Interaction in information retrieval: Selection and effectiveness of search terms

Journal of the American Society for Information Science

Volumn 48, Issue 8, 1997, Pages 741-761

  Spink, Amanda ^a   Saracevic, Tefko ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION); INDEXING (OF INFORMATION); ONLINE SEARCHING; VOCABULARY CONTROL;

SEARCH TERM EFFECTIVENESS;

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL;

EID: 0031207464     PISSN: 00028231     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199708)48:8<741::AID-ASI7>3.0.CO;2-S     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Bates, M. J. (1988). How to use controlled vocabularies more effectively in online searching. Online. 11, 45-56.
2. Bates, M. J., Wilde, D. N., & Siegfried, S. (1993). An analysis of search terminology used by humanities scholars: The Getty Online Searching Project Report Number 1. Library Quarterly, 63, 1-39.
3. Belkin, N. J. (1984). Cognitive models and information transfer. Social Science Information Studies, 4, 111-129.
4. Belkin, N.J. (1993). Interaction with texts: Information retrieval as information-seeking behavior. In Information retrieval. 10. Von der Modelierung zur Anwerdung. Konstanz, Germany: Universitaetsverlag. 55-66.
5. Belkin, N.J., Cool, C., Stein, A., & Thiel, U. (1995). Cases, scripts, and information seeking strategies: On the design of interactive information retrieval systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 9(3), 379-395.
6. Belkin, N. J., & Croft, W. B. (1992). Information filtering and information retrieval: Two sides of the same coin? Communications of the ACM, 35(12), 29-38.
7. Belkin, N. J., & Vickery, A. (1985). Interaction in information systems. London: The British Library.
8. Blair, D. C. (1990). Language and representation in information retrieval. New York: Elsevier.
9. Blair, D. C., & Maron, (1985). An evaluation of retrieval effectiveness for a full-text document-retrieving system. Communications of the ACM, 28, 289-299.
10. Cleverdon, C. (1967). Report on the testing and analysis of an investigation into the comparative efficiency of indexing systems. Cranfield, England: College of Aeronautics, Aslib Cranfield Research Project.
11. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
12. Croft, W. B. (1987). Approaches to intelligent information retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 23, 249-254.
13. Dubois, C. P. R. (1987). Free text vs. controlled vocabulary: A reassessment. Online Review, 11, 243-253.
14. Efthimiadis, E. (1993). A user-centered evaluation of ranking algorithms for interactive query expansion. Proceedings of the 16th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 16, 146-159.
15. Fidel, R. (1986). Toward expert systems for the selection of search keys. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 37 (1), 37-44.
16. Fidel, R. (1991a). Searchers' selection of search keys. I. The selection routine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(7), 490-500.
17. Fidel, R. (1991b). Searchers' selection of search keys. II. Controlled vocabulary or free-text searching. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(7), 501-514.
18. Fidel, R. (1991c). Searchers' selection of search keys. III. Searching styles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42(1), 515-527.
19. Harman, D. (Ed.) (1995). The second Text Retrieval Conference-TREC 2. Information Processing and Management, 31(3), Special Issue, 244-448.
20. Harter, S. P. (1986). Online information retrieval: Concepts, principles and techniques. New York: Academic Press.
21. Hsieh-Yee, J. (1993). Effect of search experience and subject knowledge on the search tactics of novice and experienced searchers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44(3), 161-174.
22. Ingwersen, P. (1992). Information retrieval interaction. London: Taylor Graham.
23. Ingwersen, P. (1996). Cognitive perspectives of information retrieval interaction: Elements of a cognitive IR theory. Journal of Documentation, 52(1), 3-50.
24. Keen, E. M. (1973). The Aberystwyth Index Language Test. Journal of Documentation, 29, 1-35.
25. Knoke, D., & Burke, P. J. (1980). Log-linear models. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
26. Lancaster, F. W. (1980). Trends in subject indexing from 1957 to 2000. In P. J. Taylor (Ed.), New trends in documentation and information. London: Aslib.
27. Markey, K., et al. (1982). An analysis of controlled vocabulary and free text search statements in online searches. Online Review, 4, 225-235.
28. Mokros, H. (1984). Patterns of persistence and change in the sequence of nonverbal actions. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Chicago.
29. Mokros, H., Mullins, L., & Saracevic, T. (1995). Practice and personhood in professional interaction: Social identity and information needs. Library and Information Science Research, 17, 237-257.
30. Parker, J. E. (1971). Preliminary assessment of the comparative efficiencies of an SDI system using controlled vocabulary or natural language for retrieval. Program, 5, 26-34.
31. Robertson, S. J., Walker, S., & Hancock-Beaulieu, M. M. (1995). Large text collection experiments on an operational interactive system: Okapi at TREC. Information Processing and Management, 31(3), 345-361.
32. Rocchio, J. J. (1971). Relevance feedback in information retrieval. In G. Salton (Ed.), The SMART retrieval system: Experiments in automatic document processing, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 313-323.
33. Rowley, J. (1994). The controlled versus natural indexing language debate revisited: A perspective on information retrieval practice and research. Journal of Information Science, 20(2), 108-119.
34. Salton, G., & Buckley, C. (1990). Improving information retrieval by relevance feedback. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41(4), 288-297.
35. Saracevic, T. (1975). Relevance: A review and a framework for the thinking on the notion of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 26(6), 321-343.
36. Saracevic, T. (1995). Evaluation of evaluation in information retrieval. Proceedings of the 18th Annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 138-146.
37. Saracevic, T. (1996). Interactive models in information retrieval (IR): A review and proposal. Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Information Science, 33, 3-9.
38. Saracevic, T., Kantor. P., Chamis, A. Y., & Trivison, D. (1988). A study of information seeking and retrieving. I. Background and methodology. II. Users, questions and effectiveness. III. Searchers, searches and overlap. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 39(3), 161-216.
39. Saracevic, T., Mokros, H., & Su, L. (1990). Nature of interaction between users and intermediaries in online searching: A qualitative analysis. Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 27, 47-54.
40. Saracevic, T., Mokros, H., Su, L., & Spink, A. (1991). Interaction between users and intermediaries in online searching. Proceedings of the 12th Annual National Online Meeting, 12, 329-341.
41. Saracevic, T., & Su, L. (1989). Modeling and measuring the userintermediary-computer interaction in online searching: Design of a study. Proceedings of the 52nd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 26, 75-80.
42. Spink, A. (1993a). The effect of user characteristics on search outcome in mediated online searching. Online & CD-ROM Review, 17(5), 275-278.
43. Spink, A. (1993b). Feedback in information retrieval. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Rutgers University, School of Communication. Information and Library Studies.
44. Spink, A. (1993c). Interaction with information retrieval systems: Reflections on feedback. Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 30, 115-121.
45. Spink, A. (1994). Term relevance feedback and query expansion: Relation to design. Proceedings of the 17th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 17, 81-90.
46. Spink, A. (1995). Term relevance feedback and mediated database searching: Implications for information retrieval practice and systems design. Information Processing and Management, 31(2), 162-171.
47. Spink, A. (in press). A feedback model for information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science.
48. Spink, A., & Goodrum, A. (1996). A study of search intermediary working notes. Information Processing and Management, 32(6), 681-696.
49. Spink, A., & Losee, R. M. (1996). Feedback in information retrieval. In Williams, M. (ed.) Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 31, 33-78.
50. Spink, A., & Saracevic, T. (1992a). Sources and uses of search terminology in mediated online searching. Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 29, 249-255.
51. Spink, A., & Saracevic, T. (1992b). Where do the search terms come from? Proceedings of the 13th Annual National Online Meeting, 13, 363-373.
52. Spink, A., & Saracevic, T. (1993a). Dynamics of search term selection during mediated online searching. Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 30, 63-72.
53. Spink, A., & Saracevic, T. (1993b). Search term selection during mediated online searching. Proceedings of the 14th National Online Meeting, 14, 387-397.
54. Storrs, (1994). A conceptualization of multiparty interaction. Interaction with Computers, 6(2), 173-189.
55. Strzalkowski, T. (1995). Natural language information retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 31(3), 395-416.
56. Swanson, D.R. (1977). Information retrieval as a trial and error process. Library Quarterly, 47(2), 128-148.
57. Williams, F. (1992). Reasoning with statistics: How to read quantitative research. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
58. Wu, M. M. (1992). Information interaction dialogue: A study of patron elicitation in IR interaction. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Rutgers University. New Brunswick, NJ.