classification; and second, to investigate users' preferred query submission methods in different problematic situations. An interface that incorporated multiple query submission methods - the conventional single-line query box as well as methods associated the faceted classification display was constructed. Participants' interactions with the interface were monitored remotely over a period of 10 weeks; information about their problematic situations and information retrieval behaviors were also collected during this time. The traditional controlled experiment was not adequate in answering the author's research questions; hence, the author provides his rationale for a naturalistic approach. The study's findings show that there is indeed a selective compatibility between query submission methods provided by the MeSH display and users' problematic situations. The query submission methods associated with the display were found to be the preferred search tools when users' information needs were vague and the search topics unfamiliar. The findings support the theoretical proposition that users engaging in an information retrieval process with a variety of problematic situations need different approaches. The author argues that rather than treat the information retrieval system as a general purpose tool, more attention should be given to the interaction between the functionality of the tool and the characteristics of users' problematic situations.

0.025299782 = product of:
  0.11806565 = sum of:
    0.0514505 = weight(_text_:subject in 517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0514505 = score(doc=517,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4791082 = fieldWeight in 517, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=517)
    0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033307575 = score(doc=517,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 517, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=517)
    0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033307575 = score(doc=517,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 517, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=517)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Current online catalogs have problems providing reasonable subject access, often resulting in searches with too few or too many hits. These problems can be improved by enhancing MARC records, building semantic networks through cross-references, and linking subject headings to classification numbers. This paper describes a pilot project to design a hypertext search engine using these principles

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 13(1991) nos.3/4, S.103-132

0.022824414 = product of:
  0.10651393 = sum of:
    0.059409913 = weight(_text_:subject in 1176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059409913 = score(doc=1176,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5532265 = fieldWeight in 1176, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1176)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1176,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1176, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1176)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1176,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1176, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1176)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Digital repository migrations present a periodic opportunity to assess metadata quality and to perform strategic enhancements. Lafayette College Libraries implemented OCLC FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) for its digital image collections as part of a migration from multiple repositories to a single one built on the Samvera Hyrax open-source framework. Application of FAST has normalized subject headings across dissimilar collections in a way that tremendously improves descriptive consistency for staff and discoverability for end users. However, the process of applying FAST headings was complicated by several features of in-scope metadata as well as gaps in available controlled subject authorities.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 61(2023) no.5-6, S.579-589

0.022701254 = product of:
  0.10593919 = sum of:
    0.036007844 = weight(_text_:subject in 2234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036007844 = score(doc=2234,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.33530587 = fieldWeight in 2234, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2234)
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 2234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=2234,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 2234, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2234)
    0.03496567 = weight(_text_:classification in 2234) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03496567 = score(doc=2234,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.3656675 = fieldWeight in 2234, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2234)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

This study explores the navigation behaviour of all users of a large web service, Renardus, using web log analysis. Renardus provides integrated searching and browsing access to quality-controlled web resources from major individual subject gateway services. The main navigation feature is subject browsing through the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) based on mapping of classes of resources from the distributed gateways to the DDC structure. Among the more surprising results are the hugely dominant share of browsing activities, the good use of browsing support features like the graphical fish-eye overviews, rather long and varied navigation sequences, as well as extensive hierarchical directory-style browsing through the large DDC system.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft "Moving beyond the presentation layer: content and context in the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) System"

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 42(2006) nos.3/4, S.163-186

0.021118827 = product of:
  0.09855452 = sum of:
    0.0514505 = weight(_text_:subject in 2974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0514505 = score(doc=2974,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4791082 = fieldWeight in 2974, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2974)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=2974,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2974, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2974)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=2974,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2974, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2974)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

This study examines end-user interactions with indexing language information during subject searching in a library catalog and their understanding of this information and its function in term selection. Participants were asked to interact with the indexing language (Library of Congress Subject Headings) and were asked to express their general understanding of the information provided and each specific type of information included in the indexing language. In addition, participants were asked to express their understanding of the function of indexing language information in term selection, its usefulness and desirability as an integrated tool into the information retrieval system during subject searching. Study findings and their implications are discussed and future research is considered.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 47(2009) no.1, S.xx-xx

0.019380465 = product of:
  0.090442166 = sum of:
    0.033948522 = weight(_text_:subject in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033948522 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
    0.04022163 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04022163 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
    0.016272005 = product of:
      0.03254401 = sum of:
        0.03254401 = weight(_text_:22 in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03254401 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Reports on a dramatic shift from subject to periodical title searching at Colorado University Libraries. States possible reasons for the change, examines problems encountered by users with searching the periodical title index and suggests how this change in online catalogue searching may affect future catalogue design and bibliographic instruction

Date

29. 7.1998 10:57:22

0.018810362 = product of:
  0.08778169 = sum of:
    0.033948522 = weight(_text_:subject in 3344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033948522 = score(doc=3344,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 3344, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3344)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 3344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=3344,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 3344, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3344)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 3344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=3344,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 3344, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3344)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Provides a background to the size, organisation, and activities of the University of Twente and its library, the only campus university in the Netherlands. Describes the development and integration of descriptors and their conversion into a thesaurus. Discusses national developments in subject cataloguing; the OPAC of Twente University Library; the changing role of the OPAC and of classification systems; international OPAC developments and evaluation of the Twente OPAC

0.01810185 = product of:
  0.0844753 = sum of:
    0.044100422 = weight(_text_:subject in 4252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044100422 = score(doc=4252,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 4252, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4252)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=4252,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4252, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4252)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 4252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=4252,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4252, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4252)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Presents a pilot study for an Internordic project to monitor the use of online catalogues in the Nordic technological university libraries. Focuses on the use of classification in subject searching, how the UDC is used and the extent of its use. Studies user interaction with the OPACs and improvements to information retrieval in the catalogues using the transaction log method to gather data. The pilot study examnines the TENTTU Books database which is the online union catalogue of the Helsinki Univ. of Technology Library, a multilingual database with true information retrieval. The Internordic study itself will make comparisons between the TENTTU system and the new Virginia Tech Library System. Discusses the users monitored, method of analysis, subject searching in the database, results and how the UDC codes were used. Compares this to other studies conducted in Finland and evaluates the project

0.01810185 = product of:
  0.0844753 = sum of:
    0.044100422 = weight(_text_:subject in 5428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044100422 = score(doc=5428,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 5428, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5428)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=5428,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5428, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5428)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5428) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=5428,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5428, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5428)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Critiques of subject access standards in LIS literature have addressed biases of gender, sexuality, race, age, ability, ethnicity, language and religion as limits to the representation of diversity and to effective library service for diverse populations. The current study identifies and analyzes this literature as a basis for ameliorating systemic bias and to gather the existing literature for wider accessibility. The study analyzes five quantitative variables: standards discussed, categories of problems, marginalized groups and topics discussed, date, and basis of conclusions (research or experience). Textual analysis reveals that basic tenets of subject access-user-focused cataloguing, objectivity, and standardization-are problematized in the literature and may be the best starting point for future research. In practice, librarians can work to counteract systemic problems in the careful and equitable application of standards and their adaptation to local contexts.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 32(2001) no.2, S.61-80

0.017691448 = product of:
  0.08256009 = sum of:
    0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 4563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02546139 = score(doc=4563,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 4563, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4563)
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 4563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=4563,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 4563, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4563)
    0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 4563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028549349 = score(doc=4563,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 4563, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4563)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The study reported here investigated the search behaviour patterns of nanoscience and nanotechnology searchers as revealed by transaction log analysis of the NANOnetBASE electronic book digital library. This paper examines the patterns and strategies of nano searchers' query formulation and reformulation, then explores the extent of interdisciplinarity in search queries using the INSPEC and Compendex thesauri. The results show certain query formulation patterns associated with searching in an emerging and interdisciplinary area of nanotechnology such as: the use of multiword and compound query terms, extensive use of search terms beginning with the prefix "nano," hyphenated terms, spelling variations, a large number of query reformulations, and the use of acronyms. The results also indicate that 62% of the unique top terms resulting from mapping users' query terms to the INSPEC Classification codes represented two or more disciplines, specifically terms associated with the Classification code "A" representing "physics." The results have implications for information organization and representation, user interface design and federated searching in digital libraries and multi-subject databases.

0.016957905 = product of:
  0.07913689 = sum of:
    0.029704956 = weight(_text_:subject in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029704956 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 7914, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7914)
    0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035193928 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 7914, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7914)
    0.014238005 = product of:
      0.02847601 = sum of:
        0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02847601 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7914, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7914)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The library of the Cité des Sciences et de l'industrie attracts 4.000 visitors daily of whom 25% consult the GEAC system OPAC. Describes a 1992 survey consisting of online questions followed by an interview. The questionnaires were adapted from ones used in the UK and utilised OLIVE (Online Interactive Validation and Evaluation). While difficulties arose from users' inconsistency in their replies and failures to answer questions, it has become clear that subject access is unsatisfactory, sometimes because of mistyping by the searcher but also because of the vocabulary problems and lack of guidance in search strategies

Source

International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 22(1993) no.4, S.68-71

0.016459066 = product of:
  0.076808974 = sum of:
    0.029704956 = weight(_text_:subject in 360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029704956 = score(doc=360,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 360, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=360)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=360,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 360, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=360)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=360,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 360, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=360)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to obtain information which would help planners of the online catalog design a catalog which would be relevant to the needs of university faculty. Data was obtained by means of a questionnaire mailed to the faculty, College of Humanities, University of Utah. It was found that (1) references in books or articles they read; (2) the Subject Catalog; and (3) printed indexes, bibliographies and research guides in that order were the three most utilized information sources. Browsing was an important fourth. The faculty would like more in-depth coverage of the local library collection rather than access to other library catalogs or online databases from the catalog terminal. Feedback and comments in response to an open-ended question varied.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 6(1986) no.3, S.23-37

0.01434355 = product of:
  0.10040485 = sum of:
    0.088200845 = weight(_text_:subject in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088200845 = score(doc=1333,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.82132834 = fieldWeight in 1333, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1333)
    0.0122040035 = product of:
      0.024408007 = sum of:
        0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024408007 = score(doc=1333,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1333, 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=1333)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

n this article, we report on the first large-scale study of end-user understanding of subject headings. Our objectives were to determine the extent to which children and adults understood subdivided subject headings and to suggest improvements for improving understanding of subject headings. The 1991 Library of Congress Subject Subdivisions Conference suggested standardizing the order of subject subdivisions for the purpose of simplifying subject cataloging, which served as the impetus for the study. We demonstrated that adults understood subject headings better than children; however, both adults and children assigned correct meanings to less than half of the subject headings they examined. Neither subject heading context nor subdivision order had an effect on understanding. Based on our findings, we challenge the library community to make major changes to the Library of Congress Subject Headings system that have the potential to increase end-user understanding of subject headings.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.013320256 = product of:
  0.09324179 = sum of:
    0.046620894 = weight(_text_:classification in 742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046620894 = score(doc=742,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.48755667 = fieldWeight in 742, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=742)
    0.046620894 = weight(_text_:classification in 742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046620894 = score(doc=742,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.48755667 = fieldWeight in 742, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=742)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

Discusses the problems encountered by elementary school children in retrieving information from catalogues, either traditional card catalogues or OPACs. Describes an alternative system of classification using colours and symbols that was developed in The Common School of Amherst, Mass. The case study found that children do have the ability to use a classification scheme that is keyed to their developmental level and that employs both colours and symbols to facilitate their search efforts

0.0130425235 = product of:
  0.060865108 = sum of:
    0.033948522 = weight(_text_:subject in 4408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033948522 = score(doc=4408,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.31612942 = fieldWeight in 4408, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4408)
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 4408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=4408,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 4408, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4408)
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 4408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=4408,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 4408, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4408)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship between preferred choice of school subject and student information behaviour (IB). Design/methodology/approach Mixed methods were employed. In all, 152 students, teachers and librarians participated in interviews or focus groups. In total, 1,375 students, key stage 3 (11-14 years) to postgraduate, responded to a questionnaire. The research population was drawn from eight schools, two further education colleges and three universities. Insights from the literature review and the qualitative research phase led to a hypothesis which was investigated using the questionnaire: that students studying hard subjects are less likely to engage in deep IB than students studying soft subjects. Findings Results support the hypothesis that preferences for subjects at school affect choice of university degree. The hypothesis that a preference for hard or soft subjects affects IB is supported by results of an analysis in which like or dislike of maths/ICT is correlated with responses to the survey. Interviewees' comments led to the proposal that academic subjects can be classified according to whether a subject helps students to acquire a "tool of the Mind" or to apply such a tool. A model suggesting how IB may differ depending on whether intellectual tools are being acquired or applied is proposed. Practical implications The "inner logic" of certain subjects and their pedagogies appears closely linked to IB. This should be considered when developing teaching programmes. Originality/value The findings offer a new perspective on subject classification and its association with IB, and a new model of the association between IB and tool acquisition or application is proposed, incorporating the perspectives of both teacher and student.

0.012897282 = product of:
  0.09028097 = sum of:
    0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 2091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045140486 = score(doc=2091,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 2091, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2091)
    0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 2091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045140486 = score(doc=2091,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 2091, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2091)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

In this paper, we define and present a comprehensive classification of user intent for Web searching. The classification consists of three hierarchical levels of informational, navigational, and transactional intent. After deriving attributes of each, we then developed a software application that automatically classified queries using a Web search engine log of over a million and a half queries submitted by several hundred thousand users. Our findings show that more than 80% of Web queries are informational in nature, with about 10% each being navigational and transactional. In order to validate the accuracy of our algorithm, we manually coded 400 queries and compared the results from this manual classification to the results determined by the automated method. This comparison showed that the automatic classification has an accuracy of 74%. Of the remaining 25% of the queries, the user intent is vague or multi-faceted, pointing to the need for probabilistic classification. We discuss how search engines can use knowledge of user intent to provide more targeted and relevant results in Web searching.