Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.025459195 = product of:
  0.063647985 = sum of:
    0.040348392 = weight(_text_:context in 5882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040348392 = score(doc=5882,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17622331 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.22896172 = fieldWeight in 5882, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.14465 = idf(docFreq=1904, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5882)
    0.023299592 = weight(_text_:system in 5882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023299592 = score(doc=5882,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5882, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5882)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Due to the advances in information retrieval in the past decades, search engines have become extremely efficient at acquiring useful sources in response to a user's query. However, for more prolonged and complex information seeking tasks, these search engines are not as well suited. During complex information seeking tasks, various stages may occur, which imply varying support needs for users. However, the implications of theoretical information seeking models for concrete search user interfaces (SUI) design are unclear, both at the level of the individual features and of the whole interface. Guidelines and design patterns for concrete SUIs, on the other hand, provide recommendations for feature design, but these are separated from their role in the information seeking process. This chapter addresses the question of how to design SUIs with enhanced support for the macro-level process, first by reviewing previous research. Subsequently, we outline a framework for complex task support, which explicitly connects the temporal development of complex tasks with different levels of support by SUI features. This is followed by a discussion of concrete system examples which include elements of the three dimensions of our framework in an exploratory search and sensemaking context. Moreover, we discuss the connection of navigation with the search-oriented framework. In our final discussion and conclusion, we provide recommendations for designing more holistic SUIs which potentially evolve along with a user's information seeking process.

0.013195123 = product of:
  0.032987807 = sum of:
    0.023299592 = weight(_text_:system in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023299592 = score(doc=5229,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.17398985 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
    0.009688215 = product of:
      0.029064644 = sum of:
        0.029064644 = weight(_text_:29 in 5229) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029064644 = score(doc=5229,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14956595 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 5229, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5229)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Thirty-one patrons, who were selected by Slone to provide a range of age and experience, agreed when approached while using the catalog of the Wake County library system to try searching via the Internet. Fifteen searched the Wake County online catalog in this manner and 16 searched the World Wide Web, including that catalog. They were subjected to brief pre-structured taped interviews before and after their searches and observed during the searching process resulting in a log of behaviors, comments, pages accessed, and time spent. Data were analyzed across participants and categories. Web searches were characterized as linking, URL, search engine, within a site domain, and searching a web catalog; and participants by the number of these techniques used. Four used only one, 13 used two, 11 used three, two used four, and one all five. Participant experience was characterized as never used, used search engines, browsing experience, email experience, URL experience, catalog experience, and finally chat room/newsgroup experience. Sixteen percent of the participants had never used the Internet, 71% had used search engines, 65% had browsed, 58% had used email, 39% had used URLs, 39% had used online catalogs, and 32% had used chat rooms. The catalog was normally consulted before the web, where both were used, and experience with an online catalog assists in web use. Scrolling was found to be unpopular and practiced halfheartedly.

Date

21. 7.2006 11:26:29

0.013068355 = product of:
  0.032670885 = sum of:
    0.02691025 = weight(_text_:index in 3206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02691025 = score(doc=3206,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18579477 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.14483857 = fieldWeight in 3206, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.369764 = idf(docFreq=1520, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3206)
    0.005760637 = product of:
      0.01728191 = sum of:
        0.01728191 = weight(_text_:22 in 3206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01728191 = score(doc=3206,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1488917 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04251826 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3206, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3206)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Content

"In einer öffentlichen Bücherei ist die Suche nach einem Werk recht einfach: Man geht einfach die Regale ab, bis man beim richtigen Buchstaben oder Thema angekommen ist. In vielen wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken ist das komplizierter. Denn dort müssen sich Studenten durch Datenbanken und Zettelkataloge wühlen. "Eine Ausnahme ist der Lesesaal, erklärt Marlene Grau, Sprecherin der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek in Hamburg. Im Lesesaal stehen die Bücher wie in einer öffentlichen Bibliothek in Reih und Glied nach Fachgebieten wie Jura, Biologie oder Medizin sortiert. So können Studenten ein wenig schmökern und querbeet lesen. Wer jedoch ein bestimmtes Werk sucht, nutzt besser gleich den Katalog der Bibliothek. Darin lässt sich zum einen nach dem Autor oder einem Titelstichwort suchen - in der Biologie etwa "Fliege" oder "Insekt". "Dann kann man hoffen, dass Bücher zum Thema das Stichwort im Titel enthalten", sagt Grau. Die andere Variante ist, nach einem Schlagwort zu suchen. Um das passende zu finden, kann man im Schlagwort-Index blättern. Oder man sucht nach einem bekannten Buch, das zum Thema passt. Dann kann man mit dessen Schlagwörtern weitersuchen. Der Vorteil: Bücher müssen dieses Schlagwort nicht im Titel enthalten. Buchtitel wie 'Keine Angst vor Zahlen' oder 'Grundkurs Rechnen' findet man über die Schlagworte 'Mathematik' und 'Einführung', aber mit Stichworten eher nicht", erklärt Ulrich Hohoff. Er leitet die Universitätsbibliothek in Augsburg.

Date

3. 5.1997 8:44:22

0.009319837 = product of:
  0.046599183 = sum of:
    0.046599183 = weight(_text_:system in 1300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046599183 = score(doc=1300,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.3479797 = fieldWeight in 1300, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1300)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This paper describes a new OPAC system called The Book House and discusses its relevance as a solution to current OPAC developments. The Book House is an interactive, multimedia, online public access catalogue system designed to support casual and/or novice end-users in information retrieval. It runs on a Macintosh and is available on CD-ROM and disks in English and Danish (it can be purchased from Risø for $100). It comprises an interface and module for classifying and indexing fact and fiction books in the database called Book House Write. It uses icons, text and animation in the display interface in order to enhance the utility of the system for the general public. Both words and pictures can be used for searching, which makes the system suitable for all age groups. It plays on users' previous experiencees with computer games to support learning by doing something in an enjoyable way. A prerequisite for the design of The Book House was a new approach to cognitive analysis of retrieval in libraries. Based on the success of this approach, it is claimed that OPAC systems will only be really useful and widespread (1) when their domain and task characteristics allow supplementary information to be added to existing descriptions of book content in online card catalogues in order to match end-users' intentions and needs, and (2) when the user interface and routes to the databases are configured as an integrated and uniform set of displays which match the search strategies of users, as well as their mental capabilities and limitations

0.0065901205 = product of:
  0.032950602 = sum of:
    0.032950602 = weight(_text_:system in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032950602 = score(doc=2726,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13391352 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04251826 = queryNorm
        0.24605882 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This research investigates how people's perceptions of information retrieval (IR) systems, their perceptions of search tasks, and their perceptions of self-efficacy influence the amount of invested mental effort (AIME) they put into using two different IR systems: a Web search engine and a library system. It also explores the impact of mental effort on an end user's search experience. To assess AIME in online searching, two experiments were conducted using these methods: Experiment 1 relied on self-reports and Experiment 2 employed the dual-task technique. In both experiments, data were collected through search transaction logs, a pre-search background questionnaire, a post-search questionnaire and an interview. Important findings are these: (1) subjects invested greater mental effort searching a library system than searching the Web; (2) subjects put little effort into Web searching because of their high sense of self-efficacy in their searching ability and their perception of the easiness of the Web; (3) subjects did not recognize that putting mental effort into searching was something needed to improve the search results; and (4) data collected from multiple sources proved to be effective for assessing mental effort in online searching.