User effect in evaluating personalized information retrieval systems

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 4227 LNCS, Issue , 2006, Pages 257-271

  Law, Effie Lai Chong ^a   Klobučar, Tomaž ^b   Pipan, Matic ^b  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b JO EF STEFAN INSTITUTE   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; EVALUATION; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; RANDOM PROCESSES; SEARCH ENGINES; USER INTERFACES;

ADAPTIVE IR SYSTEMS; RELATIVE MEASURES; RELEVANCE CRITERIA; USER EFFECT;

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL SYSTEMS;

EID: 33750549025     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/11876663_21     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (26)

1. Barry, C.L., & Schamber, L. (1998). Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: A cross-situational comparison. IP&M, 34(2/3), 219-236.
2. st Annual meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 35, 23-32.
3. Borlund, P. (2003). The concept of relevance in IR. JASIST, 54(10), 913-925.
4. Borlund, P. & Ingwersen, P. (1998). Measurse of relative relevance and ranked half-life: performance indicators for interactive IR. In Proceedings of SIGIR'98 (pp. 324-331).
5. Boyce, B. (1982). Beyond topicality: A two stage view of relevance and retrieval process. IP&M, 18, 105-109.
6. Brantner, S. (Ed.) D4.4 Smart learning space description: the ELENA project (http://www.elena-project.org/en/index.asp ?p=3-4).
7. Buckley, C., & Voorhees, E.M. (2004). Retrieval evaluation with incomplete information. SIGIR'04, Sheffield, UK.
8. Cosjin, E., & Ingwersen, P. (2000). Dimensions of relevance. IP&M, 36, 533-550.
9. Crystal, A., & Greenberg, J. (in press). Relevance criteria identified by health information users during Web searches. JASIST.
10. Elliot, M., & Kling, R. (1997). Organizational usability of digital libraries. JASIST, 48(11), 1023-1035.
11. th SIGIR Conference, Dublin (Ireland), pp.51-60.
12. Hassenzahl, M., & Tractinsky, N. (2006). User experience - a research agenda. Behaviour and Information Technology, 25(2), 91-97.
13. Hertzum, M., Jacobsen, N. E. (2001). The evaluator effect: A chilling fact about usability evaluation methods. Int'l. J. Human Computer Interaction, 13(4): 421-443 (2001).
14. Jansen, B.J. (2005). Seeking and implementing automated assistance during the search process. IP&M, 41, 909-928.
15. Maglaughlin, K.L. & Sonnenwald, D.H. (2002). User perspectives on relevance critera: A comparison among relevant, partially relevant, and not-relevant judgments. JASIST, 53(5), 327-342.
16. Magoulas, G.D., & Chen, S. Y. Chen (Eds) (2004). Proceedings of the Workshop in Individual Difference in Adaptive Hypermedia (http://www.dcs.bbk.ac. uk/-gmagoulas/AH2004_Workshop/Individual_Differences_WorkProc.pdf).
17. McCarthy, J., & Wright, P. C. (2004). Technology as Experience. MIT Press.
18. Michel, C. (2003). Poset representation and similarity comparisons of systems in IR. In SIGIR Workshop on 〈Mathematical/Formal Methods in IR〉 (MF/IR 2003) - July 2003 Toronto, Canada.
19. Mizzaro, S. (1997). Relevance: the whole history. JASIST, 48, 810-832.
20. Park, T.K. (1994) Toward a theory of user-based relevance. JASIST, 45, 135-141.
21. Saracevic, T. (1996). Relevance reconsidered '96. In P. Ingwersen & N. Ole Pors (Eds.), CoLIS2 (pp. 201-218). Copenhagen, Denmark.
22. Sloane, N. J. A., & Wyner, A.D. (1993) (Ed.), Claude Elwood Shannon: Collected Papers, New York: IEEE Press.
23. Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Swanson, D.R. (1986). Subjective versus objective relevance in bibliographic retrieval systems. Library Quarterly, 56, 389-398.
25. Tang, R., & Solomon, P. (2001). Use of relevance criteria across stages of document evaluation. JASIST, 52(8), 676-685.
26. Voorhees, E.M. (2001). Evaluation by highly relevant documents. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 74-82).