Search (126 results, page 1 of 7)

0.10636416 = product of:
  0.21272832 = sum of:
    0.064692475 = weight(_text_:world in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.064692475 = score(doc=245,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.4204015 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
    0.06078585 = weight(_text_:wide in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06078585 = score(doc=245,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.342674 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
    0.087249994 = weight(_text_:web in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.087249994 = score(doc=245,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.6677857 = fieldWeight in 245, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=245)
  0.5 = coord(3/6)

Abstract

A study of the "real world" Web information searching behavior of 206 college students over a 10-month period showed that, contrary to expectations, the users adopted a more passive or browsing approach to Web information searching and became more eclectic in their selection of Web hosts as they gained experience. The study used a longitudinal transaction log analysis of the URLs accessed during 5,431 user days of Web information searching to detect changes in information searching behavior associated with increased experience of using the Web. The findings have implications for the design of future Web information retrieval tools

0.0956558 = product of:
  0.1434837 = sum of:
    0.026139706 = weight(_text_:world in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026139706 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.16986786 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
    0.03473477 = weight(_text_:wide in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03473477 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.1958137 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
    0.075376906 = weight(_text_:web in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.075376906 = score(doc=1188,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.5769126 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
    0.0072323103 = product of:
      0.02169693 = sum of:
        0.02169693 = weight(_text_:22 in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02169693 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1188, 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=1188)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(4/6)

Abstract

Surfing the World Wide Web used to be cool, dude, real cool. But things have gotten hot - so hot that finding something useful an the Web is no longer cool. It is suffocating Web searchers in the smoke and debris of mountain-sized lists of hits, decisions about which search engines they should use, whether they will get lost in the dizzying maze of a subject directory, use the right syntax for the search engine at hand, enter keywords that are likely to retrieve hits an the topics they have in mind, or enlist a browser that has sufficient functionality to display the most promising hits. When it comes to Web searching, in a few short years we have gone from the cool image of surfing the Web into the frying pan of searching the Web. We can turn down the heat by rethinking what Web searchers are doing and introduce some order into the chaos. Web search strategies that are tool-based-oriented to specific Web searching tools such as search en gines, subject directories, and meta search engines-have been widely promoted, and these strategies are just not working. It is time to dissect what Web searching tools expect from searchers and adjust our search strategies to these new tools. This discussion offers Web searchers help in the form of search strategies that are based an strategies that librarians have been using for a long time to search commercial information retrieval systems like Dialog, NEXIS, Wilsonline, FirstSearch, and Data-Star.

Content

"Web searching is different from searching commercial IR systems. We can learn from search strategies recommended for searching IR systems, but most won't be effective for Web searching. Web searchers need strate gies that let search engines do the job they were designed to do. This article presents six new Web searching strategies that do just that."

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.09527597 = product of:
  0.14291395 = sum of:
    0.032674633 = weight(_text_:world in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032674633 = score(doc=5229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.21233483 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
    0.043418463 = weight(_text_:wide in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043418463 = score(doc=5229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
    0.05769842 = weight(_text_:web in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05769842 = score(doc=5229,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
    0.009122452 = product of:
      0.027367353 = sum of:
        0.027367353 = weight(_text_:29 in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027367353 = score(doc=5229,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14083174 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(4/6)

Abstract

Thirty-one patrons, who were selected by Slone to provide a range of age and experience, agreed when approached while using the catalog of the Wake County library system to try searching via the Internet. Fifteen searched the Wake County online catalog in this manner and 16 searched the World Wide Web, including that catalog. They were subjected to brief pre-structured taped interviews before and after their searches and observed during the searching process resulting in a log of behaviors, comments, pages accessed, and time spent. Data were analyzed across participants and categories. Web searches were characterized as linking, URL, search engine, within a site domain, and searching a web catalog; and participants by the number of these techniques used. Four used only one, 13 used two, 11 used three, two used four, and one all five. Participant experience was characterized as never used, used search engines, browsing experience, email experience, URL experience, catalog experience, and finally chat room/newsgroup experience. Sixteen percent of the participants had never used the Internet, 71% had used search engines, 65% had browsed, 58% had used email, 39% had used URLs, 39% had used online catalogs, and 32% had used chat rooms. The catalog was normally consulted before the web, where both were used, and experience with an online catalog assists in web use. Scrolling was found to be unpopular and practiced halfheartedly.

Date

21. 7.2006 11:26:29

0.06564318 = product of:
  0.13128635 = sum of:
    0.03920956 = weight(_text_:world in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03920956 = score(doc=101,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.25480178 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
    0.052102152 = weight(_text_:wide in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052102152 = score(doc=101,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
    0.03997464 = weight(_text_:web in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03997464 = score(doc=101,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
  0.5 = coord(3/6)

Abstract

Question Answering is an area of information retrieval with the added challenge of applying sophisticated techniques to identify the complex syntactic and semantic relationships present in text in order to provide a more sophisticated and satisfactory response to the user's information needs. For this reason, the authors see question answering as the next step beyond standard information retrieval. In this chapter state of the art question answering is covered focusing on providing an overview of systems, techniques and approaches that are likely to be employed in the next generations of search engines. Special attention is paid to question answering using the World Wide Web as the data source and to question answering exploiting the possibilities of Semantic Web. Considerations about the current issues and prospects for promising future research are also provided.

0.057967342 = product of:
  0.08695101 = sum of:
    0.026139706 = weight(_text_:world in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026139706 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.16986786 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
    0.03473477 = weight(_text_:wide in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03473477 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.1958137 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
    0.018844226 = weight(_text_:web in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018844226 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
    0.0072323103 = product of:
      0.02169693 = sum of:
        0.02169693 = weight(_text_:22 in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02169693 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.6666667 = coord(4/6)

Abstract

Browsing is considered to be unstructured and human-driven, although not a cognitively intensive process. It is conducted using systems that facilitate considerable user-system interactivity. Cued by the content, people immerse themselves in a topic of interest and meander from topic to topic while concurrently recognising interesting and informative information en route. They seem to seek and gather information in a purposeless, illogical and indiscriminate manner. Typical examples of these ostensibly random acts are scanning a non-fiction book, examining the morning newspaper, perusing the contents of a business report and scavenging the World Wide Web. Often the result is the acquisition of new information, the rejection or confirmation of an idea, or the genesis of new, perhaps not-wholly-formed thoughts about a topic. Noteworthy about this approach is that people explore information without having consciously structured queries or explicit goals. This form of passive information interaction behaviour is defined as acquiring and gathering information while scanning an information space without a specific goal in mind (Waterworth & Chignell, 1991; Toms, 1997), and for the purposes of this study, is called browsing. Traditionally, browsing is thought of in two ways: as a physical process - the action taken when one scans a list, a document, or a set of linked information nodes (e.g., Fox & Palay, 1979; Thompson & Croft, 1989; Ellis, 1989), and as a conceptual process, information seeking when the goal is ill-defined (e.g., Cove & Walsh, 1987). Browsing is also combined with searching in an integrated information-seeking process for retrieving information (e.g., Ellis, 1989; Belkin, Marchetti & Cool, 1993; Marchionini, 1995; Chang, 1995). Each of these cases focuses primarily on seeking information when the objective ranges from fuzzy to explicit.

Date

22. 3.2002 9:44:47

0.047193117 = product of:
  0.094386235 = sum of:
    0.032674633 = weight(_text_:world in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032674633 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.21233483 = fieldWeight in 2603, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2603)
    0.052671213 = weight(_text_:web in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052671213 = score(doc=2603,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 2603, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2603)
    0.009040388 = product of:
      0.027121164 = sum of:
        0.027121164 = weight(_text_:22 in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027121164 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2603, 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=2603)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(3/6)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to report the result of follow-up research on end-users' conceptions of information visibility on the web and their conceptualizations of success and failure in web searching. Design/methodology/approach - The data were collected by a questionnaire followed by a brief interview with the participants. The questionnaire was developed based on the information visibility model suggested by the author in the original study. Fifty-two library and information sciences students from Tarbiat Mollem University (TMU) and Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS) in Tehran took part in the study. Findings - The model of information visibility can enable web users to gain a better understanding of their information seeking (IS) outcomes and it can assist them to improve their information literacy skills. The model can provide a theoretical framework to investigate web users' IS behavior and can be used as a diagnostic tool to explore the contextual and conceptual elements affecting the visibility of information for end-users. Research limitations/implications - The paper suggests a visibility learning diary (VLD), which might be useful to measure the efficiency of information literacy training courses. Originality/value - The contextual and conceptual approach of the paper provides a deeper insight into the issue of information visibility, which has received little attention by IS and information retrieval researchers until now.

Date

1. 1.2009 10:22:40

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft "Technology around the world"

0.03606371 = product of:
  0.07212742 = sum of:
    0.02263765 = weight(_text_:world in 312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02263765 = score(doc=312,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.14710988 = fieldWeight in 312, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=312)
    0.024561193 = weight(_text_:wide in 312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024561193 = score(doc=312,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.1384612 = fieldWeight in 312, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=312)
    0.02492857 = weight(_text_:web in 312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02492857 = score(doc=312,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.19079591 = fieldWeight in 312, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=312)
  0.5 = coord(3/6)

Abstract

How do you find your way in an age of information overload? How can you filter streams of complex information to pull out only what you want? Why does it matter how information is structured when Google seems to magically bring up the right answer to your questions? What does it mean to be "findable" in this day and age? This eye-opening new book examines the convergence of information and connectivity. Written by Peter Morville, author of the groundbreakin Information Architecture for the World Wide Web, the book defines our current age as a state of unlimited findability. In other words, anyone can find anything at any time. Complete navigability. Morville discusses the Internet, GIS, and other network technologies that are coming together to make unlimited findability possible. He explores how the melding of these innovations impacts society, since Web access is now a standard requirement for successful people and businesses. But before he does that, Morville looks back at the history of wayfinding and human evolution, suggesting that our fear of being lost has driven us to create maps, charts, and now, the mobile Internet.
The book's central thesis is that information literacy, information architecture, and usability are all critical components of this new world order. Hand in hand with that is the contention that only by planning and designing the best possible software, devices, and Internet, will we be able to maintain this connectivity in the future. Morville's book is highlighted with full color illustrations and rich examples that bring his prose to life. Ambient Findability doesn't preach or pretend to know all the answers. Instead, it presents research, stories, and examples in support of its novel ideas. Are w truly at a critical point in our evolution where the quality of our digital networks will dictate how we behave as a species? Is findability indeed the primary key to a successful global marketplace in the 21st century and beyond. Peter Morville takes you on a thought-provoking tour of these memes and more -- ideas that will not only fascinate but will stir your creativity in practical ways that you can apply to your work immediately.

Footnote

Rez. in: nfd - Information Wissenschaft und Praxis 57(2006) H.3, S.177-178 (D. Lewandowski): "Wohl unbestritten ist, dass die Suche in Informationsbeständen eine immer größere Bedeutung erhält. Wir suchen nicht nur noch explizit, indem wir ein Informationssystem anwählen und dort eine Suche absetzen, sondern verwenden Suchfunktionen innerhalb von Programmen, auf Websites, innerhalb des Betriebssystems unseres Computers oder sogar ziemlich unbewusst, indem wir Informationen maßgeschneidert aufgrund einer einmal hinterlegten Suche oder eines automatisch erstellten Suchprofils erhalten. Man kann also in der Tat davon sprechen, dass wir von der Suche umgeben werden. Das ist mit dem Konzept der "Ambient Findability" gemeint. Angelehnt ist diese Bezeichnung an den Begriff der "Ambient Music" (in den 70er Jahren durch Brian Eno geprägt), die den Hörer umgibt und von ihm oft gar nicht aktiv wahrgenommen wird. Um eine Vorstellung von dieser Musik zu bekommen, eignet sich vielleicht am besten der Titel einer Platte eben von Brian Eno: "Music for Airports". Peter Morville, bekannt als Co-Autor des empfehlenswerten Buchs "Information Architecture for the World Wide Web"', hat sich nun mit der Veränderung der Suche auseinandergesetzt. Sein Buch bedient sich in ganz unterschiedlichen Disziplinen, um die Prozesse des Suchens, Stöberns und Findens aufzuzeigen. So finden sich Betrachtungen über die Orientierung des Menschen in unbekannten Umgebungen, über die Interaktion mit Informationssystemen, über das soziale Verhalten der Web-Nutzer (Stichworte: Content-Tagging, Folksonomies, Social Networking) und über technische Veränderungen durch die Verfügbarkeit von Informationssystemen in allen Lebenskontexten, vor allem auch über mobile Endgeräte. Das Buch ist in sieben Kapitel gegliedert. Das erste, "Lost and Found" betitelt, bietet auf wenigen Seiten die Definitionen der zentralen Begriffe ambient und findability, erläutert kurz das Konzept der Information Literacy und zeigt, dass die bessere Auffindbarkeit von Informationen nicht nur ein schöner Zusatznutzen ist, sondern sich für Unternehmen deutlich auszahlt.
Im Kapitel über das "Sociosemantic Web" werden die groben Grundzüge der Klassifikationslehre erläutert, um dann ausführlich auf neuere Ansätze der Web-Erschließung wie Social Tagging und Folksonomies einzugehen. Auch dieses Kapitel gibt eher einen Überblick als den schon Kundigen vertiefende Informationen zu liefern. Das letzte Kapitel widmet sich schließlich der Art, wie Entscheidungen getroffen werden, der Network Culture, dem Information Overload, um schließlich zu den "Inspired Decisions" zu gelangen - Entscheidungen, die sowohl auf "sachlichen Informationen" (also den klassischen Zutaten der "informed decisions") als auch aus aus Netzwerken stammenden Informationen wie etwa Empfehlungen durch Freunde oder Community-Mitglieder irgendeiner Art gewonnen werden. Fasst man zusammen, so ist an Morvilles Text besonders bemerkenswert, dass nach einigen Jahren, in denen die Suche im Web als ein Problem der Suche in unstrukturierten Daten angesehen wurde, nun wieder verstärkt Erschließungsansätze, die auf klassische Erschließungsinstrumente zurückgreifen, propagiert werden. Zwar sollen sie nicht in ihrer ursprünglichen Form angewandt werden, da den Nutzern nicht zuzumuten ist, sich mit den entsprechenden Regeln auseinanderzusetzen, aber auch hinter der auf den ersten Blick zumindest chaotisch wirkenden Folksonomy ist das Prinzip der Klassifikation zu erkennen. Um die modernen Ansätze erfolgreich zu machen, bedarf es aber dringend Information Professionals, die das "beste aus beiden Welten" verbinden, um moderne, für den Nutzer optimale Informationssysteme zu schaffen. Für die Gesamtbewertung des Buchs gelten die bereits zu einzelnen Kapitels angeführten Kritikpunkte: In erster Linie bleibt das Buch zu sehr an der Oberfläche und wirkt irgendwie "zusammengeschrieben" anstatt als Ergebnis der tiefgreifenden Beschäftigung mit dem Thema. Als eine Einführung in aufkommende Technologien rund um die Suche ist es aber durchaus geeignet - gut lesbar ist der Text auf jeden Fall.

0.03166535 = product of:
  0.09499605 = sum of:
    0.032674633 = weight(_text_:world in 587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032674633 = score(doc=587,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.21233483 = fieldWeight in 587, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=587)
    0.06232142 = weight(_text_:web in 587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06232142 = score(doc=587,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.47698978 = fieldWeight in 587, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=587)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Subject content analysis of Web query terms is essential to understand Web searching interests. Such analysis includes exploring search topics and observing changes in their frequency distributions with time. To provide a basis for in-depth analysis of users' search interests on a larger scale, this article presents a query categorization approach to automatically classifying Web query terms into broad subject categories. Because a query is short in length and simple in structure, its intended subject(s) of search is difficult to judge. Our approach, therefore, combines the search processes of real-world search engines to obtain highly ranked Web documents based on each unknown query term. These documents are used to extract cooccurring terms and to create a feature set. An effective ranking function has also been developed to find the most appropriate categories. Three search engine logs in Taiwan were collected and tested. They contained over 5 million queries from different periods of time. The achieved performance is quite encouraging compared with that of human categorization. The experimental results demonstrate that the approach is efficient in dealing with large numbers of queries and adaptable to the dynamic Web environment. Through good integration of human and machine efforts, the frequency distributions of subject categories in response to changes in users' search interests can be systematically observed in real time. The approach has also shown potential for use in various information retrieval applications, and provides a basis for further Web searching studies.

0.030692264 = product of:
  0.09207679 = sum of:
    0.052102152 = weight(_text_:wide in 923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052102152 = score(doc=923,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 923, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=923)
    0.03997464 = weight(_text_:web in 923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03997464 = score(doc=923,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 923, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=923)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Engineers face a wide range of gaps when trying to identify, acquire, and utilize information from the Web. To be able to avoid creating such gaps, it is essential to understand them in detail. This paper reports the results of a study of the real life gaps in information usage processes of 17 engineers. Using the critical incident interviewing technique, 65 examples of information usage processes were uncovered. An inductive analysis of these data, using the constant comparison method, yields five classes of identification gaps, of acquisition gaps, and of utilization gaps. Within these fifteen gap classes, 79 types of information usage gaps are identified. The results of this study confirm and extend existing studies on information usage gaps. Future research should examine whether such gaps need to be bridged and, if so, how they could be bridged.

0.027600124 = product of:
  0.08280037 = sum of:
    0.03920956 = weight(_text_:world in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03920956 = score(doc=3612,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.25480178 = fieldWeight in 3612, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3612)
    0.043590814 = product of:
      0.06538622 = sum of:
        0.032840826 = weight(_text_:29 in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032840826 = score(doc=3612,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14083174 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 3612, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3612)
        0.032545395 = weight(_text_:22 in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032545395 = score(doc=3612,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3612, 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=3612)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

In this paper results of a field study into the need for research information of different user groups are presented: scientists, policy makers and policy researchers, industry and media. Main questions of semi-structured interviews were: what kind of research information users need, what kind of research information resources are used and which information resources are missing at the moment. User groups are missing for a diversity of reasons the overview of research, experts and institutes in the different scientific fields. Especially for the accessibility and transparency of the scientific world these overviews are reported to be needed. Neither Google nor any of the research institutes or policy research organisations are able to present surveys for different science fields at the moment. Giving users the possibility to search, browse and navigate through accessible and more specialised layers of research information might give answers to different user groups simultaneously.

Date

2. 7.2005 12:22:50

Source

Gaining insight from research information (CRIS2002): Proceedings of the 6th International Conference an Current Research Information Systems, University of Kassel, August 29 - 31, 2002. Eds: W. Adamczak u. A. Nase

0.026964504 = product of:
  0.08089351 = sum of:
    0.03473477 = weight(_text_:wide in 4497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03473477 = score(doc=4497,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.1958137 = fieldWeight in 4497, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4497)
    0.04615874 = weight(_text_:web in 4497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04615874 = score(doc=4497,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.35328537 = fieldWeight in 4497, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4497)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

This book provides practical strategies which enable the advanced web user to locate information effectively and to form a precise evaluation of the accuracy of that information. Although the book provides a brief but thorough review of the technologies which are currently available for these purposes, most of the book concerns practical `future-proof' techniques which are independent of changes in the tools available. For example, the book covers: how to retrieve salient information quickly; how to remove or compensate for bias; and tuition of novice Internet users.

Content

Key Features - Importantly, the book enables readers to develop strategies which will continue to be useful despite the rapidly-evolving state of the Internet and Internet technologies - it is not about technological `tricks'. - Enables readers to be aware of and compensate for bias and errors which are ubiquitous an the Internet. - Provides contemporary information an the deficiencies in web skills of novice users as well as practical techniques for teaching such users. The Authors Dr Alison Stacey works at the Learning Resource Centre, Cambridge Regional College. Dr Adrian Stacey, formerly based at Cambridge University, is a software programmer. Readership The book is aimed at a wide range of librarians and other information professionals who need to retrieve information from the Internet efficiently, to evaluate their confidence in the information they retrieve and/or to train others to use the Internet. It is primarily aimed at intermediate to advanced users of the Internet. Contents Fundamentals of information retrieval from the Internet - why learn web searching technique; types of information requests; patterns for information retrieval; leveraging the technology: Search term choice: pinpointing information an the web - why choose queries carefully; making search terms work together; how to pick search terms; finding the 'unfindable': Blas an the Internet - importance of bias; sources of bias; usergenerated bias: selecting information with which you already agree; assessing and compensating for bias; case studies: Query reformulation and longer term strategies - how to interact with your search engine; foraging for information; long term information retrieval: using the Internet to find trends; automating searches: how to make your machine do your work: Assessing the quality of results- how to assess and ensure quality: The novice user and teaching internet skills - novice users and their problems with the web; case study: research in a college library; interpreting 'second hand' web information.

0.02557689 = product of:
  0.07673067 = sum of:
    0.043418463 = weight(_text_:wide in 3290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043418463 = score(doc=3290,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 3290, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3290)
    0.0333122 = weight(_text_:web in 3290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0333122 = score(doc=3290,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 3290, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3290)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The large volumes of medical information available on the web may provide answers for a wide range of users attempting to solve health-related problems. While experts generally utilize reliable resources for diagnosis search and professional development, novices utilize different (social) web resources to obtain information that helps them manage their health or the health of people who they care for. A diverse number of related search topics address clinical diagnosis, advice searching, information sharing, connecting with experts, etc. This paper focuses on the extent to which expertise can impact clinical query formulation, document relevance assessment and retrieval performance in the context of tailoring retrieval models and systems to experts vs. non-experts. The results show that medical domain expertise 1) plays an important role in the lexical representations of information needs; 2) significantly influences the perception of relevance even among users with similar levels of expertise and 3) reinforces the idea that a single ground truth does not exist, thereby leading to the variability of system rankings with respect to the level of user's expertise. The findings of this study presents opportunities for the design of personalized health-related IR systems, but also for providing insights about the evaluation of such systems.

0.022324583 = product of:
  0.066973746 = sum of:
    0.043418463 = weight(_text_:wide in 5170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043418463 = score(doc=5170,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 5170, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5170)
    0.023555283 = weight(_text_:web in 5170) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023555283 = score(doc=5170,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5170, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5170)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Meho and Tibbo show that the Ellis model of information seeking applies to a web environment by way of a replication of his study in this case using behavior of social science faculty studying stateless nations, a group diverse in skills, origins, and research specialities. Data were collected by way of e-mail interviews. Material on stateless nations was limited to papers in English on social science topics published between 1998 and 2000. Of these 251 had 212 unique authors identified as academic scholars and had sufficient information to provide e-mail addresses. Of the 139 whose addresses were located, 9 who were physically close were reserved for face to face interviews, and of the remainder 60 agreed to participate and responded to the 25 open ended question interview. Follow up questions generated a 75% response. Of the possible face to face interviews five agreed to participate and provided 26 thousand words as opposed to 69 thousand by the 45 e-mail participants. The activities of the Ellis model are confirmed but four additional activities are also identified. These are accessing, i.e. finding the material identified in indirect sources of information; networking, or the maintaining of close contacts with a wide range of colleagues and other human sources; verifying, i.e. checking the accuracy of new information; and information managing, the filing and organizing of collected information. All activities are grouped into four stages searching, accessing, processing, and ending.

0.022273626 = product of:
  0.066820875 = sum of:
    0.05769842 = weight(_text_:web in 2046) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05769842 = score(doc=2046,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.4416067 = fieldWeight in 2046, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2046)
    0.009122452 = product of:
      0.027367353 = sum of:
        0.027367353 = weight(_text_:29 in 2046) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027367353 = score(doc=2046,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14083174 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2046, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2046)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Web searchers commonly have difficulties crafting queries to fulfill their information needs; even after they are able to craft a query, they often find it challenging to evaluate the results of their Web searches. Sources of these problems include the lack of support for constructing and refining queries, and the static nature of the list-based representations of Web search results. WordBars has been developed to assist users in their Web search and exploration tasks. This system provides a visual representation of the frequencies of the terms found in the first 100 document surrogates returned from an initial query, in the form of a histogram. Exploration of the search results is supported through term selection in the histogram, resulting in a re-sorting of the search results based on the use of the selected terms in the document surrogates. Terms from the histogram can be easily added or removed from the query, generating a new set of search results. Examples illustrate how WordBars can provide valuable support for query refinement and search results exploration, both when vague and specific initial queries are provided. User evaluations with both expert and intermediate Web searchers illustrate the benefits of the interactive exploration features of WordBars in terms of effectiveness as well as subjective measures. Although differences were found in the demographics of these two user groups, both were able to benefit from the features of WordBars.

Date

29. 7.2008 15:30:02

0.020597888 = product of:
  0.061793663 = sum of:
    0.052671213 = weight(_text_:web in 2044) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052671213 = score(doc=2044,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.40312994 = fieldWeight in 2044, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2044)
    0.009122452 = product of:
      0.027367353 = sum of:
        0.027367353 = weight(_text_:29 in 2044) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027367353 = score(doc=2044,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14083174 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 2044, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2044)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Categorized overviews of web search results are a promising way to support user exploration, understanding, and discovery. These search interfaces combine a metadata-based overview with the list of search results to enable a rich form of interaction. A study of 24 sophisticated users carrying out complex tasks suggests how searchers may adapt their search tactics when using categorized overviews. This mixed methods study evaluated categorized overviews of web search results organized into thematic, geographic, and government categories. Participants conducted four exploratory searches during a 2-hour session to generate ideas for newspaper articles about specified topics such as "human smuggling." Results showed that subjects explored deeper while feeling more organized, and that the categorized overview helped subjects better assess their results, although no significant differences were detected in the quality of the article ideas. A qualitative analysis of searcher comments identified seven tactics that participants reported adopting when using categorized overviews. This paper concludes by proposing a set of guidelines for the design of exploratory search interfaces. An understanding of the impact of categorized overviews on search tactics will be useful to web search researchers, search interface designers, information architects and web developers.

Date

29. 7.2008 15:27:58

0.0187849 = product of:
  0.056354694 = sum of:
    0.049122386 = weight(_text_:wide in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049122386 = score(doc=296,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17738682 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.2769224 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
    0.0072323103 = product of:
      0.02169693 = sum of:
        0.02169693 = weight(_text_:22 in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02169693 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 296, 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=296)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Previous empirical studies of searcher behaviour have drawn attention to a wide variety of factors that affect performance; for instance, the display of retrieved results can alter search strategies (Allen 1991, 1994), the information need type influences search behaviour, (Elkerton et al 1984, Marchionini 1995); while the task complexity, reflected in the information need can affect user's search behaviour (Large et al 1994). Furthermore, information source selection (Bassilli 1977), and the user's model of the system and domain impact on the search process (Michel 1994); while motivation (Solomon 1993, Jacobsen et al 1992) and the importance of the information need (Wendt 1969) also influence search duration and the effort a user will employ. Rouse and Rouse (1984) in a review of empirical studies, summarise a wide variety of variables that can effect searching behaviour, including payoff, costs of searching, resource available, amount of information sought, characteristics of the data and conflicts between documents. It appears that user behaviour is inconsistent in the search strategies adopted even for the same search need and system (Davidson 1977, Iivonen 1995). Theories of searcher behaviour have been proposed that provide explanations of aspects of end-user behaviour, such as the evolution of the user's information need and the problems of articulating a query, [Bates (1979, 1989), Markey and Atherton 1978], effective search strategies in browsing and goal directed searches [Marchionini 1995, Belkin (1987, 1993)], the linguistic problem of matching search terms with indexing terms or content of target documents through an expert intermediary (Ingwersen 1982) or cognitive aspects of IR (Kulthau 1984, Ingwersen 1996).

Date

22. 3.2002 9:54:13

0.018743306 = product of:
  0.056229915 = sum of:
    0.032674633 = weight(_text_:world in 0) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032674633 = score(doc=0,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1538826 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.21233483 = fieldWeight in 0, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.8436708 = idf(docFreq=2573, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=0)
    0.023555283 = weight(_text_:web in 0) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023555283 = score(doc=0,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 0, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=0)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

As information becomes more ubiquitous and the demands that searchers have on search systems grow, there is a need to support search behaviors beyond simple lookup. Information seeking is the process or activity of attempting to obtain information in both human and technological contexts. Exploratory search describes an information-seeking problem context that is open-ended, persistent, and multifaceted, and information-seeking processes that are opportunistic, iterative, and multitactical. Exploratory searchers aim to solve complex problems and develop enhanced mental capacities. Exploratory search systems support this through symbiotic human-machine relationships that provide guidance in exploring unfamiliar information landscapes. Exploratory search has gained prominence in recent years. There is an increased interest from the information retrieval, information science, and human-computer interaction communities in moving beyond the traditional turn-taking interaction model supported by major Web search engines, and toward support for human intelligence amplification and information use. In this lecture, we introduce exploratory search, relate it to relevant extant research, outline the features of exploratory search systems, discuss the evaluation of these systems, and suggest some future directions for supporting exploratory search. Exploratory search is a new frontier in the search domain and is becoming increasingly important in shaping our future world.

0.016951984 = product of:
  0.1017119 = sum of:
    0.1017119 = product of:
      0.15256785 = sum of:
        0.07662859 = weight(_text_:29 in 3339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07662859 = score(doc=3339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14083174 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 3339, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3339)
        0.07593926 = weight(_text_:22 in 3339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07593926 = score(doc=3339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3339, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3339)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Date

22. 5.2005 19:52:29

0.016613113 = product of:
  0.049839336 = sum of:
    0.040798947 = weight(_text_:web in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040798947 = score(doc=5493,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 5493, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5493)
    0.009040388 = product of:
      0.027121164 = sum of:
        0.027121164 = weight(_text_:22 in 5493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027121164 = score(doc=5493,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14019686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04003532 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5493, 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=5493)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Purpose Web search is more and more moving into mobile contexts. However, screen size of mobile devices is limited and search engine result pages face a trade-off between offering informative snippets and optimal use of space. One factor clearly influencing this trade-off is snippet length. The purpose of this paper is to find out what snippet size to use in mobile web search. Design/methodology/approach For this purpose, an eye-tracking experiment was conducted showing participants search interfaces with snippets of one, three or five lines on a mobile device to analyze 17 dependent variables. In total, 31 participants took part in the study. Each of the participants solved informational and navigational tasks. Findings Results indicate a strong influence of page fold on scrolling behavior and attention distribution across search results. Regardless of query type, short snippets seem to provide too little information about the result, so that search performance and subjective measures are negatively affected. Long snippets of five lines lead to better performance than medium snippets for navigational queries, but to worse performance for informational queries. Originality/value Although space in mobile search is limited, this study shows that longer snippets improve usability and user experience. It further emphasizes that page fold plays a stronger role in mobile than in desktop search for attention distribution.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.013599649 = product of:
  0.081597894 = sum of:
    0.081597894 = weight(_text_:web in 3623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081597894 = score(doc=3623,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.13065568 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04003532 = queryNorm
        0.6245262 = fieldWeight in 3623, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3623)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to report findings from an exploratory study investigating the web interactions and technoliteracy of children in the early childhood years. Previous research has studied aspects of older children's technoliteracy and web searching; however, few studies have analyzed web search data from children younger than six years of age. Design/methodology/approach - The study explored the Google web searching and technoliteracy of young children who are enrolled in a "preparatory classroom" or kindergarten (the year before young children begin compulsory schooling in Queensland, Australia). Young children were video- and audio-taped while conducting Google web searches in the classroom. The data were qualitatively analysed to understand the young children's web search behaviour. Findings - The findings show that young children engage in complex web searches, including keyword searching and browsing, query formulation and reformulation, relevance judgments, successive searches, information multitasking and collaborative behaviours. The study results provide significant initial insights into young children's web searching and technoliteracy. Practical implications - The use of web search engines by young children is an important research area with implications for educators and web technologies developers. Originality/value - This is the first study of young children's interaction with a web search engine.