The effect of individual differences on searching the web

Proceedings of the ASIST Annual Meeting

Volumn 40, Issue , 2003, Pages 240-246

  Madjid, Ihadjadene ^a   Stéphane, Chaudiron ^a   Daniel, Martins ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS OUEST NANTERRE LA DÉFENSE   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247149060     PISSN: 15508390     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/meet.1450400130     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (34)

1. Allen, B. (1992). Cognitive Differences in End User Searching of a CD-ROM Index, 15th Annual Inter-national SIGIR'92, ACM, Denmark.
2. Borgman, C L. (1989). All Users of Information Retrieval Systems are not Created Equal: An exploation into individual differences, Information Processing & Management, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 237-251.
3. Chen, C., Czerwinski, M., Macredie, R. (2000) Individual differences in virtual environments: Introduction and overview. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(6), 499-507.
4. Chen, S. Y & Ford, N (1998) Modelling User Navigation Behaviours in a Hypermedia-Based Learning System: An Individual Differences Approach. International Journal of Knowledge Organization . 25(3), 67-78.
5. Drori, O. (2001). Improving Display of Search Results in Information Retrieval Systems - User's Study. In P. T. Isaías (Eds), Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on New Developments in Digital Libraries (NDDL), Portugal, July 6-7, 2001 , pp. 20-33: ICEIS Press.
6. Dumais Susan T., Hao Chen (2000): Hierarchical classification of Web content. SIGIR 2000, 256-263
7. Dumais, S., Cutrell, E. & Chen, H. (2001). Optimizing Search by Showing Results In Context. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems in Seattle, Washington, United States, 2001, pp 277-284. New York: ACM Press.
8. Ford, N., Wood, F. and Walsh, C. (1994) Cognitive Styles and Searching. Online & Cdrom Review, 18(2), 79-86.
9. Korfhage, R. (1997). Information Storage and Retrieval. New York: Wiley Computer Pub.
10. Lazonder, A.W., Biemans, H.J.A. & Wopereis, G.J.H. (2000). Differences between novice and experienced users in searching in the Worl Wide Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(6), 576-581.
11. Leader, L. F., & Klein, J. D. (1996). The effects of search tool type and cognitive style on performance during hypermedia database searches. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(2), 5-15.
12. Marchionini, G. (1989). Information-seeking strategies of novices using a full- text electronic encyclopedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40(1) 54-66.
13. Marchionini, G., Lin, X., Dwiggins, S. (1990). Effects of the usesr's knowledge on searching in a hypertext environment. In Proceedings of the 53rd ASIS Annual Meeting (Vol. 4-8, 1990, Toronto, Canada) (pp. 129-142).
14. Moss, N.C. and Hale, G.G. (1999) Cognitive style and its effect on Internet search strategies: A quantitative investigation Presented at the European Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Lahti, Finland
15. Nahl, D. and Tenopir, C. (1996). Affective and cognitive searching behavior of novice end-users of a full-text database. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(4), 276-286.
16. Palmquist, R. A. and Kim, K. (2000). "The Effect of Cognitive Style and Online Search Experience on Web Search Performance. "Journal of the American Society of Information Science": Special Topics Issue on Individual Differences in Virtual Environments, 51(6), 558-567.
17. Pratt W and L. Fagan (2000). The Usefulness of Dynamically Categorizing Search Results. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (JAMIA). 2000; 7(6) p. 605-617.
18. Ramana Rao and al (1995). Rich Interaction in the Digital Library. CACM 38(4), 29-39.
19. Silverstein C (1998). Analysis of a very large Altavista query log. SRC technical Note 1998-014. Digital, Palo Alto
20. Spink, A., Jansen, B. J., & Ozmultu, H. C. (2000). Use of query reformulation and relevance feedback by Web users. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 10(4), 317-328
21. Wang, P. and Tenopir, C. (1999) An Exploratory Study of Users' Interaction with World Wide Web Resoures, Information Skills, Cognitive Styles, Affective States and Searching Behaviors. Proceeding of 19th Annual National Online Meeting.
22. Zamir O, Oren Etzioni (1999): Grouper: A Dynamic Clustering Interface to Web Search Results. WWW8 / Computer Networks, 31(11-16), 1361-1374
23. Marcu, D. (1997). The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts. Ph.D Dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto.
24. Mani, I., & Bloedorn, E. (1999). Summarization similarities and differences among related documents. Information Retrieval, 1(1), 1-23.
25. Mann, W., & Thompson, S. (1988). Rhetorical structural theory: toward a functional theory of text organization. Text, 8(3), 243-281.
26. th Annual International ACM Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR) (pp.74-82). Seattle, WA.
27. National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2002). Document Understanding Conferences. Retrieved May 19, 2003 from http://www-nlpir.nist. gov/projects/duc/index.html.
28. Otterbacher, J.C., Winkel, A.J., & Radev, D.R. (2002). The Michigan single and multi-document summarizer for DUC 2002. Document Understanding Conferences. Retrieved May 19, 2003 fromhttp://www.nlpir.nist.gov/projects/duc/ pubs/2002papers/umich_otter.pdf
29. st SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue. Retrieved May 19, 2003 from http://www.sigdial.org/sigdialworkshop/proceedings/radev.pdf
30. Radev, R. D., Jing, H., & Budzikowska, M. (2000). Centroid-based summarization of multiple documents: sentence extraction, utility-based evaluation and user studies. In Workshop held with Applied Natural Language Processing Conference / Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ANLP/ANNCL) (pp. 21-29).
31. Sowa, J. (1984). Conceptual Structures: Information processing in mind and machine. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
32. Teufel, S., & Moens, M. (1997). Sentence extraction as a classification task. In Proceedings of the ACL'97/EACL'97 Workshop on Intelligent Scalable Text Summarization (pp.58-65). Madrid, Spain.
33. Trochim, W. (1999). The research methods knowledge base. Cincinnati, OH: Atomic Dog Publishing.
34. st International Conference on Human Language Technology Research (HLT-01).