Search (62 results, page 1 of 4)

0.024775969 = product of:
  0.086715885 = sum of:
    0.032137483 = weight(_text_:wide in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032137483 = score(doc=4042,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
    0.02465703 = weight(_text_:web in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02465703 = score(doc=4042,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
    0.008737902 = weight(_text_:information in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008737902 = score(doc=4042,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
    0.021183468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021183468 = score(doc=4042,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)

Abstract

Although technology can often correct spelling errors, the complex tasks of information searching and retrieval in an online public access catalog (OPAC) are made more difficult by these errors in users' input and bibliographic records. This study examines the search behaviors of 38 university students, divided into groups with either easy-to-spell or difficult-to-spell search terms, who were asked to find items in the OPAC with these search terms. Search behaviors and strategy use in the OPAC and on the World Wide Web (WWW) were examined. In general, students used familiar Web resources to check their spelling or discover more about the assigned topic. Students with difficult-to-spell search terms checked spelling more often, changed search strategies to look for the general topic and had fewer successful searches. Students unable to find the correct spelling of a search term were unable to complete their search. Students tended to search the OPAC as they would search a search engine, with few search terms or complex search strategies. The results of this study have implications for spell checking, user-focused OPAC design, and cataloging. Students' search behaviors are discussed by expanding Thatcher's (2006) Information-Seeking Process and Tactics for the WWW model to include OPACs.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.12, S.2461-2476

0.011209717 = product of:
  0.052312013 = sum of:
    0.03019857 = weight(_text_:web in 4097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03019857 = score(doc=4097,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 4097, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4097)
    0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 4097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071344664 = score(doc=4097,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4097, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4097)
    0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4097) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014978974 = score(doc=4097,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4097, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4097)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Although many studies have identified search tactics, few studies have explored tactic transitions. This study investigated the transitions of search tactics during the Web-based search process. Bringing their own 60 search tasks, 31 participants, representing the general public with different demographic characteristics, participated in the study. Data collected from search logs and verbal protocols were analyzed by applying both qualitative and quantitative methods. The findings of this study show that participants exhibited some unique Web search tactics. They overwhelmingly employed accessing and evaluating tactics; they used fewer tactics related to modifying search statements, monitoring the search process, organizing search results, and learning system features. The contributing factors behind applying most and least frequently employed search tactics are in relation to users' efforts, trust in information retrieval (IR) systems, preference, experience, and knowledge as well as limitation of the system design. A matrix of search-tactic transitions was created to show the probabilities of transitions from one tactic to another. By applying fifth-order Markov chain, the results also presented the most common search strategies representing patterns of tactic transition occurring at the beginning, middle, and ending phases within one search session. The results of this study generated detailed and useful guidance for IR system design to support the most frequently applied tactics and transitions, to reduce unnecessary transitions, and support transitions at different phases.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.11, S.2188-2205

0.011141414 = product of:
  0.051993262 = sum of:
    0.02465703 = weight(_text_:web in 4095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02465703 = score(doc=4095,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 4095, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4095)
    0.012357258 = weight(_text_:information in 4095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012357258 = score(doc=4095,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 4095, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4095)
    0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014978974 = score(doc=4095,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4095, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4095)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The search task and the system both affect the demand on cognitive resources during information search. In some situations the demands may become too high for a person. This article has a three-fold goal. First, it presents and critiques methods to measure cognitive load. Second, it explores the distribution of load across search task stages. Finally, it seeks to improve our understanding of factors affecting cognitive load levels in information search. To this end, a controlled Web search experiment with 48 participants was conducted. Interaction logs were used to segment search tasks semiautomatically into task stages. Cognitive load was assessed using a new variant of the dual-task method. Average cognitive load was found to vary by search task stages. It was significantly higher during query formulation and user description of a relevant document as compared to examining search results and viewing individual documents. Semantic information shown next to the search results lists in one of the studied interfaces was found to decrease mental demands during query formulation and examination of the search results list. These findings demonstrate that changes in dynamic cognitive load can be detected within search tasks. Dynamic assessment of cognitive load is of core interest to information science because it enriches our understanding of cognitive demands imposed on people engaged in the search process by a task and the interactive information retrieval system employed.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.11, S.2167-2187

0.010022244 = product of:
  0.046770472 = sum of:
    0.02465703 = weight(_text_:web in 379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02465703 = score(doc=379,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 379, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=379)
    0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071344664 = score(doc=379,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 379, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=379)
    0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014978974 = score(doc=379,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 379, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=379)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

Eye movement data can provide an in-depth view of human reasoning and the decision-making process, and modern information retrieval (IR) research can benefit from the analysis of this type of data. The aim of this research was to examine the relationship between relevance criteria use and visual behavior in the context of predictive relevance judgments. To address this objective, a multimethod research design was employed that involved observation of participants' eye movements, talk-aloud protocols, and postsearch interviews. Specifically, the results reported in this article came from the analysis of 281 predictive relevance judgments made by 24 participants using the Google search engine. We present a novel stepwise methodological framework for the analysis of relevance judgments and eye movements on the Web and show new patterns of relevance criteria use during predictive relevance judgment. For example, the findings showed an effect of ranking order and surrogate components (Title, Summary, and URL) on the use of relevance criteria. Also, differences were observed in the cognitive effort spent between very relevant and not relevant judgments. We conclude with the implications of this study for IR research.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.9, S.1728-1746

0.0093488535 = product of:
  0.06544197 = sum of:
    0.06039714 = weight(_text_:web in 3623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06039714 = score(doc=3623,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.6245262 = fieldWeight in 3623, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3623)
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 3623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=3623,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 3623, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3623)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

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

0.009107954 = product of:
  0.042503785 = sum of:
    0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 1523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017435152 = score(doc=1523,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 1523, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1523)
    0.010089659 = weight(_text_:information in 1523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010089659 = score(doc=1523,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1523, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1523)
    0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014978974 = score(doc=1523,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1523, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1523)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

People frequently answer consequential questions, such as those with a medical focus, using Internet search engines. Their primary goal is to revise or establish beliefs in one or more outcomes. Search engines are not designed to furnish answers, and instead provide results that may contain answers. Information retrieval research has targeted aspects of information access such as query formulation, relevance, and search success. However, there are important unanswered questions on how beliefs-and potential biases in those beliefs-affect search behaviors and how beliefs are shaped by searching. To understand belief dynamics, we focus on yes-no medical questions (e.g., "Is congestive heart failure a heart attack?"), with consensus answers from physicians. We show that (a) presearch beliefs are affected only slightly by searching and changes are likely to skew positive (yes); (b) presearch beliefs affect search behavior; (c) search engines can shift some beliefs by manipulating result rank and availability, but strongly-held beliefs are difficult to move using uncongenial information and can be counterproductive, and (d) search engines exhibit near-random answer accuracy. Our findings suggest that search engines should provide correct answers to searchers' questions and develop methods to persuade searchers to shift strongly held but factually incorrect beliefs.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.11, S.2165-2178

0.009107954 = product of:
  0.042503785 = sum of:
    0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 1723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017435152 = score(doc=1723,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 1723, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1723)
    0.010089659 = weight(_text_:information in 1723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010089659 = score(doc=1723,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 1723, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1723)
    0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014978974 = score(doc=1723,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1723, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1723)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The Internet facilitates the provision of accessible information to people with learning disabilities. However, problems with navigation and retrieval represent a barrier for this cohort. This article addresses one aspect of page design, testing whether a horizontal or vertical contents arrangement facilitates faster access to content for people with learning disabilities. Participants were timed as they looked for one-word "dummy" menu entries appearing in various locations along a horizontal or vertical grid. The words corresponded to images shown at random in a word-search type activity. Results were analyzed using mixed effects models. Results showed that mean search times increased as the position shifted from left to right and from top to bottom. Thus, participants undertook the test as if it were a reading exercise, despite the images appearing in the center of the page and the words appearing at random positions. The research also suggests that a horizontal menu may be more effective than a vertical one, with the most important links placed on the left. The propensity to imbibe information "serially" (word-for-word) rather than to skim or look "globally" has important website design implications.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.4, S.674-683

0.008810189 = product of:
  0.061671317 = sum of:
    0.04931406 = weight(_text_:web in 4624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04931406 = score(doc=4624,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.5099235 = fieldWeight in 4624, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4624)
    0.012357258 = weight(_text_:information in 4624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012357258 = score(doc=4624,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23754507 = fieldWeight in 4624, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4624)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

Limited research has investigated the role of multitasking, cognitive coordination, and cognitive shifts during web search. Understanding these three behaviors is crucial to web search model development. This study aims to explore characteristics of multitasking behavior, types of cognitive shifts, and levels of cognitive coordination as well as the relationship between them during web search. Data collection included pre- and postquestionnaires, think-aloud protocols, web search logs, observations, and interviews with 42 graduate students who conducted 315 web search sessions with 221 information problems. Results show that web search is a dynamic interaction including the ordering of multiple information problems and the generation of evolving information problems, including task switching, multitasking, explicit task and implicit mental coordination, and cognitive shifting. Findings show that explicit task-level coordination is closely linked to multitasking, and implicit cognitive-level coordination is related to the task-coordination process; including information problem development and task switching. Coordination mechanisms directly result in cognitive state shifts including strategy, evaluation, and view states that affect users' holistic shifts in information problem understanding and knowledge contribution. A web search model integrating multitasking, cognitive coordination, and cognitive shifts (MCC model) is presented. Implications and further research also are discussed.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.8, S.1446-1472

0.008057646 = product of:
  0.05640352 = sum of:
    0.042278 = weight(_text_:web in 4676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042278 = score(doc=4676,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 4676, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4676)
    0.014125523 = weight(_text_:information in 4676) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014125523 = score(doc=4676,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 4676, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4676)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

This paper discusses an approach of collecting qualitative data on human information behaviour that is based on mining web data using search engines. The approach is technically the same that has been used for some time in webometric research to make statistical inferences on web data, but the present paper shows how the same tools and data collecting methods can be used to gather data for qualitative data analysis on human information behaviour.

Source

Information und Wissen: global, sozial und frei? Proceedings des 12. Internationalen Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI 2011) ; Hildesheim, 9. - 11. März 2011. Hrsg.: J. Griesbaum, T. Mandl u. C. Womser-Hacker

0.0074184835 = product of:
  0.05192938 = sum of:
    0.009988253 = weight(_text_:information in 5216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009988253 = score(doc=5216,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 5216, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5216)
    0.04194113 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04194113 = score(doc=5216,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.46789268 = fieldWeight in 5216, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5216)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

A cross-disciplinary examination of the user behaviors involved in seeking and evaluating data is surprisingly absent from the research data discussion. This review explores the data retrieval literature to identify commonalities in how users search for and evaluate observational research data in selected disciplines. Two analytical frameworks, rooted in information retrieval and science and technology studies, are used to identify key similarities in practices as a first step toward developing a model describing data retrieval.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.5, S.419-432

0.0073006917 = product of:
  0.05110484 = sum of:
    0.008737902 = weight(_text_:information in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008737902 = score(doc=1103,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
    0.042366937 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042366937 = score(doc=1103,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.47264296 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

Users' preferences for folders versus tags was studied in 2 working environments where both options were available to them. In the Gmail study, we informed 75 participants about both folder-labeling and tag-labeling, observed their storage behavior after 1 month, and asked them to estimate the proportions of different retrieval options in their behavior. In the Windows 7 study, we informed 23 participants about tags and asked them to tag all their files for 2 weeks, followed by a period of 5 weeks of free choice between the 2 methods. Their storage and retrieval habits were tested prior to the learning session and, after 7 weeks, using special classification recording software and a retrieval-habits questionnaire. A controlled retrieval task and an in-depth interview were conducted. Results of both studies show a strong preference for folders over tags for both storage and retrieval. In the minority of cases where tags were used for storage, participants typically used a single tag per information item. Moreover, when multiple classification was used for storage, it was only marginally used for retrieval. The controlled retrieval task showed lower success rates and slower retrieval speeds for tag use. Possible reasons for participants' preferences are discussed.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.10, S.1995-2012

0.0070542456 = product of:
  0.032919813 = sum of:
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 2637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=2637,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2637, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2637)
    0.021183468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021183468 = score(doc=2637,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 2637, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2637)
    0.0066915164 = product of:
      0.020074548 = sum of:
        0.020074548 = weight(_text_:22 in 2637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020074548 = score(doc=2637,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2637, 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=2637)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

This article reports the findings of a qualitative research study that examined professional image users' knowledge of, and interest in using, content-based image retrieval (CBIR) systems in an attempt to clarify when and where CBIR methods might be applied. The research sought to determine the differences in the perceived usefulness of CBIR technologies among image user groups from several domains and explicate the reasons given regarding the utility of CBIR systems for their professional tasks. Twenty participants (archaeologists, architects, art historians, and artists), individuals who rely on images of cultural materials in the performance of their work, took part in the study. The findings of the study reveal that interest in CBIR methods varied among the different professional user communities. Individuals who showed an interest in these systems were primarily those concerned with the formal characteristics (i.e., color, shape, composition, and texture) of the images being sought. In contrast, those participants who expressed a strong interest in images of known items, images illustrating themes, and/or items from specific locations believe concept-based searches to be the most direct route. These image users did not see a practical application for CBIR systems in their current work routines.

Date

22. 1.2016 12:32:25

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.2, S.350-365

0.00683917 = product of:
  0.04787419 = sum of:
    0.013980643 = weight(_text_:information in 4016) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013980643 = score(doc=4016,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 4016, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4016)
    0.033893548 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4016) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033893548 = score(doc=4016,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.37811437 = fieldWeight in 4016, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4016)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

In der vorgestellten Studie aus dem Bereich des interaktiven Information Retrieval wurde erstmals die Erwartungshaltung von Suchmaschinennutzern als mögliche Determinante der Benutzerzufriedenheit untersucht. Das experimentelle Untersuchungsdesign basiert auf einem betriebswirtschaftlichen Modell, das die Entstehung von Kundenzufriedenheit durch die Bestätigung bzw. Nicht-Bestätigung von Erwartungen erklärt. Ein zentrales Ergebnis dieser Studie ist, das bei der Messung von Benutzerzufriedenheit besonders auf den Messzeitpunkt zu achten ist. Des Weiteren konnte ein von der Systemgüte abhängiger Adaptionseffekt hinsichtlich der Relevanzbewertung der Benutzer nachgewiesen werden.

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 61(2010) H.6/7, S.385-396

0.0061724912 = product of:
  0.028804958 = sum of:
    0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 4193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071344664 = score(doc=4193,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4193, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4193)
    0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014978974 = score(doc=4193,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 4193, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4193)
    0.0066915164 = product of:
      0.020074548 = sum of:
        0.020074548 = weight(_text_:22 in 4193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020074548 = score(doc=4193,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4193, 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=4193)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)

Abstract

The development of visual retrieval methods requires information about user interaction with images, including their description and categorization. This article presents the development of a categorization model for magazine images based on two user studies. In Study 1, we elicited 10 main classes of magazine image categorization criteria through sorting tasks with nonexpert and expert users (N=30). Multivariate methods, namely, multidimensional scaling and hierarchical clustering, were used to analyze similarity data. Content analysis of category names gave rise to classes that were synthesized into a categorization framework. The framework was evaluated in Study 2 by experts (N=24) who categorized another set of images consistent with the framework and found it to be useful in the task. Based on the evaluation study the framework was solidified into a model for categorizing magazine imagery. Connections between classes were analyzed both from the original sorting data and from the evaluation study and included into the final model. The model is a practical categorization tool that may be used in workplaces, such as magazine editorial offices. It may also serve to guide the development of computational methods for image understanding, selection of concepts for automatic detection, and approaches to support browsing and exploratory image search.

Date

22. 1.2011 14:09:26

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.295-313

0.006041726 = product of:
  0.04229208 = sum of:
    0.036238287 = weight(_text_:web in 3995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.036238287 = score(doc=3995,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.37471575 = fieldWeight in 3995, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3995)
    0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 3995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0060537956 = score(doc=3995,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 3995, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3995)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

This research examined college students' image searching processes on the Web. The study's objective was to collect empirical data on students' search needs and identify what contextual factors had a significant influence on their image searching tactics. While confirming common search behaviors such as Google-dominant use, short queries, rare use of advanced search options, and checking few search result pages, the findings also revealed a significantly different effect of contextual factors on the tactics of querying and navigating, performance, and relevance judgment. In particular, interaction activities were differentiated by task goals, level of searching expertise, and work task stages. The results suggested that context-sensitive services and interface features would better suit Web users' actual needs and enhance their searching experience.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.10, S.2011-2028

0.005950577 = product of:
  0.04165404 = sum of:
    0.03660921 = weight(_text_:elektronische in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03660921 = score(doc=566,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14013545 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2612416 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.728978 = idf(docFreq=1061, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
    0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0050448296 = score(doc=566,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

Die Arbeit untersucht die Usability von Online-Wörterbüchern und elektronischen Sprachportalen und soll eine Brücke zwischen der Usability von Websites hinsichtlich softwareergonomischer Normen und Konventionen und Wörterbüchern in elektronischer Form schlagen. Die einzige Usability-Methode, mit der es möglich ist, konkrete und empirisch belegte Aussagen darüber zu treffen, wie potentielle Nutzer ein Online-Wörterbuch verwenden und welche Probleme dabei festgestellt werden, ist ein Usability- Test mit realen Benutzern. Als Untersuchungsgegenstand dient das Online-Wortschatz-Informationssystem Deutsch (Owid), die Base lexicale du français (BLF) und das elektronische Lernerwörterbuch Deutsch-Italienisch (Eldit). Die Arbeit setzt sich aus vier verschiedenen empirischen Studien zusammen. Da ein Usability-Test immer nur einen Ausschnitt an Funktionalitäten aus einem gesamten System widerspiegeln kann, wurden mithilfe einer empirischen Fragebogen-Studie zunächst die für den Benutzer wichtigsten und am meisten verwendeten Funktionen eines Online-Wörterbuchs identifiziert und als Grundlage für den Test gewählt. Eine anschließende heuristische Evaluation trug potentielle Usability-Probleme der drei Online- Wörterbücher zusammen und stellte die Grundlage für die Thesenstellung des Usability-Tests dar. Der Test setzte sich aus zwei empirischen Teilen zusammen: Einem Aufgabenteil, den die Testperson für jedes der drei Online-Wörterbüchern einzeln bearbeiten und dabei die Testmethode des lauten Denkens anwenden musste und einem Post-Test- Fragebogen, der direkt nach dem Bearbeiten des jeweiligen Aufgabenkatalogs ausgefüllt wurde. Der gesamte Test wurde mit Morae, einer Software u. a. für Software- und Website- Usability-Tests, durchgeführt und ausgewertet.

Source

Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis. 63(2012) H.6, S.345-360

0.0054361345 = product of:
  0.03805294 = sum of:
    0.020078167 = weight(_text_:information in 2691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020078167 = score(doc=2691,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.38596505 = fieldWeight in 2691, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2691)
    0.01797477 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01797477 = score(doc=2691,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 2691, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2691)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

We report a naturalistic interactive information retrieval (IIR) study of 18 ordinary users in the age of 20-25 who carry out everyday-life information seeking (ELIS) on the Internet with respect to the three types of information needs identified by Ingwersen (1986): the verificative information need (VIN), the conscious topical information need (CIN), and the muddled topical information need (MIN). The searches took place in the private homes of the users in order to ensure as realistic searching as possible. Ingwersen (1996) associates a given search behaviour to each of the three types of information needs, which are analytically deduced, but not yet empirically tested. Thus the objective of the study is to investigate whether empirical data does, or does not, conform to the predictions derived from the three types of information needs. The main conclusion is that the analytically deduced information search behaviour characteristics by Ingwersen are positively corroborated for this group of test participants who search the Internet as part of ELIS.

Source

Information processing and management. 50(2014) no.4, S.493-507

0.0053332914 = product of:
  0.037333038 = sum of:
    0.03019857 = weight(_text_:web in 1666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03019857 = score(doc=1666,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 1666, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1666)
    0.0071344664 = weight(_text_:information in 1666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071344664 = score(doc=1666,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1666, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1666)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

In recent years, searching the web on mobile devices has become enormously popular. Because mobile devices have relatively small screens and show fewer search results, search behavior with mobile devices may be different from that with desktops or laptops. Therefore, examining these differences may suggest better, more efficient designs for mobile search engines. In this experiment, we use eye tracking to explore user behavior and performance. We analyze web searches with 2 task types on 2 differently sized screens: one for a desktop and the other for a mobile device. In addition, we examine the relationships between search performance and several search behaviors to allow further investigation of the differences engendered by the screens. We found that users have more difficulty extracting information from search results pages on the smaller screens, although they exhibit less eye movement as a result of an infrequent use of the scroll function. However, in terms of search performance, our findings suggest that there is no significant difference between the 2 screens in time spent on search results pages and the accuracy of finding answers. This suggests several possible ideas for the presentation design of search results pages on small devices.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 66(2015) no.3, S.526-544

0.0051339446 = product of:
  0.03593761 = sum of:
    0.02465703 = weight(_text_:web in 4098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02465703 = score(doc=4098,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 4098, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4098)
    0.011280581 = weight(_text_:information in 4098) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011280581 = score(doc=4098,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 4098, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4098)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

Although considered proxies for people to interact with a system, mental models have produced limited practical implications for system design. This might be due to the lack of exploration of the elements of mental models resulting from the methodological challenge of measuring mental models. This study employed a new method, concept listing, to elicit people's mental models of an information-rich space, MedlinePlus, after they interacted with the system for 5 minutes. Thirty-eight undergraduate students participated in the study. The results showed that, in this short period of time, participants perceived MedlinePlus from many different aspects in relation to four components: the system as a whole, its content, information organization, and interface. Meanwhile, participants expressed evaluations of or emotions about the four components. In terms of the procedural knowledge, an integral part of people's mental models, only one participant identified a strategy more aligned to the capabilities of MedlinePlus to solve a hypothetical task; the rest planned to use general search and browse strategies. The composition of participants' mental models of MedlinePlus was consistent with that of their models of information-rich Web spaces in general.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.11, S.2206-2218

0.0049329763 = product of:
  0.034530833 = sum of:
    0.013347364 = weight(_text_:information in 3624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013347364 = score(doc=3624,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.256578 = fieldWeight in 3624, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3624)
    0.021183468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021183468 = score(doc=3624,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 3624, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3624)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to resolve a gap in the knowledge of how people with dyslexia interact with information retrieval (IR) systems, specifically an understanding of their information-searching behaviour. Design/methodology/approach - The dyslexia cognitive profile is used to design a logging system, recording the difference between two sets of participants: dyslexic and control users. A standard Okapi interface is used - together with two standard TREC topics - in order to record the information searching behaviour of these users. Findings - Using the log data, the differences in information-searching behaviour of control and dyslexic users, i.e. in the way the two groups interact with Okapi, are established and it also established that qualitative information collected (such as experience etc.) may not be able to account for these differences. Evidence from query variables was unable to distinguish between groups, but differences on topic for the same variables were recorded. Users who view more documents tended to judge more documents as being relevant, in terms of either the user group or topic. Session data indicated that there may be an important difference between the number of iterations used in a search between the user groups, as there may be little effect from the topic on this variable. Originality/value - This is the first study of the effect of dyslexia on information search behaviour, and it provides some evidence to take the field forward.