Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

6.5776956E-4 = product of:
  0.009866543 = sum of:
    0.009866543 = product of:
      0.019733086 = sum of:
        0.019733086 = weight(_text_:information in 4577) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019733086 = score(doc=4577,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.38790947 = fieldWeight in 4577, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4577)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

To better understand how individuals and groups derive satisfaction from information, it is important to identify the information source preferences they apply in information seeking and decision making. Four informal propositions drove the structure and underlying logic of this study, forming a preliminary outline of a theory of information source preference profiles and their influence an information satisfaction. This study employed Social Judgment Analysis (SJA) to identify the information judgment preferences held by professional groups for six selected information sources: word of mouth, expert oral advice, Internet, print news, nonfiction books, and radio/television news. The research was designed as an hypotheses-generating exploratory study employing a purposive sample (n = 90) and generated four empirically supported, testable hypotheses about user satisfaction with information sources. The SJA judgment functions revealed the influences of volume and polarity (i.e., positive versus negative information) an information satisfaction. By advancing the understanding of how information source preferences can be identified empirically and their influence an information satisfaction, this research reflects a first, small step toward understanding "satisficing." Satisficing behaviors result in early termination of information search processes when individuals, facing incomplete information, are sufficiently satisfied to assume risks and execute decisions.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 54(2003) no.9, S.879-904

2.848226E-4 = product of:
  0.004272339 = sum of:
    0.004272339 = product of:
      0.008544678 = sum of:
        0.008544678 = weight(_text_:information in 4574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008544678 = score(doc=4574,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 4574, 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=4574)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

This study is based an earlier research by the author that employed social judgment analysis (SJA; J. SteflMabry, 2001, 2003) to identify the information judgment preferences held by professional groups. This study explores the extent to which individuals, professional groups, and subgroups are self-aware of their judgment profiles. Three specialized groups of professionals-law enforcement, medicine, and education-were chosen to determine if preference profiles cluster around professions or around demographic and other background variables. As the proliferation of data continues to increase, the need to understand users' media preference and selection decisions is of tremendous value to every industry, governmental agency, and institution of learning. In 1966, H. Menzel first raised concern about the reliability of users' to self-assess, and scientists continue to explore the issue of competency in human judgment. To understand the reliability of users' self-assessment regarding media preferences, this study examines the extent to which individuals and groups are self-aware of the empirical judgment profiles they employ in evaluating information source scenarios. This investigation explores the congruence of three groups of professionals' self-reported media preferences as compared to their empirical judgment values, as defined by social judgment analysis.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.13, S.1419-1426