Search (89 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × theme_ss:"Suchoberflächen"
  1. Davis, L.: Designing a search user interface for a digital library (2006) 0.02 
    0.017131606 = product of:
  0.042829014 = sum of:
    0.02018963 = weight(_text_:of in 5294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018963 = score(doc=5294,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 5294, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5294)
    0.022639386 = product of:
      0.045278773 = sum of:
        0.045278773 = weight(_text_:22 in 5294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045278773 = score(doc=5294,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5294, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5294)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The author describes some of the challenges, decisions, and processes that affected the design and development of the search user interface for Version 2 of the Digital Library for Earth System Education (DLESE; www.dlese.org), released July 29, 2003. The DLESE is a community-led effort funded by the National Science Foundation and is part of the National Science Digital Library (NSDL).
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:48:54
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.788-791
  2. Rose, D.E.: Reconciling information-seeking behavior with search user interfaces for the Web (2006) 0.02 
    0.016862115 = product of:
  0.04215529 = sum of:
    0.022345824 = weight(_text_:of in 5296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022345824 = score(doc=5296,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 5296, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5296)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 5296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=5296,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5296, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5296)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    User interfaces of Web search engines reflect attributes of the underlying tools used to create them, rather than what we know about how people look for information. In this article, the author examines several characteristics of user search behavior: the variety of information-seeking goals, the cultural and situational context of search, and the iterative nature of the search task. An analysis of these characteristics suggests ways that interfaces can be redesigned to make searching more effective for users.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:58:06
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.797-799
  3. Sacco, G.M.: Dynamic taxonomies and guided searches (2006) 0.02 
    0.01667951 = product of:
  0.041698776 = sum of:
    0.013683967 = weight(_text_:of in 5295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013683967 = score(doc=5295,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.20947541 = fieldWeight in 5295, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5295)
    0.02801481 = product of:
      0.05602962 = sum of:
        0.05602962 = weight(_text_:22 in 5295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05602962 = score(doc=5295,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 5295, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5295)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    A new search paradigm, in which the primary user activity is the guided exploration of a complex information space rather than the retrieval of items based on precise specifications, is proposed. The author claims that this paradigm is the norm in most practical applications, and that solutions based on traditional search methods are not effective in this context. He then presents a solution based on dynamic taxonomies, a knowledge management model that effectively guides users to reach their goal while giving them total freedom in exploring the information base. Applications, benefits, and current research are discussed.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:56:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.792-796
  4. Vaughan, M.W.; Resnick, M.L.: Search user interfaces : best practices and future visions (2006) 0.02 
    0.015834233 = product of:
  0.03958558 = sum of:
    0.011286346 = weight(_text_:of in 5191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011286346 = score(doc=5191,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 5191, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5191)
    0.028299233 = product of:
      0.056598466 = sum of:
        0.056598466 = weight(_text_:22 in 5191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056598466 = score(doc=5191,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5191, 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=5191)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:37:31
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.777-780
  5. Mochel, K.: Search in the Web shopping environment (2006) 0.02 
    0.015664605 = product of:
  0.03916151 = sum of:
    0.01935205 = weight(_text_:of in 5301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01935205 = score(doc=5301,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 5301, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5301)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 5301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=5301,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5301, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5301)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The author presents a design case study of a search user interface for Web catalogs in the context of online shopping for consumer products such as clothing, furniture, and sporting goods. The case study provides a review of the user data for the user interface (UI), and the resulting redesign recommendations. Based on the case study and its user data, a set of common user requirements for searching in the context of online shopping is provided.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:23:19
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.819-824
  6. Wildemuth, B.M.: Evidence-based practice in search interface design (2006) 0.01 
    0.014990156 = product of:
  0.03747539 = sum of:
    0.017665926 = weight(_text_:of in 5302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017665926 = score(doc=5302,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 5302, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5302)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 5302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=5302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5302, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5302)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    An evidence-based practice approach to search interface design is proposed, with the goal of designing interfaces that adequately support search strategy formulation and reformulation. Relevant findings from studies of information professionals' searching behaviors, end users' searching of bibliographic databases, and search behaviors on the Web are highlighted. Three brief examples are presented to illustrate the ways in which findings from such studies can be used to make decisions about the design of search interfaces. If academic research can be effectively connected with design practice, we can discover which design practices truly are best practices and incorporate them into future search interfaces.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:30:09
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.825-828
  7. Dorner, D.G.; Curtis, A.M.: ¬A comparative review of common user interface products (2004) 0.01 
    0.014244139 = product of:
  0.035610348 = sum of:
    0.015800884 = weight(_text_:of in 2851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015800884 = score(doc=2851,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 2851, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2851)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 2851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=2851,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2851, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2851)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    A common user interface replaces the multiple interfaces found among individual electronic library resources, reducing the time and effort spent by the user in both searching and learning to use a range of databases. Although the primary function of a common user interface is to simplify the search process, such products can be holistic solutions designed to address requirements other than searching, such as user authentication and site branding. This review provides a detailed summary of software currently on the market. The products reviewed were EnCompass, MetaLib, Find-It-All OneSearch, ZPORTAL, CPORTAL, InfoTrac Total Access, MetaFind, MuseSearch, SiteSearch, Single Search, Chameleon Gateway, and WebFeat.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.182-197
  8. Jones, M.; Buchanan, G.; Cheng, T.-C.; Jain, P.: Changing the pace of search : supporting background information seeking (2006) 0.01 
    0.014244139 = product of:
  0.035610348 = sum of:
    0.015800884 = weight(_text_:of in 5287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015800884 = score(doc=5287,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 5287, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5287)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 5287) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=5287,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5287, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5287)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Almost all Web searches are carried out while the user is sitting at a conventional desktop computer connected to the Internet. Although online, handheld, mobile search offers new possibilities, the fast-paced, focused style of interaction may not be appropriate for all user search needs. The authors explore an alternative, relaxed style for Web searching that asynchronously combines an offline handheld computer and an online desktop personal computer. They discuss the role and utility of such an approach, present a tool to meet these user needs, and discuss its relation to other systems.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:37:49
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.838-842
  9. Gremett, P.: Utilizing a user's context to improve search results (2006) 0.01 
    0.014163372 = product of:
  0.03540843 = sum of:
    0.0127690425 = weight(_text_:of in 5299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0127690425 = score(doc=5299,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 5299, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5299)
    0.022639386 = product of:
      0.045278773 = sum of:
        0.045278773 = weight(_text_:22 in 5299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045278773 = score(doc=5299,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5299, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5299)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Usability evaluations and observations of users shopping at Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com) revealed some interesting user behaviors. The mixed behavior patterns were leveraged to create an interface for an e-commerce product. The author describes some design practices for providing a scoped search interface for an e-commerce site.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:17:44
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.808-812
  10. Roto, V.: Search on mobile phones. (2006) 0.01 
    0.014163372 = product of:
  0.03540843 = sum of:
    0.0127690425 = weight(_text_:of in 5304) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0127690425 = score(doc=5304,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 5304, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5304)
    0.022639386 = product of:
      0.045278773 = sum of:
        0.045278773 = weight(_text_:22 in 5304) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045278773 = score(doc=5304,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5304, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5304)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The search tools familiar from the personal computer are propagating to mobile devices. Are users willing to type keywords with the limited keypad of an ordinary mobile phone? How does mobile search differ from stationary search? The author found that users are surprisingly willing to use search also with the traditional phone keypad, and foresees a search revolution as mobile devices enable location-based search.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:35:39
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.834-837
  11. Resnick, M.L.; Vaughan, M.W.: Best practices and future visions for search user interfaces (2006) 0.01 
    0.013426805 = product of:
  0.03356701 = sum of:
    0.016587472 = weight(_text_:of in 5293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016587472 = score(doc=5293,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 5293, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5293)
    0.016979538 = product of:
      0.033959076 = sum of:
        0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 5293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033959076 = score(doc=5293,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5293, 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=5293)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The authors describe a set of best practices that were developed to assist in the design of search user interfaces. Search user interfaces represent a challenging design domain because novices who have no desire to learn the mechanics of search engine architecture or algorithms often use them. These can lead to frustration and task failure when it is not addressed by the user interface. The best practices are organized into five domains: the corpus, search algorithms, user and task context, the search interface, and mobility. In each section the authors present an introduction to the design challenges related to the domain and a set of best practices for creating a user interface that facilitates effective use by a broad population of users and tasks.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 17:38:51
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.781-787
  12. Komlodi, A.; Soergel, D.; Marchionini, G.: Search histories for user support in user interfaces (2006) 0.01 
    0.013426805 = product of:
  0.03356701 = sum of:
    0.016587472 = weight(_text_:of in 5298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016587472 = score(doc=5298,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 5298, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5298)
    0.016979538 = product of:
      0.033959076 = sum of:
        0.033959076 = weight(_text_:22 in 5298) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033959076 = score(doc=5298,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5298, 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=5298)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The authors describe user interface tools based on search histories to support legal information seekers. The design of the tools was informed by the results of a user study (Komlodi, 2002a) that examined the use of human memory, external memory aids, and search histories in legal information seeking and derived interface design recommendations for information storage and retrieval systems. The data collected were analyzed to identify potential task areas where search histories can support information seeking and use. The results show that many information-seeking tasks can take advantage of automatically and manually recorded history information. These findings encouraged the design of user interface tools building on search history information: direct search history displays, history-enabled scratchpad facilities, and organized results collection tools.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:04:19
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.803-897
  13. Hendry, D.G.: Workspaces for search (2006) 0.01 
    0.013397372 = product of:
  0.03349343 = sum of:
    0.013683967 = weight(_text_:of in 5297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013683967 = score(doc=5297,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.20947541 = fieldWeight in 5297, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5297)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 5297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=5297,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5297, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5297)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Progress in search interfaces requires vigorous inquiry into how search features can be embedded into application environments such as those for decision-making, personal information collecting, and designing. Progress can be made by focusing on mid-level descriptions of how search components can draw upon and update workspace content and structure. The immediate goal is to advance our understanding of how to shape and exploit context in search. The long-term goal is to develop an interdisciplinary design resource that enables stakeholders in the computing, social, and information sciences to more richly impact each others' work.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:01:11
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.800-802
  14. Thissen, F.: Screen-Design-Manual : Communicating Effectively Through Multimedia (2003) 0.01 
    0.012797958 = product of:
  0.031994894 = sum of:
    0.017845279 = weight(_text_:of in 1397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017845279 = score(doc=1397,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 1397, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1397)
    0.0141496165 = product of:
      0.028299233 = sum of:
        0.028299233 = weight(_text_:22 in 1397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028299233 = score(doc=1397,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1397, 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=1397)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The "Screen Design Manual" provides designers of interactive media with a practical working guide for preparing and presenting information that is suitable for both their target groups and the media they are using. It describes background information and relationships, clarifies them with the help of examples, and encourages further development of the language of digital media. In addition to the basics of the psychology of perception and learning, ergonomics, communication theory, imagery research, and aesthetics, the book also explores the design of navigation and orientation elements. Guidelines and checklists, along with the unique presentation of the book, support the application of information in practice.
    Content
    From the contents:.- Basics of screen design.- Navigation and orientation.- Information.- Screen layout.Interaction.- Motivation.- Innovative prospects.- Appendix.Glossary.- Literature.- Index
    Date
    22. 3.2008 14:29:25
  15. Rogers, Y.: New theoretical approaches for human-computer interaction (2003) 0.01 
    0.012687084 = product of:
  0.03171771 = sum of:
    0.010081458 = product of:
      0.050407287 = sum of:
        0.050407287 = weight(_text_:problem in 4270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050407287 = score(doc=4270,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.28428814 = fieldWeight in 4270, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4270)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.021636253 = weight(_text_:of in 4270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021636253 = score(doc=4270,freq=60.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.33120972 = fieldWeight in 4270, product of:
          7.745967 = tf(freq=60.0), with freq of:
            60.0 = termFreq=60.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4270)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    "Theory weary, theory leery, why can't I be theory cheery?" (Erickson, 2002, p. 269). The field of human-computer interaction (HCI) is rapidly expanding. Alongside the extensive technological developments that are taking place, a profusion of new theories, methods, and concerns has been imported into the field from a range of disciplines and contexts. An extensive critique of recent theoretical developments is presented here together with an overview of HCI practice. A consequence of bringing new theories into the field has been much insightful explication of HCI phenomena and also a broadening of the field's discourse. However, these theoretically based approaches have had limited impact an the practice of interaction design. This chapter discusses why this is so and suggests that different kinds of mechanisms are needed that will enable both designers and researchers to better articulate and theoretically ground the challenges facing them today. Human-computer interaction is bursting at the seams. Its mission, goals, and methods, well established in the '80s, have all greatly expanded to the point that "HCI is now effectively a boundless domain" (Barnard, May, Duke, & Duce, 2000, p. 221). Everything is in a state of flux: The theory driving research is changing, a flurry of new concepts is emerging, the domains and type of users being studied are diversifying, many of the ways of doing design are new, and much of what is being designed is significantly different. Although potentially much is to be gained from such rapid growth, the downside is an increasing lack of direction, structure, and coherence in the field. What was originally a bounded problem space with a clear focus and a small set of methods for designing computer systems that were easier and more efficient to use by a single user is now turning into a diffuse problem space with less clarity in terms of its objects of study, design foci, and investigative methods. Instead, aspirations of overcoming the Digital Divide, by providing universal accessibility, have become major concerns (e.g., Shneiderman, 2002a). The move toward greater openness in the field means that many more topics, areas, and approaches are now considered acceptable in the worlds of research and practice.
    A problem with allowing a field to expand eclectically is that it can easily lose coherence. No one really knows what its purpose is anymore or what criteria to use in assessing its contribution and value to both knowledge and practice. For example, among the many new approaches, ideas, methods, and goals now being proposed, how do we know which are acceptable, reliable, useful, and generalizable? Moreover, how do researchers and designers know which of the many tools and techniques to use when doing design and research? To be able to address these concerns, a young field in a state of flux (as is HCI) needs to take stock and begin to reflect an the changes that are happening. The purpose of this chapter is to assess and reflect an the role of theory in contemporary HCI and the extent to which it is used in design practice. Over the last ten years, a range of new theories has been imported into the field. A key question is whether such attempts have been productive in terms of "knowledge transfer." Here knowledge transfer means the translation of research findings (e.g., theory, empirical results, descriptive accounts, cognitive models) from one discipline (e.g., cognitive psychology, sociology) into another (e.g., human-computer interaction, computer supported cooperative work).
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 38(2004), S.87-144
  16. Beale, R.: Improving Internet interaction : from theory to practice (2006) 0.01 
    0.01239295 = product of:
  0.030982375 = sum of:
    0.011172912 = weight(_text_:of in 5303) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011172912 = score(doc=5303,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.17103596 = fieldWeight in 5303, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5303)
    0.019809462 = product of:
      0.039618924 = sum of:
        0.039618924 = weight(_text_:22 in 5303) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039618924 = score(doc=5303,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5303, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5303)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The Internet is a medium for education, entertainment, communication, and personal expression. User behavior has developed three main modalities for using this medium effectively - searching, browsing, and monitoring - which are supported to different degrees by conventional tools. Understanding the nature of the interaction allows us to design and implement a system called Mitsukeru to support browsing behaviors, while retaining the free-form movements between other interaction styles. The system uses agent-based modeling and look-ahead to provide informative yet nonintrusive guidance to the user, and is described in detail.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:31:43
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.829-833
  17. Buzydlowski, J.W.; White, H.D.; Lin, X.: Term Co-occurrence Analysis as an Interface for Digital Libraries (2002) 0.01 
    0.01176377 = product of:
  0.05881885 = sum of:
    0.05881885 = product of:
      0.1176377 = sum of:
        0.1176377 = weight(_text_:22 in 1339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1176377 = score(doc=1339,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.804159 = fieldWeight in 1339, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    22. 2.2003 17:25:39
    22. 2.2003 18:16:22
  18. Kalbach, J.: "I'm feeling lucky" : the role of emotions in seeking information on the Web (2006) 0.01 
    0.011189005 = product of:
  0.027972512 = sum of:
    0.013822895 = weight(_text_:of in 5300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013822895 = score(doc=5300,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 5300, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5300)
    0.0141496165 = product of:
      0.028299233 = sum of:
        0.028299233 = weight(_text_:22 in 5300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028299233 = score(doc=5300,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5300, 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=5300)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Recent research highlights the potential relevance of emotions in interface design. People can no longer be modeled as purely goal-driven, task-solving agents: They also have affective motivations for their choices and behavior implying an extended mandate for search design. Absent from current Web design practice, however, is a pattern for emotive criticism and design reflecting these new directions. Further, discussion of emotions and Web design is not limited to visual design or aesthetic appeal: Emotions users have as they interact with information also have design implications. The author outlines a framework for understanding users' emotional states as they seek information on the Web. It is inspired largely by Carol Kuhlthau's (1991, 1993, 1999) work in library services, particularly her information searching process (ISP), which is adapted to Web design practice. A staged approach resembling traditional models of information seeking behavior is presented here as the basis for creating appropriate search and navigation systems. This user-centered framework is flexible and solution-oriented, enjoys longevity, and considers affective factors. Its aim is a more comprehensive, conceptual analysis of the user's entire information search experience.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 18:19:20
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.6, S.813-818
  19. Ju, B.; Gluck, M.: User-Process Model Approach to Improve User Interface Usability (2005) 0.01 
    0.010464129 = product of:
  0.026160322 = sum of:
    0.008315044 = product of:
      0.041575223 = sum of:
        0.041575223 = weight(_text_:problem in 3262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041575223 = score(doc=3262,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17731056 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 3262, 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=3262)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    0.017845279 = weight(_text_:of in 3262) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017845279 = score(doc=3262,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 3262, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3262)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Our purpose in this study is to inductively reorganize software interface menu items based an a user's process model. The proposed menu interface in this study used direct users' input, such as goals and strategies for solving their information needs, to reorganize and re-label menus. To assess its effectiveness, efficiency, and user satisfaction with actual users, we implemented and compared this new menu version to the original interface that was based upon a traditional categorical menu organization. The significance of this study is that it incorporates user process modeling into the design of the user interface, providing insights into the impact of such modeling an the usability of an information system. Results from the usability testing do indicate that the proposed menu and the traditional menu are similarly effective for users in terms of task completion time and accuracy. User preferences and debriefing comments from usability testing also indicate users preferred the user-process based arrangement of menu items as displayed. However, the types of tasks (different problem type) suggest significant differences for results in task completion time and in accuracy, sometimes favoring the new version. In other words, usable and effective menu organization depends more an the types of tasks and the domain of knowledge than mere menu organization, although menu organization is a factor in the process.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.10, S.1098-1112
  20. Thomas, D.H.: ¬The effect of interface design on item selection in an online catalog (2001) 0.01 
    0.009635495 = product of:
  0.024088737 = sum of:
    0.0127690425 = weight(_text_:of in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0127690425 = score(doc=168,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06532493 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04177434 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 168, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=168)
    0.011319693 = product of:
      0.022639386 = sum of:
        0.022639386 = weight(_text_:22 in 168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022639386 = score(doc=168,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14628662 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04177434 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 168, 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=168)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The effect that content and layout of bibliographic displays had on the ability of end-users to process catalog information was tested using a 2 x 2 factorial experimental design. Participants were asked to perform two related tasks during the course of the experiment. In the first task, they were asked to select a set of items that they would examine further for a hypothetical paper they must write, using a simulated online catalog to make their assessments of relevance. In the second task, they were asked to examine 20 bibliographic records, decide whether they would choose to examine these items further on the shelf, and identify the data elements that they used to formulate their relevance decision. One group viewed bibliographic records on an interface similar to current online catalogs, one that used data labels and contained data elements commonly found. A second group viewed these records on an interface in which the labels had been removed, but the data elements were the same as those in the first. The third group viewed these records on a labeled display that included enhanced data elements on the brief record display. The final group viewed these records with the same brief record data elements as the third group, but with the labels removed, using ISBD and AACR2 punctuation standards. For the first task, participants using enhanced brief screen interfaces viewed more brief screens and fewer full screens than their counterparts. Screen durations for the second 10 screens were found to have dropped from those of the first 10 screens. Statistical analyses comparing demographic variables to the screen frequencies uncovered many significant differences. Participants using the enhanced-content interfaces made fewer selections from index and full screens, and more selections from brief screens. For the second task, participants who used enhanced-content interfaces were able to make some sort of relevance judgment more frequently than those who used standard-content interfaces.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Authors

Languages

  • e 82
  • d 7
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 78
  • m 10
  • s 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications