Examination of relevance criteria choices and the information search process

Journal of Documentation

Volumn 65, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 719-744

  Taylor, Art ^a   Zhang, Xiangmin ^b   Amadio, William J ^a  

^a RIDER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Information retrieval; Research

Indexed keywords

EID: 70350266261     PISSN: 00220418     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/00220410910983083     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Barry, C.L. (1998), “Document representations and clues to document relevance”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 49 No. 14, pp. 1293-303.
2. Barry, C.L. and Schamber, L. (1998), “Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: a cross-situational comparison”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 34 Nos 2-3, pp. 219-36.
3. Barry, C.L. (1994), “User-defined relevance criteria: an exploratory study”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 45, pp. 149-59.
4. Bateman, J. (1998), “Changes in relevance criteria: a longitudinal study”, Proceedings of the ASIS Annual Meeting, October 25-29, Pittsburgh, PA, Vol. 35, pp. 23-32.
5. Belkin, N. (1982), “ASK for information retrieval – part I”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 38, pp. 61-72.
6. Belkin, N.J. (2000), “Helping people find what they don't know”, Communications of ACM, Vol. 43, pp. 58-61.
7. Borlund, P. (2003), “The concept of relevance in IR”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 54, pp. 913-25.
8. Borlund, P. and Ingwersen, P. (1998), “Measures of relative relevance and ranked half-life: performance indicators for interactive IR”, SIGIR '98: Proceedings of the 21st Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, August 24-28, Melbourne, Australia, ACM, pp. 324-31.
9. Choi, Y. and Rasmussen, E.M. (2002), “Users' relevance criteria in image retrieval in American history”, Information Processing & Management, Vol. 38, pp. 695-726.
10. Cooper, W.S. (1971), “A definition of relevance for information retrieval”, Information Storage and Retrieval, Vol. 7, pp. 19-37.
11. Cosijn, E. and Ingwersen, P. (2001), “Dimensions of relevance”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 533-50.
12. Crystal, A. and Greenberg, J. (2006), “Relevance criteria identified by health information users during web searches”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 57 No. 10, pp. 1368-82.
13. Cuadra, C.A. and Katter, R.V. (1967), “Opening the black box of ‘relevance’”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 23, pp. 291-303.
14. Ellis, D. (1989), “A behavioural approach to information science retrieval design”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 45, pp. 171-212.
15. Ellis, D. (1997), “Modeling the information seeking patterns of engineers and research scientists in an industrial environment”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 384-403.
16. Harter, S.P. (1992), “Psychological relevance and information science”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 43 No. 9, pp. 602-15.
17. Hirsh, S.G. (1999), “Children's relevance criteria and information seeking on electronic resources”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 50 No. 14, pp. 1265-83.
18. Hj⊘rland, B. (2000), “Relevance research: the missing perspective(s): non-relevance and epistemological relevance”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 51, pp. 209-11.
19. Kuhlthau, C. (1993), Seeking Meaning: A Process Approach to Library and Information Services, Ablex Publishing Company, Norwood, NJ.
20. Kuhlthau, C.C. (1991), “Inside the search process: information seeking from the user's perspective”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 361-71.
21. Maglaughlin, K.L. and Sonnenwald, D.H. (2002), “User perspectives on relevance criteria: a comparison among relevant, partially relevant, and not-relevant judgments”, Journal of the American Society of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 327-42.
22. Mizzaro, S. (1998), “How many relevances in information retrieval?”, Interacting with Computers, Vol. 10, pp. 303-20.
23. Park, K. (1993), “The nature of relevance in information retrieval: an empirical study”, Library Quarterly, Vol. 63 No. 3, pp. 318-51.
24. Saracevic, T. (1975), “Relevance: a review of and a framework for the thinking on the notion in information science”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 26, pp. 321-43.
25. Sarcevic, T. (1996), “Relevance reconsidered”, Proceedings of the Second Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS 2), October 14-17, Copenhagen, pp. 201-18.
26. Schamber, L. (1991), “Users' criteria for evaluation in a multimedia environment”, in Ed. Griffiths, J.-M. (Ed.), Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science (ASIS) 54th Annual Meeting, Vol. 28, pp. 126-33.
27. Schamber, L. and Bateman, J. (1996), “User criteria in relevance evaluation: Toward development of a measurement scale”, Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, Baltimore, MD, October 21-26.
28. Schamber, L., Eisenberg, M.B. and Nilan, M.S. (1990), “A re-examination of relevance: toward a dynamic, situational definition”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 755-76.
29. Spink, A., Greisdorf, H. and Bateman, J. (1998), “From highly relevant to not relevant: examining different regions of relevance”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 599-621.
30. Su, L.T. (1993), “Is relevance an adequate criterion for retrieval system evaluation: an empirical inquiry into user's evaluation”, Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science, Learned Information, Medford, NJ, pp. 93-103.
31. Tang, R. and Solomon, P. (1998), “Toward an understanding of the dynamics of relevance judgment: an analysis of one person's search behavior”, Information Processing and Management, Nos 2-3, pp. 237-56.
32. Tang, R.S. and Solomon, P. (2001), “Use of relevance criteria across stages of document evaluation: on the complementarity of experimental and naturalistic studies”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 52 No. 8, pp. 676-85.
33. Taylor, A.R., Cool, C., Belkin, N.J. and Amadio, W.J. (2007), “Relationships between categories of relevance criteria and stage in task completion”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 43, pp. 1071-84.
34. Taylor, R.S. (1968), “Question-negotiation and information seeking in libraries”, College Research Libraries, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 178-94.
35. Vakkari, P. (2000), “Relevance and contributing information types of searched documents in task performance”, Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, July 24-28, Athens, Greece, ACM Press, New York, NY, pp. 2-9.
36. Vakkari, P. and Hakala, N. (2000), “Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in task performance”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 56 No. 5, pp. 540-62.
37. Wang, P. and Soergel, D. (1998), “A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study I: document selection”, Journal of the American Society of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 115-33.
38. Wang, P. and White, M.D. (1999), “A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study II: decisions at the reading and writing stages”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 98-114.
39. Wilson, P. (1973), “Situational relevance”, Information Storage and Retrieval, Vol. 9 No. 8, pp. 457-71.
40. Wilson, T.D. (1999), “Models in information behavior research”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 55, pp. 49-270.
41. Xu, Y. and Chen, Z. (2006), “Relevance judgment: what do information consumers consider beyond topicality?”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 57 No. 7, pp. 961-73.
42. Belkin, N.J., Oddy, R.N. and Brooks, H. (1982), “ASK for information retrieval – part II”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 145-64.
43. Bookstein, A. (1979), “Relevance”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 269-73.
44. Swanson, D.R. (1986), “Subjective versus objective relevance in bibliographic retrieval systems”, The Library Quarterly, Vol. 56, pp. 389-98.
45. Swanson, D.R. (1988), “Historical note: information retrieval and the future of an illusion”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 39, pp. 92-98.
46. Vakkari, P., Pennanen, M. and Serola, S. (2003), “Changes in search terms and tactics while writing a research proposal: a longitudinal case study”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 39, pp. 445-63.
47. Wilson, T.D. (1997), “Information behavior: an interdisciplinary perspective”, Information Processing and Management, Vol. 83 No. 4, pp. 551-72.