Search (262 results, page 1 of 14)

  • × theme_ss:"Suchtaktik"
  1. Toms, E.G.: What motivates the browser? (1999) 0.04
    0.044335514 = product of:
      0.110838786 = sum of:
        0.016277399 = weight(_text_:of in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016277399 = score(doc=292,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2491759 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
        0.09456138 = sum of:
          0.071922 = weight(_text_:mind in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.071922 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
                6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04177434 = queryNorm
              0.27584085 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
          0.022639386 = weight(_text_:22 in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.022639386 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04177434 = 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)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, 13-15 August 1998, Sheffield, UK. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  2. Drabenstott, K.M.: Web search strategies (2000) 0.04
    0.043242 = product of:
      0.108105 = sum of:
        0.013543614 = weight(_text_:of in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013543614 = score(doc=1188,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.20732687 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
        0.09456138 = sum of:
          0.071922 = weight(_text_:mind in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.071922 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
                6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04177434 = queryNorm
              0.27584085 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
                0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
          0.022639386 = weight(_text_:22 in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.022639386 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04177434 = 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)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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.
    Date
    22. 9.1997 19:16:05
    Imprint
    Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science
    Source
    Saving the time of the library user through subject access innovation: Papers in honor of Pauline Atherton Cochrane. Ed.: W.J. Wheeler
  3. Dumitrescu, A.; Santini, S.: Full coverage of a reader's interests in context-based information filtering (2021) 0.03
    0.032411493 = product of:
      0.08102873 = sum of:
        0.02708723 = weight(_text_:of in 327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02708723 = score(doc=327,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.41465378 = fieldWeight in 327, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=327)
        0.053941496 = product of:
          0.10788299 = sum of:
            0.10788299 = weight(_text_:mind in 327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10788299 = score(doc=327,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2607373 = queryWeight, product of:
                  6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.41376126 = fieldWeight in 327, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  6.241566 = idf(docFreq=233, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=327)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    We present a collection of algorithms to filter a stream of documents in such a way that the filtered documents will cover as well as possible the interest of a person, keeping in mind that, at any given time, the offered documents should not only be relevant, but should also be diversified, in the sense of covering all the interests of the person. We use a modification of the WEBSOM algorithm to create a user model based on a self-organizing network trained using a collection of documents representative of the person's interests. We introduce the concepts of freshness and coverage. A document is fresh if it belongs to a semantic area of interest to a person for which no documents were seen in the recent past; a group of documents has coverage to the extent to which it is a good representation of all the interests of a person. Our tests show that these algorithms can effectively increase the coverage of the documents that are shown to the user without overly affecting precision.
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72(2021) no.8, S.1011-1027
  4. Lin, S.-j.; Belkin, N.: Validation of a model of information seeking over multiple search sessions (2005) 0.03
    0.031502984 = product of:
      0.05250497 = sum of:
        0.014111101 = product of:
          0.0705555 = sum of:
            0.0705555 = weight(_text_:problem in 3450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0705555 = score(doc=3450,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.39792046 = fieldWeight in 3450, 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=3450)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.021414334 = weight(_text_:of in 3450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021414334 = score(doc=3450,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 3450, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3450)
        0.016979538 = product of:
          0.033959076 = sum of:
            0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 3450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033959076 = score(doc=3450,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3450, 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=3450)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    Abstract
    Most information systems share a common assumption: information seeking is discrete. Such an assumption neither reflects real-life information seeking processes nor conforms to the perspective of phenomenology, "life is a journey constituted by continuous acquisition of knowledge." Thus, this study develops and validates a theoretical model that explains successive search experience for essentially the same information problem. The proposed model is called Multiple Information Seeking Episodes (MISE), which consists of four dimensions: problematic situation, information problem, information seeking process, episodes. Eight modes of multiple information seeking episodes are identified and specified with properties of the four dimensions of MISE. The results partially validate MISE by finding that the original MISE model is highly accurate, but less sufficient in characterizing successive searches; all factors in the MISE model are empirically confirmed, but new factors are identified as weIl. The revised MISE model is shifted from the user-centered to the interaction-centered perspective, taking into account factors of searcher, system, search activity, search context, information attainment, and information use activities.
    Date
    10. 4.2005 14:52:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.4, S.393-415
  5. Morse, P.M.: Browsing and search theory (1973) 0.02
    0.0247859 = product of:
      0.06196475 = sum of:
        0.022345824 = weight(_text_:of in 3339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022345824 = score(doc=3339,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 3339, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3339)
        0.039618924 = product of:
          0.07923785 = sum of:
            0.07923785 = weight(_text_:22 in 3339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07923785 = score(doc=3339,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    22. 5.2005 19:52:29
    Source
    Toward a theory of librarianship. Papers in honor of J.H. Shera. Ed. by H. Rawski
  6. Branch, J.L.: Investigating the information-seeking process of adolescents : the value of using think alouds and think afters (2000) 0.02
    0.0247859 = product of:
      0.06196475 = sum of:
        0.022345824 = weight(_text_:of in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022345824 = score(doc=3924,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 3924, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3924)
        0.039618924 = product of:
          0.07923785 = sum of:
            0.07923785 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07923785 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3924, 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=3924)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Source
    Library and information science research. 22(2000) no.4, S.371-382
  7. Ennis, M.; Sutcliffe, A.G.; Watkinson, S.J.: Towards a predictive model of information seeking : empirical studies of end-user-searching (1999) 0.02
    0.023488076 = product of:
      0.039146792 = sum of:
        0.0066520358 = product of:
          0.033260178 = sum of:
            0.033260178 = weight(_text_:problem in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033260178 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.1875815 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.021175062 = weight(_text_:of in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021175062 = score(doc=296,freq=44.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.3241498 = fieldWeight in 296, product of:
              6.6332498 = tf(freq=44.0), with freq of:
                44.0 = termFreq=44.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=296)
        0.011319693 = product of:
          0.022639386 = sum of:
            0.022639386 = weight(_text_:22 in 296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022639386 = score(doc=296,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    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
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  8. Monchaux, S.; Amadieu, F.; Chevalier, A.; Mariné, C.: Query strategies during information searching : effects of prior domain knowledge and complexity of the information problems to be solved (2015) 0.02
    0.022437057 = product of:
      0.037395094 = sum of:
        0.008315044 = product of:
          0.041575223 = sum of:
            0.041575223 = weight(_text_:problem in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041575223 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 2680, 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=2680)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.014930432 = weight(_text_:of in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014930432 = score(doc=2680,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.22855641 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
        0.0141496165 = product of:
          0.028299233 = sum of:
            0.028299233 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028299233 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6 = coord(3/5)
    
    Abstract
    This study addresses the impact of domain expertise (i.e. of prior knowledge of the domain) on the performance and query strategies used by users while searching for information. Twenty-four experts (psychology students) and 24 non-experts (students from other disciplines) had to search for psychology information from the Universalis website in order to perform six information problems of varying complexity: two simple problems (the keywords required to complete the task were provided in the problem statement), two more difficult problems (the keywords required had to be inferred) and two impossible problems (no answer was provided by the website). The results showed that participants with prior knowledge in the domain (experts in psychology) performed better (i.e. reached more correct answers after shorter search times) than non-experts. This difference was stronger as the complexity of the problems increased. This study also showed that experts and non-experts displayed different query strategies. Experts reformulated the impossible problems more often than non-experts, because they produced new queries with psychology-related keywords. The participants rarely used thematic category tool and when they did so this did not enhance their performance.
    Date
    25. 1.2016 18:46:22
  9. Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a classification scheme for fiction based on an analysis of actual user-librarian communication, and use of the scheme for control of librarians' search strategies (1980) 0.02
    0.02237801 = product of:
      0.055945024 = sum of:
        0.02764579 = weight(_text_:of in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02764579 = score(doc=5835,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.42320424 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
        0.028299233 = product of:
          0.056598466 = sum of:
            0.056598466 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056598466 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Date
    5. 8.2006 13:22:44
    Source
    Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u, L. Kajberg
  10. Spink, A.; Park, M.; Koshman, S.: Factors affecting assigned information problem ordering during Web search : an exploratory study (2006) 0.02
    0.018455489 = product of:
      0.04613872 = sum of:
        0.028222201 = product of:
          0.141111 = sum of:
            0.141111 = weight(_text_:problem in 991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.141111 = score(doc=991,freq=16.0), product of:
                0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.7958409 = fieldWeight in 991, product of:
                  4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                    16.0 = termFreq=16.0
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=991)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.01791652 = weight(_text_:of in 991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01791652 = score(doc=991,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 991, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=991)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Multitasking is the human ability to handle the demands of multiple tasks. Multitasking behavior involves the ordering of multiple tasks and switching between tasks. People often multitask when using information retrieval (IR) technologies as they seek information on more than one information problem over single or multiple search episodes. However, limited studies have examined how people order their information problems, especially during their Web search engine interaction. The aim of our exploratory study was to investigate assigned information problem ordering by forty (40) study participants engaged in Web search. Findings suggest that assigned information problem ordering was influenced by the following factors, including personal interest, problem knowledge, perceived level of information available on the Web, ease of finding information, level of importance and seeking information on information problems in order from general to specific. Personal interest and problem knowledge were the major factors during assigned information problem ordering. Implications of the findings and further research are discussed. The relationship between information problem ordering and gratification theory is an important area for further exploration.
  11. Ford, N.; Wilson, T.D.; Foster, A.; Ellis, D.; Spink, A.: Information seeking and mediated searching : Part 4: cognitive styles in information seeking (2002) 0.02
    0.017908463 = product of:
      0.044771157 = sum of:
        0.02231161 = product of:
          0.11155804 = sum of:
            0.11155804 = weight(_text_:problem in 5239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11155804 = score(doc=5239,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = 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)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.022459546 = weight(_text_:of in 5239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022459546 = score(doc=5239,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 5239, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5239)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 53(2002) no.9, S.728-735
  12. Vakkari, P.: ¬A theory of the task-based information retrieval process : a summary and generalisation of a longitudinal study (2001) 0.02
    0.01713658 = product of:
      0.042841446 = sum of:
        0.014111101 = product of:
          0.0705555 = sum of:
            0.0705555 = weight(_text_:problem in 4493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0705555 = score(doc=4493,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.39792046 = fieldWeight in 4493, 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=4493)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.028730344 = weight(_text_:of in 4493) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028730344 = score(doc=4493,freq=36.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.43980673 = fieldWeight in 4493, product of:
              6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
                36.0 = termFreq=36.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4493)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The aim of this article is threefold: (1) to give a summary of empirical results reported earlier on relations between students' problem stages in the course of writing their research proposals for a master's thesis and the information sought, choice of search terms and tactics and relevance assessments of the information found for that task; (2) to show how the findings of the study refine Kuhlthau's model of the information search process in the field of information retrieval (IR); and (3) to construe a tentative theory of a task-based IR process based on the supported hypotheses. The results of the empirical studies show that there is a close connection between the students' problem stages (mental model) in the task performance and the information sought, the search tactics used and the assessment of the relevance and utility of the information found. The corroborated hypotheses expand the ideas in Kuhlthau's model in the domain of IR. A theory of task-based information searching based on the empirical findings of the study is presented.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 57(2001) no.1, S.44-60
  13. Koopmans, N.I.: What's your question? : The need for research information from the perspective of different user groups (2002) 0.02
    0.016558254 = product of:
      0.041395634 = sum of:
        0.024416098 = weight(_text_:of in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024416098 = score(doc=3612,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.37376386 = fieldWeight in 3612, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3612)
        0.016979538 = product of:
          0.033959076 = sum of:
            0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 3612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033959076 = score(doc=3612,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = 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)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    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
  14. Limberg, L.: Three conceptions of information seeking and use (1999) 0.02
    0.015775634 = product of:
      0.039439082 = sum of:
        0.022459546 = weight(_text_:of in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022459546 = score(doc=281,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 281, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=281)
        0.016979538 = product of:
          0.033959076 = sum of:
            0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033959076 = score(doc=281,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 281, 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=281)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    This study grew out of a need for better research based understanding of information seeking and use in a specific context. Several researchers in library and information studies (LIS) pointed out the predominance of research on information needs and information seeking and expressed a need for the study of information use (i.a. Kuhlthau 1993; Vakkari 1997; Wilson 1981). The role of context for information seeking behaviour has been stressed (i.a. Dervin 1997; Wilson 1981, 1994). The complex process of information seeking and use in learning contexts needs further exploration, according to i.a. Kuhlthau (1993). My research project investigated how students used information and what they learnt from the information they retrieved and used for an assignment. The aim of the project was to study information seeking through an explorative investigation of the interaction between information seeking and use and learning outcomes.
    Date
    22. 3.2002 9:53:10
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  15. Crestani, F.; Du, H.: Written versus spoken queries : a qualitative and quantitative comparative analysis (2006) 0.02
    0.015357548 = product of:
      0.03839387 = sum of:
        0.021414334 = weight(_text_:of in 5047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021414334 = score(doc=5047,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 5047, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5047)
        0.016979538 = product of:
          0.033959076 = sum of:
            0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 5047) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033959076 = score(doc=5047,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5047, 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=5047)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The authors report on an experimental study on the differences between spoken and written queries. A set of written and spontaneous spoken queries are generated by users from written topics. These two sets of queries are compared in qualitative terms and in terms of their retrieval effectiveness. Written and spoken queries are compared in terms of length, duration, and part of speech. In addition, assuming perfect transcription of the spoken queries, written and spoken queries are compared in terms of their aptitude to describe relevant documents. The retrieval effectiveness of spoken and written queries is compared using three different information retrieval models. The results show that using speech to formulate one's information need provides a way to express it more naturally and encourages the formulation of longer queries. Despite that, longer spoken queries do not seem to significantly improve retrieval effectiveness compared with written queries.
    Date
    5. 6.2006 11:22:23
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.7, S.881-890
  16. Wildemuth, B.M.: Search moves made by novices end users (1992) 0.01
    0.014649781 = product of:
      0.036624454 = sum of:
        0.011641062 = product of:
          0.05820531 = sum of:
            0.05820531 = weight(_text_:problem in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05820531 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.3282676 = fieldWeight in 2422, 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=2422)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.024983391 = weight(_text_:of in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024983391 = score(doc=2422,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.38244802 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The transaction logs of 53 medical students' searches of a factual database, INQUIRER, of microbiology facts and concepts were analysed in detail to determine: the overall frequency of search moves; the interaction between the problem statement and the students' search strategies; the search moves selected by individual students; and the tactics (combinations of moves) used by the students. Over 200 searches were conducted in response to clinical scenarios in microbiology and the searches were made up of 853 search moves. Results indicate that students used only a few distinct moves and that their selection of moves varied by individual and by search stimulus. Patterns also emerged in students' combinations of search moves into search tactics
    Source
    Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Pittsburgh, 26.-29.10.92. Ed.: D. Shaw
  17. Spink, A.: Towards a theoretical framework for information retrieval in an information seeking context (1999) 0.01
    0.0145429075 = product of:
      0.03635727 = sum of:
        0.0117592495 = product of:
          0.058796246 = sum of:
            0.058796246 = weight(_text_:problem in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.058796246 = score(doc=300,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.33160037 = fieldWeight in 300, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=300)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.024598021 = weight(_text_:of in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024598021 = score(doc=300,freq=38.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 300, product of:
              6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
                38.0 = termFreq=38.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=300)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents the initial stages of the development of a three-dimensional model as a theoretical framework for conceptualizing and exploring interactive information retrieval (IR) with an information seeking context. The model, displayed in Figure 1, includes a Plane of Judgment within a Plane of Interaction within a Plane of Time. The Plane of Judgment includes levels and regions of relevance judgments, and other user judgments during interactive IR, e.g., magnitude or strategy feedback, tactics, search strategies, or search terms. The Plane of Judgment exists within a Plane of Interaction. The Plane of Interaction consists of interactive IR models, including Ingwersen (1992, 1996), Belkin, Cool, Stein and Theil (1995), and Saracevic (1996b, 1997). The Plane of Interaction includes movement or shifts within interactions or search episodes, e.g., tactics, information problem, strategies, terms, feedback, goal states, or uncertainty. IR interactions that occur within a Plane of Interaction exist within a Plane of Time. The Plane of Time includes users' information seeking stages, represented in the model by Kuhlthau's Information Search Process Model (1993) and users' successive searches over time related to the same or evolving information problem (Spink, 1996). The three-dimensional model is a framework for the development of theoretical and empirical research to: 1. Integrate interactive IR research within information-seeking context 2. Explore users' interactive IR episodes within their changing information-seeking contexts 3. Examine relevance judgments within users' information seeking processes 4. Broaden relevance research to include the concurrent exploration of relevance judgment level, region and time
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  18. Kuhlthau, C.C.: Investigating patterns in information seeking : concepts in context (1999) 0.01
    0.0145429075 = product of:
      0.03635727 = sum of:
        0.0117592495 = product of:
          0.058796246 = sum of:
            0.058796246 = weight(_text_:problem in 301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.058796246 = score(doc=301,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.33160037 = fieldWeight in 301, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=301)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.024598021 = weight(_text_:of in 301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024598021 = score(doc=301,freq=38.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.37654874 = fieldWeight in 301, product of:
              6.164414 = tf(freq=38.0), with freq of:
                38.0 = termFreq=38.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=301)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents the initial stages of the development of a three-dimensional model as a theoretical framework for conceptualizing and exploring interactive information retrieval (IR) with an information seeking context. The model, displayed in Figure 1, includes a Plane of Judgment within a Plane of Interaction within a Plane of Time. The Plane of Judgment includes levels and regions of relevance judgments, and other user judgments during interactive IR, e.g., magnitude or strategy feedback, tactics, search strategies, or search terms. The Plane of Judgment exists within a Plane of Interaction. The Plane of Interaction consists of interactive IR models, including Ingwersen (1992, 1996), Belkin, Cool, Stein and Theil (1995), and Saracevic (1996b, 1997). The Plane of Interaction includes movement or shifts within interactions or search episodes, e.g., tactics, information problem, strategies, terms, feedback, goal states, or uncertainty. IR interactions that occur within a Plane of Interaction exist within a Plane of Time. The Plane of Time includes users' information seeking stages, represented in the model by Kuhlthau's Information Search Process Model (1993) and users' successive searches over time related to the same or evolving information problem (Spink, 1996). The three-dimensional model is a framework for the development of theoretical and empirical research to: 1. Integrate interactive IR research within information-seeking context 2. Explore users' interactive IR episodes within their changing information-seeking contexts 3. Examine relevance judgments within users' information seeking processes 4. Broaden relevance research to include the concurrent exploration of relevance judgment level, region and time
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  19. Byström, K.: Information seekers in context : an analysis of the 'doer' in INSU studies (1999) 0.01
    0.014402213 = product of:
      0.03600553 = sum of:
        0.021855915 = weight(_text_:of in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021855915 = score(doc=297,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 297, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=297)
        0.0141496165 = product of:
          0.028299233 = sum of:
            0.028299233 = weight(_text_:22 in 297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028299233 = score(doc=297,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 297, 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=297)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    In information needs, seeking and use (INSU) research, individuals have most commonly been perceived as users (e.g., Kuhlthau, 1991; Dervin & Nilan, 1986; Dervin, 1989; Belkin, 1980). The concept user originates from the user of libraries and other information services and information systems. Over the years the scope of the concept has become wider and it is nowadays often understood in the sense of seekers of information (e.g., Wilson, 1981; Marchionini, 1995) and users of information (e.g., Streatfield, 1983). Nevertheless, the concept has remained ambiguous by being on the one hand universal and on the other hand extremely specific. The purpose of this paper is to map and evaluate views on people whose information behaviour has been in one way or another the core of our research area. The goal is to shed some light on various relationships between the different aspects of doers in INSU studies. The paper is inspired by Dervin's (1997) analysis of context where she identified among other themes the nature of subject by contrasting a `transcendental individual' with a `decentered subject', and Talja's (1997) presentation about constituting `information' and `user' from the discourse analytic viewpoint as opposed to the cognitive viewpoint. Instead of the metatheoretical approach applied by Dervin and Talja, a more concrete approach is valid in the present analysis where no direct arguments for or against the underlying metatheories are itemised. The focus is on doers in INSU studies leaving other, even closely-related concepts (i.e., information, information seeking, knowledge etc.), outside the scope of the paper.
    Date
    22. 3.2002 9:55:52
    Source
    Exploring the contexts of information behaviour: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Research in Information Needs, Seeking and Use in Different Contexts, Sheffield, UK, 1998. Ed. by D.K. Wilson u. D.K. Allen
  20. Vakkari, P.; Pennanen, M.; Serola, S.: Changes of search terms and tactics while writing a research proposal : a longitudinal case study (2003) 0.01
    0.014402213 = product of:
      0.03600553 = sum of:
        0.021855915 = weight(_text_:of in 1073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021855915 = score(doc=1073,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 1073, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1073)
        0.0141496165 = product of:
          0.028299233 = sum of:
            0.028299233 = weight(_text_:22 in 1073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028299233 = score(doc=1073,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04177434 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1073, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1073)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The study analyses how students' growing understanding of the topic and search experience were related to their choice of search tactics and terms while preparing a research proposal for a small empirical study. In addition to that, the findings of the study are used to test Vakkari's (2001) theory of task-based IR. The research subjects were 22 students of psychology attending a seminar for preparing the proposal. They made a search for their task in PsychINFO database at the beginning and end of the seminar. Data were collected in several ways. A pre- and post-search interview was conducted in both sessions. The students were asked to think aloud in the sessions. This was recorded as were the transaction logs. The results show that search experience was slightly related to the change of facets. Although the students' vocabulary of the topic grew generating an increased use of specific terms between the sessions, their use of search tactics and operators remained fairly constant. There was no correlation between the terms and tactics used and the total number of useful references found. By comparing these results with the findings of relevant earlier studies the conclusion was drawn that domain knowledge has an impact on searching assuming that users have a sufficient command of the system used. This implies that the tested theory of task-based IR is valid on condition that the searchers are experienced. It is suggested that the theory should be enriched by including search experience in its scope.

Languages

  • e 258
  • d 2
  • ja 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 251
  • m 8
  • el 2
  • s 2
  • More… Less…