A study of interface support mechanisms for interactive information retrieval

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 57, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 933-948

  White, Ryen W ^a   Ruthven, Ian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INTERACTIVE FEATURES; INTERACTIVE INFORMATION RETRIEVAL;

CONTROL SYSTEMS; DECISION MAKING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SYSTEMS; QUERY LANGUAGES; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS;

USER INTERFACES;

EID: 33646697538     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20365     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aulhersberg, I.J. (1992). Incremental relevance feedback, In E. Fox. N. Belkin, P. Ingwersen, & A.M. Pejtersen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 11-22). New York: ACM Press.
2. Allan, J. (1996). Incremental relevance feedback for information filtering. In H.-P. Frei, D. Harman, P. Schaübie, &. R. Wilkinsun (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 270-278). New York: ACM Press.
3. Anick, P. (2003). Using terminological feedback for Web search refinement: A log based study. In J. Callan, D. Hawking. & A. Smeaton (Hds.), Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 88-95). New York: ACM Press.
4. Bates, M.J. (1990). Where should the person stop and the information search interface start? Information Processing and Management, 25(5), 575-591.
5. Beaulieu, M. (1997). Experiments on interfaces to support query expansion. Journal of Documentation, 53(1), 8-19.
6. Beaulieu, M., & Jones, S. (1998). Interactive searching and interface issues in the Okapi best match retrieval system. Interacting with Computers, 10(3), 237-248.
7. Belkin, N.J., Cool, C., Kelly, D., Kim, G., Kim, J.-Y., Lee, H.J., et al. (2003). Query length in interactive information retrieval. In J. Callan, D. Hawking, & A. Smeaton (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 205-212). New York: ACM Press.
8. Belkin, N.J., Cool, C., Kelly, D., Lin, S.-J., Park, S.-Y., Perez-Carballo, J., et al. (2001). Iterative exploration, design and evaluation for query reformulation in interactive information retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 37, 403-434.
9. Bell, D.J., & Ruthven, I. (2004). Searchers' assessments of task complexity for Web searching. In S. Macdonald & J. Tait (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th BCS-IRSG European Conference on Information Retrieval (pp. 57-71). Berlin: Springer-Verlag
10. Borlund, P. (2000). Experimental components for the evaluation of interactive information retrieval systems. Journal of Documentation, 56(1), 71-90.
11. Buckley, C., Salton, G., & Allan, J. (1994). The effect of adding relevance information in a relevance feedback environment. In W.B. Croft & C.J. Van Rijsbergen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 292-300). New York: ACM Press.
12. Busha, C.H., & Harter, S.P. (1980). Research methods in librarianship: Techniques and interpretation. New York: Academic Press.
13. Campbell, I., & Van Rijsbergen, C.J. (1996). The ostensive model of developing information needs. In T. Aparac, T. Saracevic, P. Ingwersen, & P. Vakkari (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (pp. 251-268). Lokve: Benja Publishers.
14. 3R: A new approach to the design of document retrieval systems. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 38(6), 389-404.
15. Furnas, G.W., Landauer, T.K., Gomez, L.M., & Dumais, S.T. (1987). The vocabulary problem in human-system communication. Communications of the ACM, 30(11), 964-971.
16. Hancock-Beaulieu, M., & Walker, S. (1992). An evaluation of automatic query expansion in an online library catalog. Journal of Documentation, 48, 406-421.
17. Hearst, M. (1995). TileBars: Visualization of term distribution information in full text information access. In R.B. Katz, R. Mack, L. Marks, M.B. Rosson, & J. Nielsen (Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 59-66). New York: ACM Press.
18. Iwayama, M. (2000). Relevance feedback with a small number of relevance judgements: Incremental relevance feedback vs. document clustering. In E. Yannakoudakis, N.J. Belkin, M.K. Leong, & P. Ingwersen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 10-16). New York: ACM Press.
19. Jansen, B.J., Spink, A., & Saracevic, T. (2000). Real life, real users, and real needs: A study and analysis of user queries on the Web. Information Processing and Management, 36(2), 207-227.
20. Kelly, D., & Cool, C. (2002). The effects of topic familiarity on information search behavior. In W. Hersh & G. Marchionini (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (pp. 74-75). New York: ACM Press.
21. Kelly, D., & Teevan, J. (2003). Implicit feedback for inferring user preference. SIGIR Forum, 37(2), 18-28.
22. Koenemann, J., & Belkin, N.J. (1996). A case for interaction: A study of interactive information retrieval behavior and effectiveness. In B. Nardi, G.C. Van der Veer, & M.J. Tauber (Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 205-212). New York: ACM Press.
23. Kuhlthau, C. (1993). Principle for uncertainty for information seeking. Journal of Documentation, 49(4), 339-355.
24. Lee, J., & Moray, N. (1994). Trust, self-confidence, and operators' adaptation to automation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40, 153-184.
25. Maglaughlin, K.L., & Sonnenwald, D.H. (2002). User perspectives on relevance criteria: A comparison among relevant, partially relevant, and not-relevant judgments. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(5), 327-342.
26. Meadow, C.T. (1979). Computer as a search intermediary. Online, 3(3), 54-59.
27. Morita, M., & Shinoda, Y. (1994). Information filtering based on user behavior analysis and best match text retrieval. In W.B. Croft & C.J. Van Rijsbergen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th annual ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 272-281). New York: ACM Press.
28. Paek, T., Dumais, S.T., & Logan, R. (2004). WaveLens: A new view onto Internet search results. In E. Dykstra-Erickson & M. Tscheligi (Eds.), Proceedings on the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 727-734). New York: ACM Press.
29. Ruthven, I., Lalmas, M., & Van Rijsbergen, C.J. (2002). Ranking expansion terms using partial and extensive relevance. In R. Fidel, H. Bruce, P. Ingwersen, & P. Vakkari (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (pp. 199-219). Greenwood Village, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
30. Ruthven, I., Tombros, A., & Jose, J.M. (2001). A study on the use of summaries and summary-based query expansion for a question-answering task. Proceedings of the 23rd BCS-IRSG European Colloquium on Information Retrieval Research (pp. 1-14). Berlin: Springer Verlag.
31. Salton, G., & Buckley, C. (1990). Improving retrieval performance by relevance feedback. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 41 (4), 288-297.
32. Shneiderman, B., Byrd, D., & Croft, W.B. (1998). Sorting out search: A user-interface framework for test searches. Communications of the ACM, 41(4), 205-212.
33. Spink, A., Griesdorf, H., & Bateman, J. (1998). From highly relevant to not relevant: Examining different regions of relevance. Information Processing and Management, 34(5), 599-621.
34. Taylor, R.S. (1968). Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries. College and Research Libraries, 29, 178-194.
35. Vickery, A., & Brooks, H.M. (1987). PLEXUS: The expert system for referral. Information Processing and Management, 23(2), 99-117.
36. White, R.W. (2004). Implicit feedback for interactive information retrieval. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland.
37. White, R.W., Jose, J.M., & Ruthven, I. (2003a). A granular approach to Web search result presentation. In G.W.A. Rauterberg, M. Menozzi, & J. Wesson (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th IFIP TC13 Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 213-220). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
38. White, R.W., Jose, J.M., & Ruthven, I. (2003b). A task-oriented study on the influencing effects of query-biased summarisation in Web searching. Information Processing and Management, 39(5), 707-733.
39. White, R.W., Jose, J.M., & Ruthven, I. (2006). An implicit feedback approach to interactive information retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 42, 166-190.
40. White, R.W., Ruthven, I., & Jose, J.M. (2002). The use of implicit evidence for relevance feedback in Web retrieval. In F. Crestani, M. Girolami, & C.J. Van Rijsbergen (Eds.), Proceedings of 24th BCS-IRSG European Colloquium on Information Retrieval Research (pp. 93-109). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
41. Zellweger, P.T., Regli, S.H., Mackinlay, J.D., & Chang, B.-W. (2000). The impact of fluid documents on reading and browsing: An observational study. In G. Szwillus & T. Turner (Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 249-256). New York: ACM Press.