Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.021481335 = product of:
  0.12888801 = sum of:
    0.12888801 = weight(_text_:problem in 5239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12888801 = score(doc=5239,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.6291675 = fieldWeight in 5239, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5239)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In "Part 4. Cognitive Styles in Information Seeking,'' where Ford is the primary author, the results of the application of the Riding's Cognitive Styles Analysis and the Pask's holist/serialist portion of the Ford's Study Process Questionnaire to the 111 U.K. participants. were correlated using Spearman's coefficient with reports of focused thinking, degree of change in the intermediary's perception of the problem and personal knowledge, problem stage, degree of differentiating activity, change in problem perception, engagement in exploring activity, changes in questioning, valuing of serendipitous information, and other variables. The results would indicate that field independent individuals report clearer more focused thinking, see themselves in an earlier problem stage, and report higher levels of change in perception of the problem. Holists value serendipity and report engagement in Kuhlthau's exploring stage. They are seen by intermediaries as exhibiting fewer changes in questioning behavior. A fifth section will appear in a later issue.

0.01663937 = product of:
  0.09983622 = sum of:
    0.09983622 = weight(_text_:problem in 5232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09983622 = score(doc=5232,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.48735106 = fieldWeight in 5232, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5232)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In "Part 2. Uncertainty and Its Correlates,'' where Wilson is the primary author, after a review of uncertainty as a concept in information seeking and decision research, it is hypothesized that if the Kuhlthau problem solving stage model is appropriate the searchers will recognize the stage in which they currently are operating. Secondly to test Wilson's contention that operationalized uncertainty would be useful in characterizing users, it is hypothesized that uncertainty will decrease as the searcher proceeds through problem stages and after the completion of the search. A review of pre and post search interviews reveals that uncertainty can be operationalized, and that academic researchers have no difficulty with a stage model of the information seeking process. Uncertainty is unrelated to sex, age, or discipline, but is related to problem stage and domain knowledge. Both concepts appear robust.

0.01358599 = product of:
  0.08151594 = sum of:
    0.08151594 = weight(_text_:problem in 5233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08151594 = score(doc=5233,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.39792046 = fieldWeight in 5233, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5233)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Ellis, et alia, now provide part five of their study on mediated searching which is treated separately here because of the presence of additional authors. The data source remains cases collected from 198 individuals, 87 in Texas and 111 in Sheffield in the U.K. but the focus here is on seeker/intermediary interaction utilizing the Saracevic triadic IR model, and the method is the analysis of discourse. While the pre-search interview stressed problem definition, interaction during the search in terms of relevance and magnitude continued to develop the problem statement. The user and intermediary focused on search tactics, review and relevance, while the intermediary interaction with the system was comprised of terminology and answers. The interaction clearly affected the search process. Users and intermediaries considered the process effective and users felt the intermediary increased their overall satisfaction.

0.011207869 = product of:
  0.06724721 = sum of:
    0.06724721 = weight(_text_:problem in 4611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06724721 = score(doc=4611,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.3282676 = fieldWeight in 4611, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4611)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This paper presents an outline of models of information seeking and other aspects of information behaviour, showing the relationship between communication and information behaviour in general with information seeking and information searching in information retrieval systems. It is suggested that these models address issues at various levels of information behaviour and that they can be related by envisaging a 'nesting' of models. It is also suggested that, within both information seeking research and information searching research, alternative models address similar issues in related ways and that the models are complementary rather than conflicting. Finally, an alternative, problem-solving model is presented, which, it is suggested, provides a basis for relating the models in appropriate research strategies.

0.009606745 = product of:
  0.05764047 = sum of:
    0.05764047 = weight(_text_:problem in 611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05764047 = score(doc=611,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 611, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=611)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Purpose - Apart from information retrieval there is virtually no other area of information science that has occasioned as much research effort and writing as "user studies". Within user studies the investigation of "information needs" has been the subject of much debate and no little confusion. The aim of this paper is to attempt to reduce this confusion by devoting attention to the definition of some concepts and by proposing the basis for a theory of the motivations for information-seeking behaviour. Design/methodology/approach - The paper describes the issues of user studies and information needs within the context of information science. Findings - The paper finds that the problem seems to lie, not so much with the lack of a single definition, as with a failure to use a definition appropriate to the level, and purpose of the investigation. Originality/value - The analysis may be used as a springboard to research based upon a wider, holistic view of the information user.

0.008005621 = product of:
  0.04803372 = sum of:
    0.04803372 = weight(_text_:problem in 5242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04803372 = score(doc=5242,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20485485 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04826377 = queryNorm
        0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 5242, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5242)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In "Part 3. Successive Searching.'' where Spink is the primary author, after a review of the work on successive searching, a portion of the Texas generated data is reviewed for insights on how frequently successive searching occurred, the motivation for its occurrence, and any distinctive characteristics of the successive search pattern. Of 18 mediated searches, half requested a second search and a quarter a third search. All but one seeker reported a need to refine and enhance the previous results. Second searches while characterized as refinements included a significantly higher number of items retrieved and more search cycles. Third searches had the most cycles but less retrieved items than the second. Number of terms utilized did not change significantly and overlap was limited to about one in five terms between first and second searches. No overlap occurred between the second and third searches. Problem solving stage shifts did occur with 2 moving to a later stage after the first search, 5 remaining in the same stage and one reverting to a previous stage. Precision did not increase over successive searches, but partial relevant judgments decreased between the second and third search.