Studying human judgments of relevance: Interactions in context

ACM International Conference Proceeding Series

Volumn 176, Issue , 2006, Pages 6-14

  Anderson, Theresa Dirndorfer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Human relevance judgments; Nature of relevance in contexts; Task based information behaviour

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; INFORMATION ANALYSIS; ONLINE SEARCHING;

HUMAN RELEVANCE JUDGMENTS; NATURE OF RELEVANCE IN CONTEXTS; TASK-BASED INFORMATION BEHAVIOUR;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

EID: 34547256272     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/1164820.1164825     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (46)

1. Borlund, P., The concept of relevance in IR. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2003. 54(10): p. 913-925.
2. Schamber, L., M.B. Eisenberg, and M.S. Nilan, A re-examination of relevance: Toward a dynamic, situational definition. Information Processing and Management, 1990. 26(6): p. 755-776.
3. Schamber, L., Relevance and Information Behavior. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 1994.29: p. 3-48.
4. Greisdorf, H., Relevance: An interdisciplinary and information science perspective. Informing Science, 2000. 3(2): p. 67-71.
5. Harter, S.P., Psychological relevance and information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1992. 43(9): p. 602-615.
6. Mizzaro, S., Relevance: The Whole History. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1997. 48(9): p. 810-832.
7. Tang, R. and P. Solomon, Toward an understanding of the dynamics of relevance judgement: an analysis of one person's search behaviour. Information Processing and Management, 1998. 34(2/3): p. 237-256.
8. Wang, P. and D. Soergel, A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study 1. Document selection. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1998. 49(2): p. 115-133.
9. Barry, C.L., User-defined relevance criteria: an exploratory study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1994. 45(3): p. 149-159.
10. Park, T.K., The nature of relevance in information retrieval: An empirical study, in School of Library and Information Science. 1992, Indiana University (UMI No. 9231644): Bloomington, IN. p. 209.
11. Schamber, L., Users' criteria for evaluation in multimedia information seeking and use situations, in Graduate School. 1991, Syracuse University (UMI No. 9214390): Syracuse, NY. p. 327.
12. Swanson, D.R., Subjective versus objective relevance in bibliographic retrieval systems. Library Quarterly, 1986. 56(4): p. 389-398.
13. Byström, K. and K. Järvelin, Task complexity affects information seeking and use. Information Processing & Management, 1995. 31(2): p. 191-213.
14. Vakkari, P. and N. Hakala, Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in task performance. Journal of Documentation, 2000. 56(5): p. 540-562.
15. Hjørland, B. and F.S. Christensen, Work tasks and socio-cognitive relevance: a specific example. Brief Communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 2002. 53(11): p. 960-965.
16. Vakkari, P., Task-based information seeking, in Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, B. Cronin, Editor. 2003, Information Today: Medford, NJ. p. 413-464.
17. Mizzaro, S., How many relevances in information retrieval? Interacting with Computers, 1998.10(3): p. 303-320.
18. Vakkari, P., Task complexity, problem structure and information actions: Integrating studies on information seeking and retrieval. Information Processing & Management, 1999. 35(6): p. 819-837.
19. Spink, A., H. Greisdorf, and J. Bateman, From highly relevant to not relevant: examining different regions of relevance. Information Processing and Management, 1998. 34(5): p. 599-621.
20. Cosijn, E. and P. Ingwersen, Dimensions of relevance. Information Processing & Management, 2000. 36: p. 533-550.
21. Barry, C.L. and L. Schamber, Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: a cross-situational comparison. Information Processing and Management, 1998. 34(2-3): p. 219-236.
22. Maglaughlin, K.L. and D.H. Sonnenwald, 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, 2002. 53(5): p. 327-342.
23. Bateman, J., Changes in relevance criteria: a longitudinal study, in Proceedings of the 61st American Society for Information Science Annual Meeting. 1998. p. 23-32.
24. Kekäläinen, J. and K. Järvelin, Evaluating information retrieval systems under the challenges of interaction and multidimensional dynamic relevance, in CoLIS4 : proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science, Seattle, WA, USA, July 21-25, 2002, H. Bruce, et al., Editors. 2002, Libraries Unlimited: Greenwood Village, CO. p. 253-270.
25. Cool, C., The nature of situation assessment in new information retrieval environments, in ASIS '97: Digital Collections: Implications for users, funders, developers and maintainers. Proceedings of the 60th ASIS Annual Meeting Washington, D.C. November 1-6, 1997, C. Schwartz and M. Rorvig, Editors. 1997, Information Today for ASIS: Medford, NJ. p. 135-146.
26. Hert, C.A., Understanding information retrieval interactions: theoretical and practical implications. Contemporary Studies in Information Management, Policy, and Services, ed. P. Hernon. 1997, Greenwich, CN: Ablex.
27. Lave, J., Cognition in Practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. 1988, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
28. Barad, K., Getting real: technoscientific practices and the materialization of reality. Differences: A journal of feminist cultural studies, 1998. 10(2): p. 87 (4).
29. Anderson, T.D., Understandings of relevance and topic as they evolve in the scholarly research process, in Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2003, University of Technology, Sydney.
30. Saracevic, T., Interactive models of information retrieval (IR): A review and proposal. Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 1996. 33: p. 3-9.
31. Saracevic, T., Relevance reconsidered '96, in Proceedings of CoLIS 2, second international conference on conceptions of library and information science: Integration in perspective, P. Ingwersen and N.O. Pors, Editors. 1996, Royal School of Librarianship: Copenhagen, p. 201-218.
32. Schutz, A., Reflections on the problem of relevance. Edited, annotated, and with an introd. by Richard M. Zaner. 1970, New Haven, CT & London: Yale University Press. xxiv, 186 p. 21 cm.
33. Sperber, D. and D. Wilson, Relevance: Communication and cognition. 1986, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
34. Froehlich, T.J., Relevance reconsidered - towards an agenda for the 21st Century: introduction to special topic issue on relevance research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1994.45(3): p. 124-133.
35. Bean, C.A. and R. Green, Relevance relationships, in Relationships in the organization of knowledge, C.A. Bean and R. Green, Editors. 2001, Kluwer Academic: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, p. 115-132.
36. Boyce, B., Beyond topicality. A two-stage view of relevance and the retrieval process. Information Processing and Management, 1982.18: p. 105-189.
37. Anderson, T.D., Relevance as process: judgements in the context of scholarly research. Information Research, 2005. 10(2): p. paper 226.
38. Denzin, N.K., Interpretive interactionism. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 16. 1989, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
39. Yin, R.K., Case study research: design and methods. 1994, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
40. Van Maanen, J., Tales of the field: on writing ethnography. 1988, Chicago: University of Chicago.
41. Ely, M., et al., Doing qualitative research: circles within circles. 1991, London: Falmer Press.
42. Ely, M., et al., On writing qualitative research: living by words. 1997, London: Falmer Press. 411.
43. Bochner, A.P., Narrative's virtues. Qualitative Inquiry, 2001. 7(2): p. 131-157.
44. Richardson, L., Writing: a method of inquiry, in Handbook of qualitative research, N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, Editors. 2000, Sage: Thousand Oaks. p. 923-948.
45. Clandinin, D.J. and F.M. Connelly, Narrative inquiry: experience and story in qualitative research. 2000, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
46. Bates, M.J., Where should the person stop and the information search interface start? Information Processing & Management, 1990. 26(5): p. 575-591.