Search (27 results, page 1 of 2)

0.01601013 = product of:
  0.083252676 = sum of:
    0.013457291 = weight(_text_:und in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013457291 = score(doc=1443,freq=58.0), product of:
        0.0408199 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.32967478 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
          7.615773 = tf(freq=58.0), with freq of:
            58.0 = termFreq=58.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
    0.013457291 = weight(_text_:und in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013457291 = score(doc=1443,freq=58.0), product of:
        0.0408199 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.32967478 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
          7.615773 = tf(freq=58.0), with freq of:
            58.0 = termFreq=58.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
    0.023702051 = weight(_text_:die in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023702051 = score(doc=1443,freq=122.0), product of:
        0.044983488 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4424343 = idf(docFreq=10450, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.5269056 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
          11.045361 = tf(freq=122.0), with freq of:
            122.0 = termFreq=122.0
          2.4424343 = idf(docFreq=10450, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
    0.019178752 = weight(_text_:grund in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019178752 = score(doc=1443,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11308442 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.140059 = idf(docFreq=258, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.16959676 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.140059 = idf(docFreq=258, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
    0.013457291 = weight(_text_:und in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013457291 = score(doc=1443,freq=58.0), product of:
        0.0408199 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.32967478 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
          7.615773 = tf(freq=58.0), with freq of:
            58.0 = termFreq=58.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
  0.1923077 = coord(5/26)

Footnote

Rez. in: Information - Wissenschaft und Praxis 56(2004) H.1, S.61-62 (D. Lewandowski): "Die Autoren des vorliegenden Bandes haben sich in den letzten Jahren durch ihre zahlreichen Veröffentlichungen zum Verhalten von Suchmaschinen-Nutzern einen guten Namen gemacht. Das nun erschienene Buch bietet eine Zusammenfassung der verstreut publizierten Aufsätze und stellt deren Ergebnisse in den Kontext eines umfassenderen Forschungsansatzes. Spink und Jansen verwenden zur Analyse des Nutzungsverhaltens query logs von Suchmaschinen. In diesen werden vom Server Informationen protokolliert, die die Anfragen an diesen Server betreffen. Daten, die aus diesen Dateien gewonnen werden können, sind unter anderem die gestellten Suchanfragen, die Adresse des Rechners, von dem aus die Anfrage gestellt wurde, sowie die aus den Trefferlisten ausgewählten Dokumente. Der klare Vorteil der Analyse von Logfiles liegt in der Möglichkeit, große Datenmengen ohne hohen personellen Aufwand erheben zu können. Die Daten einer Vielzahl anonymer Nutzer können analysiert werden; ohne dass dabei die Datenerhebung das Nutzerverhalten beeinflusst. Dies ist bei Suchmaschinen von besonderer Bedeutung, weil sie im Gegensatz zu den meisten anderen professionellen Information-Retrieval-Systemen nicht nur im beruflichen Kontext, sondern auch (und vor allem) privat genutzt werden. Das Bild des Nutzungsverhaltens wird in Umfragen und Laboruntersuchungen verfälscht, weil Nutzer ihr Anfrageverhalten falsch einschätzen oder aber die Themen ihrer Anfragen nicht nennen möchten. Hier ist vor allem an Suchanfragen, die auf medizinische oder pornographische Inhalte gerichtet sind, zu denken. Die Analyse von Logfiles ist allerdings auch mit Problemen behaftet: So sind nicht alle gewünschten Daten überhaupt in den Logfiles enthalten (es fehlen alle Informationen über den einzelnen Nutzer), es werden keine qualitativen Informationen wie etwa der Grund einer Suche erfasst und die Logfiles sind aufgrund technischer Gegebenheiten teils unvollständig. Die Autoren schließen aus den genannten Vor- und Nachteilen, dass sich Logfiles gut für die Auswertung des Nutzerverhaltens eignen, bei der Auswertung jedoch die Ergebnisse von Untersuchungen, welche andere Methoden verwenden, berücksichtigt werden sollten.
Den Autoren wurden von den kommerziellen Suchmaschinen AltaVista, Excite und All the Web größere Datenbestände zur Verfügung gestellt. Die ausgewerteten Files umfassten jeweils alle an die jeweilige Suchmaschine an einem bestimmten Tag gestellten Anfragen. Die Daten wurden zwischen 199'] und 2002 erhoben; allerdings liegen nicht von allen Jahren Daten von allen Suchmaschinen vor, so dass einige der festgestellten Unterschiede im Nutzerverhalten sich wohl auf die unterschiedlichen Nutzergruppen der einzelnen Suchmaschinen zurückführen lassen. In einem Fall werden die Nutzergruppen sogar explizit nach den Suchmaschinen getrennt, so dass das Nutzerverhalten der europäischen Nutzer der Suchmaschine All the Web mit dem Verhalten der US-amerikanischen Nutzer verglichen wird. Die Analyse der Logfiles erfolgt auf unterschiedlichen Ebenen: Es werden sowohl die eingegebenen Suchbegriffe, die kompletten Suchanfragen, die Such-Sessions und die Anzahl der angesehenen Ergebnisseiten ermittelt. Bei den Suchbegriffen ist besonders interessant, dass die Spannbreite der Informationsbedürfnisse im Lauf der Jahre deutlich zugenommen hat. Zwar werden 20 Prozent aller eingegebenen Suchbegriffe regelmäßig verwendet, zehn Prozent kamen hingegen nur ein einziges Mal vor. Die thematischen Interessen der Suchmaschinen-Nutzer haben sich im Lauf der letzten Jahre ebenfalls gewandelt. Während in den Anfangsjahren viele Anfragen aus den beiden Themenfeldern Sex und Technologie stammten, gehen diese mittlerweile zurück. Dafür nehmen Anfragen im Bereich E-Commerce zu. Weiterhin zugenommen haben nicht-englischsprachige Begriffe sowie Zahlen und Akronyme. Die Popularität von Suchbegriffen ist auch saisonabhängig und wird durch aktuelle Nachrichten beeinflusst. Auf der Ebene der Suchanfragen zeigt sich weiterhin die vielfach belegte Tatsache, dass Suchanfragen in Web-Suchmaschinen extrem kurz sind. Die durchschnittliche Suchanfrage enthält je nach Suchmaschine zwischen 2,3 und 2,9 Terme. Dies deckt sich mit anderen Untersuchungen zu diesem Thema. Die Länge der Suchanfragen ist in den letzten Jahren leicht steigend; größere Sprünge hin zu längeren Anfragen sind jedoch nicht zu erwarten. Ebenso verhält es sich mit dem Einsatz von Operatoren: Nur etwa in jeder zehnten Anfrage kommen diese vor, wobei die Phrasensuche am häufigsten verwendet wird. Dass die SuchmaschinenNutzer noch weitgehend als Anfänger angesehen werden müssen, zeigt sich auch daran, dass sie pro Suchanfrage nur drei oder vier Dokumente aus der Trefferliste tatsächlich sichten.
In Hinblick auf die Informationsbedürfnisse ergibt sich eine weitere Besonderheit dadurch, dass Suchmaschinen nicht nur für eine Anfrageform genutzt werden. Eine "Spezialität" der Suchmaschinen ist die Beantwortung von navigationsorientierten Anfragen, beispielsweise nach der Homepage eines Unternehmens. Hier wird keine Menge von Dokumenten oder Fakteninformation verlangt; vielmehr ist eine Navigationshilfe gefragt. Solche Anfragen nehmen weiter zu. Die Untersuchung der Such-Sessions bringt Ergebnisse über die Formulierung und Bearbeitung der Suchanfragen zu einem Informationsbedürfnis zutage. Die Sessions dauern weit überwiegend weniger als 15 Minuten (dies inklusive Sichtung der Dokumente!), wobei etwa fünf Dokumente angesehen werden. Die Anzahl der angesehenen Ergebnisseiten hat im Lauf der Zeit abgenommen; dies könnte darauf zurückzuführen sein, dass es den Suchmaschinen im Lauf der Zeit gelungen ist, die Suchanfragen besser zu beantworten, so dass sich brauchbare Ergebnisse öfter bereits auf der ersten Ergebnisseite finden. Insgesamt bestätigt sich auch hier das Bild vom wenig fortgeschrittenen Suchmaschinen-Nutzer, der nach Eingabe einer unspezifischen Suchanfrage schnelle und gute Ergebnisse erwartet. Der zweite Teil des Buchs widmet sich einigen der bei den Suchmaschinen-Nutzern populären Themen und analysiert das Nutzerverhalten bei solchen Suchen. Dabei werden die eingegebenen Suchbegriffe und Anfragen untersucht. Die Bereiche sind E-Commerce, medizinische Themen, Sex und Multimedia. Anfragen aus dem Bereich E-Commerce sind in der Regel länger als allgemeine Anfragen. Sie werden seltener modifiziert und pro Anfrage werden weniger Dokumente angesehen. Einige generische Ausdrücke wie "shopping" werden sehr häufig verwendet. Der Anteil der E-Commerce-Anfragen ist hoch und die Autoren sehen die Notwendigkeit, spezielle Suchfunktionen für die Suche nach Unternehmenshomepages und Produkten zu erstellen bzw. zu verbessern. Nur zwischen drei und neun Prozent der Anfragen beziehen sich auf medizinische Themen, der Anteil dieser Anfragen nimmt tendenziell ab. Auch der Anteil der Anfragen nach sexuellen Inhalten dürfte mit einem Wert zwischen drei und knapp 1'7 Prozent geringer ausfallen als allgemein angenommen.
Der relativ hohe Wert von 17 Prozent stammt allerdings aus dem Jahr 1997; seitdem ist eine deutliche Abnahme zu verzeichnen. Betont werden muss außerdem, dass Anfragen nach sexuellen Inhalten nicht mit denen nach Pornographie gleichzusetzen sind. Die Suche nach Multimedia-Inhalten hat sich von den allgemeinen Suchinterfaces der Suchmaschinen hin zu speziellen Suchmasken verschoben, die inzwischen von allen großen Suchmaschinen angeboten werden. Die wichtigste Aussage aus den untersuchten Daten lautet, dass die Suche nach Multimedia-Inhalten komplexer und vor allem interaktiver ist als die übliche Websuche. Die Anfragen sind länger und enthalten zu einem deutlich größeren Teil Operatoren. Bei der Bildersuche stellen weiterhin sexuell orientierte Anfragen den höchsten Anteil. Bei der Bilderund Video-Suche sind die Anfragen deutlich länger als bei der regulären Suche; bei der Audio-Suche sind sie dagegen kürzer. Das vorliegende Werk bietet die bisher umfassendste Analyse des Nutzerverhaltens bezüglich der Web-Suche; insbesondere wurden bisher keine umfassenden, auf längere Zeiträume angelegten Studien vorgelegt, deren Ergebnisse wie im vorliegenden Fall direkt vergleichbar sind. Die Ergebnisse sind valide und ermöglichen es Suchmaschinen-Anbietern wie auch Forschern, künftige Entwicklungen stärker als bisher am tatsächlichen Verhalten der Nutzer auszurichten. Das Buch beschränkt sich allerdings auf die US-amerikanischen Suchmaschinen und deren Nutzer und bezieht nur bei All the Web die europäischen Nutzer ein. Insbesondere die Frage, ob die europäischen oder auch deutschsprachigen Nutzer anders suchen als die amerikanischen, bleibt unbeantwortet. Hier wären weitere Forschungen zu leisten."

0.012868335 = product of:
  0.083644174 = sum of:
    0.020911044 = weight(_text_:23 in 5805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020911044 = score(doc=5805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.31678912 = fieldWeight in 5805, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5805)
    0.020911044 = weight(_text_:23 in 5805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020911044 = score(doc=5805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.31678912 = fieldWeight in 5805, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5805)
    0.020911044 = weight(_text_:23 in 5805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020911044 = score(doc=5805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.31678912 = fieldWeight in 5805, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5805)
    0.020911044 = weight(_text_:23 in 5805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020911044 = score(doc=5805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.31678912 = fieldWeight in 5805, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5805)
  0.15384616 = coord(4/26)

Date

23.11.1996 17:23:42

0.009651251 = product of:
  0.06273313 = sum of:
    0.015683282 = weight(_text_:23 in 5232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015683282 = score(doc=5232,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 5232, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5232)
    0.015683282 = weight(_text_:23 in 5232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015683282 = score(doc=5232,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 5232, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5232)
    0.015683282 = weight(_text_:23 in 5232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015683282 = score(doc=5232,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 5232, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5232)
    0.015683282 = weight(_text_:23 in 5232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015683282 = score(doc=5232,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 5232, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5232)
  0.15384616 = coord(4/26)

Date

21. 7.2006 14:23:30

0.009651251 = product of:
  0.06273313 = sum of:
    0.015683282 = weight(_text_:23 in 5240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015683282 = score(doc=5240,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 5240, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5240)
    0.015683282 = weight(_text_:23 in 5240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015683282 = score(doc=5240,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 5240, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5240)
    0.015683282 = weight(_text_:23 in 5240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015683282 = score(doc=5240,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 5240, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5240)
    0.015683282 = weight(_text_:23 in 5240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015683282 = score(doc=5240,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.23759183 = fieldWeight in 5240, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5240)
  0.15384616 = coord(4/26)

Date

21. 7.2006 14:23:51

0.00804271 = product of:
  0.05227761 = sum of:
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=300,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 300, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=300)
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=300,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 300, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=300)
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=300,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 300, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=300)
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=300,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 300, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=300)
  0.15384616 = coord(4/26)

Date

23. 3.2002 9:32:28

0.00804271 = product of:
  0.05227761 = sum of:
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=285,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 285, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=285)
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=285,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 285, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=285)
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=285,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 285, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=285)
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=285,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 285, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=285)
  0.15384616 = coord(4/26)

Abstract

Detecting query reformulations within a session by a Web searcher is an important area of research for designing more helpful searching systems and targeting content to particular users. Methods explored by other researchers include both qualitative (i.e., the use of human judges to manually analyze query patterns on usually small samples) and nondeterministic algorithms, typically using large amounts of training data to predict query modification during sessions. In this article, we explore three alternative methods for detection of session boundaries. All three methods are computationally straightforward and therefore easily implemented for detection of session changes. We examine 2,465,145 interactions from 534,507 users of Dogpile.com on May 6, 2005. We compare session analysis using (a) Internet Protocol address and cookie; (b) Internet Protocol address, cookie, and a temporal limit on intrasession interactions; and (c) Internet Protocol address, cookie, and query reformulation patterns. Overall, our analysis shows that defining sessions by query reformulation along with Internet Protocol address and cookie provides the best measure, resulting in an 82% increase in the count of sessions. Regardless of the method used, the mean session length was fewer than three queries, and the mean session duration was less than 30 min. Searchers most often modified their query by changing query terms (nearly 23% of all query modifications) rather than adding or deleting terms. Implications are that for measuring searching traffic, unique sessions may be a better indicator than the common metric of unique visitors. This research also sheds light on the more complex aspects of Web searching involving query modifications and may lead to advances in searching tools.

0.00804271 = product of:
  0.05227761 = sum of:
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=967,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 967, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=967)
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=967,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 967, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=967)
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=967,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 967, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=967)
    0.013069402 = weight(_text_:23 in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013069402 = score(doc=967,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 967, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=967)
  0.15384616 = coord(4/26)

Date

26.12.2007 17:23:21

0.0064341673 = product of:
  0.041822087 = sum of:
    0.010455522 = weight(_text_:23 in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010455522 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.15839456 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
    0.010455522 = weight(_text_:23 in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010455522 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.15839456 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
    0.010455522 = weight(_text_:23 in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010455522 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.15839456 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
    0.010455522 = weight(_text_:23 in 647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010455522 = score(doc=647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06600935 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.15839456 = fieldWeight in 647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=647)
  0.15384616 = coord(4/26)

Date

19. 1.2007 12:51:23

0.0035157532 = product of:
  0.022852395 = sum of:
    0.00399833 = weight(_text_:und in 4313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00399833 = score(doc=4313,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0408199 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.09795051 = fieldWeight in 4313, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4313)
    0.00399833 = weight(_text_:und in 4313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00399833 = score(doc=4313,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0408199 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.09795051 = fieldWeight in 4313, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4313)
    0.010857405 = weight(_text_:die in 4313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010857405 = score(doc=4313,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.044983488 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.4424343 = idf(docFreq=10450, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.24136424 = fieldWeight in 4313, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.4424343 = idf(docFreq=10450, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4313)
    0.00399833 = weight(_text_:und in 4313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00399833 = score(doc=4313,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.0408199 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.09795051 = fieldWeight in 4313, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4313)
  0.15384616 = coord(4/26)

Footnote

Rez. in: iwp 62(2011) H.1, S.48 (D. Lewandowski): "... Es ist sehr schade, dass die Autorin aus diesem interessanten und für die Zukunft des Fachs sicherlich entscheidenden Thema nicht mehr gemacht hat. Gerade bei einem Thema, das noch nicht intensiv beackert wurde, ist eine ausführliche Darstellung von großer Bedeutung. Auch in Hinblick auf die Unmenge an Literatur, die in diesem Buch zitiert wird, erscheint die Form der Darstellung in keiner Weise angemessen. Ebenso unangemessen wirkt der Preis von 85 Euro für dieses schmale Werk, welches auch gut in der Form von einem oder zwei längeren Aufsätzen hätte veröffentlicht werden können."

0.0012882671 = product of:
  0.033494942 = sum of:
    0.033494942 = weight(_text_:art in 7441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033494942 = score(doc=7441,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08354246 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.5360413 = idf(docFreq=1287, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.40093318 = fieldWeight in 7441, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.5360413 = idf(docFreq=1287, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7441)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

Abstract

State of the art review of the mechanisms of feedback in information retrieval (IR) in terms of feedback concepts and models in cybernetics and social sciences. Critically evaluates feedback research based on the traditional IR models and comparing the different approaches to automatic relevance feedback techniques, and feedback research within the framework of interactive IR models. Calls for an extension of the concept of feedback beyond relevance feedback to interactive feedback. Cites specific examples of feedback models used within IR research and presents 6 challenges to future research

7.89083E-4 = product of:
  0.010258079 = sum of:
    0.0069309925 = weight(_text_:5 in 642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0069309925 = score(doc=642,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.128963 = fieldWeight in 642, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=642)
    0.0033270856 = product of:
      0.009981257 = sum of:
        0.009981257 = weight(_text_:22 in 642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009981257 = score(doc=642,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.06449488 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.018417481 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 642, 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=642)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.07692308 = coord(2/26)

Abstract

Information retrieval (IR) research has developed considerably since the 1950's to include consideration of more cognitive, interactive and iterative processes during the interaction between humans and IR or Web systems (Ingwersen, 1992, 1996). Interactive search sessions by humans with IR systems have been depicted as interactive IR models (Saracevic, 1997). Human-IR system interaction is also modeled as taking place within the context of broader human information behavior (HIB) processes (Spink et al., 2002). Research into the human or cognitive (user modeling) aspects of IR is a growing body of research on user interactivity, task performance and measures for observing user interactivity. The task context and situational characteristics of users' searches and evaluation have also been identified as key elements in a user's interaction with an IR system (Cool and Spink, 2002; Vakkari, 2003). Major theorized interactive IR models have been proposed relating to the single search episode, including Ingwersen's (1992,1996) Cognitive Model of IR Interaction, Belkin et al.'s (1995) Episodic Interaction Model, and Saracevic's (1996,1997) Stratified Model of IR Interaction. In this chapter we examine Saracevic's Stratified Model of IR Interaction and extend the model within the framework of cognitive IR (CIR) to depict CIR as a multitasking process. This chapter provides a new direction for CIR research by conceptualizing IR with a multitasking context. The next section of the chapter defines the concept of multitasking in the cognitive sciences and Section 3 discusses the emerging understanding of multitasking information behavior. In Section 4, cognitive IR is depicted within a multitasking framework using Saracevic's (1996, 1997) Stratified Model of IR Interaction. In Section 5, we link information searching and seeking models together, via Saracevic's Stratified Model of IR Interaction, but starting with a unitask model of HIB. We begin to model multitasking in cognitive IR in Section 6. In Sections 7 and 8, we increase the complexity of our developing multitasking model of cognitive IR by adding coordinating mechanisms, including feedback loops. Finally, in Section 9, we conclude the chapter and indicate future directions for further research.

Date

19. 1.2007 12:55:22

7.539925E-4 = product of:
  0.019603806 = sum of:
    0.019603806 = weight(_text_:5 in 158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019603806 = score(doc=158,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.36476243 = fieldWeight in 158, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=158)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

Abstract

Reports results from a study exploring the information retrieval and types of interactive feedback during mediated information retrieval. Identifies 5 different types of interactive feedback, extending the interactive information retrieval model to include relevance, magnitude, and strategy interactive feedback. Discusses implications for further research, investigating the nature and model of interactive feedback in information retrieval

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 48(1997) no.5, S.382-394

5.331533E-4 = product of:
  0.013861985 = sum of:
    0.013861985 = weight(_text_:5 in 6739) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013861985 = score(doc=6739,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.257926 = fieldWeight in 6739, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6739)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

Source

Online and CD-ROM review. 17(1993) no.5, S.275-278

4.6650914E-4 = product of:
  0.012129237 = sum of:
    0.012129237 = weight(_text_:5 in 623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012129237 = score(doc=623,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.22568524 = fieldWeight in 623, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=623)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

Source

Online and CD-ROM review. 21(1997) no.5, S.271-280

4.6650914E-4 = product of:
  0.012129237 = sum of:
    0.012129237 = weight(_text_:5 in 3763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012129237 = score(doc=3763,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.22568524 = fieldWeight in 3763, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3763)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

Abstract

Develops a theoretical framework for expressing the nature of feedback as a critical process in interactive information retrieval. Feedback concepts from cybernetics and social sciences perspectives are used to develop a concept of information feedback applicable to information retrieval. Adapts models from human-computer interaction and interactive information retrieval as a framework for studying the manifestations of feedback in information retrieval. Presents results from an empirical study of real-life interactions between users, professional mediators and an information retrieval system computer. Presents data involving 885 feedback loops classified in 5 categories. Presents a connection between the theoretical framework and empirical observations and provides a number of pragmatic and research suggestions

3.9986498E-4 = product of:
  0.010396489 = sum of:
    0.010396489 = weight(_text_:5 in 206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010396489 = score(doc=206,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.19344449 = fieldWeight in 206, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=206)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

Abstract

We investigated the sources and effectiveness of search terms used during mediated on-line searching under real-life (as opposed to laboratory) circumstances. A stratified model of information retrieval (IR) interaction served as a framework for the analysis. For the analysis, we used the on-line transaction logs, videotapes, and transcribed dialogue of the presearch and on-line interaction between 40 users and 4 professional intermediaries. Each user provided one question and interacted with one of the four intermediaries. Searching was done using DIALOG. Five sources of search terms were identified: (1) the users' written question statements, (2) terms derived from users' domain knowledge during the interaction, (3) terms extracted from retrieved items as relevance feedback, (4) database thesaurus, and (5) terms derived by intermediaries during the interaction. Distribution, retrieval effectiveness, transition sequences, and correlation of search terms from different sources were investigated. Search terms from users' written question statements and term relevance feedback were the most productive sources of terms contributing to the retrieval of items judged relevant by users. Implications of the findings are discussed

3.9986498E-4 = product of:
  0.010396489 = sum of:
    0.010396489 = weight(_text_:5 in 2587) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010396489 = score(doc=2587,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.19344449 = fieldWeight in 2587, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2587)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

Source

Information processing and management. 38(2002) no.5, S.605-611

3.9986498E-4 = product of:
  0.010396489 = sum of:
    0.010396489 = weight(_text_:5 in 3454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010396489 = score(doc=3454,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.19344449 = fieldWeight in 3454, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3454)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

Abstract

Major Web search engines, such as AItaVista, are essential tools in the quest to locate online information. This article reports research that used transaction log analysis to examine the characteristics and changes in AItaVista Web searching that occurred from 1998 to 2002. The research questions we examined are (1) What are the changes in AItaVista Web searching from 1998 to 2002? (2) What are the current characteristics of AItaVista searching, including the duration and frequency of search sessions? (3) What changes in the information needs of AItaVista users occurred between 1998 and 2002? The results of our research show (1) a move toward more interactivity with increases in session and query length, (2) with 70% of session durations at 5 minutes or less, the frequency of interaction is increasing, but it is happening very quickly, and (3) a broadening range of Web searchers' information needs, with the most frequent terms accounting for less than 1% of total term usage. We discuss the implications of these findings for the development of Web search engines.

3.9986498E-4 = product of:
  0.010396489 = sum of:
    0.010396489 = weight(_text_:5 in 5233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010396489 = score(doc=5233,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.19344449 = fieldWeight in 5233, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5233)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

3.9986498E-4 = product of:
  0.010396489 = sum of:
    0.010396489 = weight(_text_:5 in 991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010396489 = score(doc=991,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.05374404 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.018417481 = queryNorm
        0.19344449 = fieldWeight in 991, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.9180994 = idf(docFreq=6494, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=991)
  0.03846154 = coord(1/26)

Source

Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.5, S.1366-1378