Addressing gaps in knowledge while reading

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 60, Issue 11, 2009, Pages 2255-2268

  Jordan, Chris ^a   Watters, Carolyn ^b  

^a Mindspark Interactive Network   (United States)

^b DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

WEBSITES;

FUNCTIONAL PROTOTYPES; QUERY FORMULATION; SEARCH ACTIVITY; SEARCH METHOD; SEARCH QUERIES; USER INTERACTION; USER STUDY; WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES;

ABSTRACTING;

EID: 70349904679     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.21168     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Beale, R. (2006). Improving Internet interaction: From theory to practice. Journal American Society of Information Science and Technology, 57(6), 829-833.
2. Bemers-Lee, T., & Cailliau, R. (1990). WorldWideWeb: Proposal for a HyperText project. CERN Memo. Retrieved July 7, 2009 from http://www.w3.org/ proposal.html
3. Budzik, J., Sood, S., Hammond, K., & Birnbaum L. (2006). Context transformations for just-in-time retrieval: Adapting the Watson System to user needs. Northwestern University, EECS Department Technical Report NWU-EECS-06-21.
4. Finkelstein, L., Gabrilovich, E., Matias, Y., Rivlin, E., Solan, Z., Wolfman, G., et al. (2002). Placing search in context: The concept revisited. ACM Trans. Information Systems, 20(1), 116-131.
5. Gibson, D., Kleinberg, J., & Raghavan, P. (1998). Inferring Web communities from link topology. Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Conference on Hypertext (pp. 225-234). New York: ACM Press.
6. Golovchinsky, G. (1997a). Queries? Links? Is there a difference? Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 407-414). New York: ACM Press.
7. Golovchinsky, G. (1997b). What the query told the link: The integration of hypertext and information retrieval. Proceedings of the Eighth ACM Conference on Hypertext, 67-74.
8. Golovchinsky, G., Price, M.N., & Schilit, B.N. (1999). From reading to retrieval: Freeform ink annotations as queries. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Developmentin Information Retrieval (pp. 19-25). NewYork: ACM Press.
9. Hendry, D.G. (2006). Workspaces for search. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(6), 800-802.
10. Hendry, D.G., & Harper, D.J. (1997). An informal information-seeking environment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48(11), 1036-1048.
11. Jordan, C. (2007, June). Using Wikipedia as a knowledge base for electronic documents. Paper presented at the Seventh ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries Doctoral Consortium (JCDL07), Vancouver, British, Columbia, Canada.
12. Jordan, C., & Watters, C. (2009). Retrieval of single Wikipedia articles while reading Proceedings of IEEE Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS-42).
13. Keane, M.T., O'Brien, M., & Smyth, B. (2008). Are people biased in their use of search engines? Communications of the ACM, 51(2), 49-52.
14. Kellar, M., Watters, C., & Shepherd, M. (2007). A field study characterizing Web-based information-seeking tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 999-1018.
15. Markey, K. (2007). Twenty-five years of end-user searching, Part 1: Research findings. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(8), 1071-1081. (Pubitemid 46905088)
16. Nielsen, J. (2003). Information foraging: Why Google makes people leave your site faster. Retrieved July 7, 2009 from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/ 20030630.html
17. Pirolli, P., & Card, S. (1995). Information foraging in information access environments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 51-58). New York: ACM Press.
18. Rhodes, B.J., & Starner, T. (1996). Remembrance Agent: A continuously running automated information retrieval system. Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Practical Application of Intelligent Agents and Multi-agent Technology (PAAM'96) (pp. 487-495). Lancashire, UK: Practical Applications Co. Ltd.
19. Rose, D.E. (2006). Reconciling information-seeking behavior with search user interfaces for the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(6), 797-799.
20. Rose, D.E., & Levinson, D. (2004). Understanding user goals in Web search. Proceedings of the 13th international Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 13-19). New York: ACM Press.
21. Shneiderman, B., & Bederson, B. (2005). Maintaining concentration to achieve task completion. Proceedings of 2005 Conference on Designing for User experience. Designing for User Experiences, Vol.135. AIGA. USA.
22. Shneiderman, B., Byrd, D., & Croft, W.B. (1998). Sorting out searching: A user-interface framework for text searches. Communications of the ACM, 41(4), 95-98.
23. Shneiderman, B., & Maes, P. (1997). Direct manipulation vs. interface agents. Interactions, 4(6), 42-61.
24. Speier, C., Valacich, J.S., & Vessey, I. (1999). The influence of task interruption on individual decision making: An information overload perspective. Decision Sciences, 30(2), 337-360.
25. Taylor, R.S. (1968). Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries. College and Research Libraries, 29, 178-194.
26. Wagner, E.J., Liu, J., Birnbaum, L., & Forbus, K.D. (2009). Rich interfaces for reading news on the Web. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, 27-36.
27. Warner, J. (2007). Description and search labor for information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(12), 1783-1790. (Pubitemid 47573433)
28. Wildemuth, B.M. (2006). Evidence-based practice insearchinterface design. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(6), 825-828.
29. xu, Y., & Wang, D. (2008). Order effect in relevance judgment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(8), 1264-1275.