Relevance and contributing information types of searched documents in task performance

ABSTRACT

End-users base the relevance judgements of the searched documents on the expected contribution to their task of the information contained in the documents. There is a shortage of studies analyzing the relationships between the experienced contribution, relevance assessments and type of information initially sought. This study categorizes the types of information in documents being used in writing a research proposal for a master's thesis by eleven students throughout the various stages of the proposal writing process. The role of the specificity of the searched information in influencing its contribution is analyzed. The results demonstrate that different types of information are sought at different stages of the writing process and thus the contribution of the information also differs at the different stages. The categories of the contributing information can be understood of topicality.

REFERENCES

• 1: Carol L. Barry, User-defined relevance criteria: an exploratory study, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v.45 n.3, p.149-159, April 1994 [doi>10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199404)45:3<149::AID-ASI5>3.0.CO;2-J]
• 2: Carol L. Barry, Document representations and clues to document relevance, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v.49 n.14, p.1293-1303, Dec. 1998 [doi>10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1998)49:14<1293::AID-ASI7>3.3.CO;2-5]
• 3: Bateman, J. (1998), Changes in Relevance Criteria: A Longitudinal Study. Proceedings of the 61st ASIS Annual Meeting, 35: 23-32.
• 4: Bateman, J. (1999), Modeling the Importance of End-User Relevance Criteria. Proceedings of the 62st ASIS Annual Meeting, 36: 396-406.
• 5: Belkin, N. (1980), Anomalous States of Knowledge as Basis for IR. Canadian Journal of Information Science 5: 133-143.
• 6: Gavin, H. (1998), The Essence of Cognitive Psychology. London: Prentice Hall Europe.
• 7: Harter, S. (1992), Psychological Relevance and Information Scienece. JASIS 43(9): 602-615.
• 8: Birger Hjørland , Hanne Albrechtsen, Toward a new horizon in information science: domain-analysis, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v.46 n.6, p.400-425, July 1995 [doi>10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199507)46:6<400::AID-ASI2>3.0.CO;2-Y]
• 9: Ingwersen, P. (1996), Cognitive Perspectives of Information Retrieval Interaction: Elements of a Cognitive IR Theory. Journal of Documentation 52(1): 3- 50.
• 10: Kuhlthau, C. (1991), Inside the Search Process: Information Seeking from the Users' Perspective. JAS1S 42 (5): 361-371.
• 11: Kuhlthau, C. (1993), Seekmg Meaning. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
• 12: Park, T. (1993), The Nature of Relevance in Information Retrieval: An Empirical Study. Library Quarterly 63(3): 318-351.
• 13: Patel, V. & Ramoni, M. (1997), Cognitive Models of Directional Inference in Expert Medical Reasoning. In:
• 14: Paul J. Feltovich , Kenneth M. Ford , Robert R. Hoffman, Expertise in context: human and machine, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1997
• 15: Saracevic, T. (1975), Relevance: A Review of the Literature and a Framework for Thinking on the Notion in Information Science. JASIS 26: 321-343.
• 16: Schamber, L. (1994), Relevance and Information Behavior. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 29, (M. Williams, Ed.) Information Today, Medford, NJ., 3-48.
• 17: Linda Schamber , Michael Eisenberg , Michael S. Nilan, A re-examination of relevance: toward a dynamic, situational definition, Information Processing and Management: an International Journal, v.26 n.6, p.755-776, 1990 [doi>10.1016/0306-4573(90)90050-C]
• 18: Amanda Spink , Howard Greisdorf , Judy Bateman, From highly relevant to not relevant: examining different regions of relevance, Information Processing and Management: an International Journal, v.34 n.5, p.599-621, Sept. 1998 [doi>10.1016/S0306-4573(98)00025-9]
• 19: Suhonen, P. & Rautio, P. (1981), Yhteiskuntatieteiden tietovirrat ja suomalainen tutkija (Information Flows in Social Sciences and the Finnish Researcher). Academy of Finland. Publications 2/1981.
• 20: Stuart A. Sutton, The role of attorney mental models of law in case relevance determinations: an exploratory analysis, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v.45 n.3, p.186-200, April 1994 [doi>10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199404)45:3<186::AID-ASI8>3.0.CO;2-F]
• 21: Pertti Vakkari, Task complexity, problem structure and information actions: integrating studies on information seeking and retrieval, Information Processing and Management: an International Journal, v.35 n.6, p.819-837, 35 [doi>10.1016/S0306-4573(99)00028-X]
• 22: Vakkari, P. (2000), Cognition and Changes of Search Terms and Tactics during Task Performance: A Longitudinal Study. Proceedings of the RIAO'2000 Conference. Paris: C.I.D., 894-907.
• 23: Vakkari, P. & Hakala, N. (2000), Changes in Relevance Criteria and Problem Stages in Task Performance. Journal of Documentation, September 2000.
• 24: Peiling Wang , Dagobert Soergel, A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study I. document selection, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v.49 n.2, p.115-133, Feb. 1998 [doi>10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1998)49:2<115::AID-ASI3>3.0.CO;2-1]
• 25: Peiling Wang , Marilyn Domas White, A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study II. Decisions at the reading and citing stages, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, v.50 n.2, p.98-114, Feb. 1999 [doi>10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:2<98::AID-ASI2>3.3.CO;2-C]

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.3 INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL
      H.3.4 Systems and Software
          Subjects: Performance evaluation (efficiency and effectiveness)

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.3 INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL

General Terms:
Experimentation, Human Factors, Performance

Keywords:
cognitive models and IR, embedding search within larger tasks, field&slash;empirical studies of the information seeking, process, situational relevance