Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 63, Issue 9, 2012, Pages 1879-1896

  Bilal, Dania ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

children; information retrieval; search engines

Indexed keywords

AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGIES; CHILDREN; INFORMATION LITERACY; NATURAL LANGUAGE QUERIES; RANKING ALGORITHM; RELEVANCE JUDGMENT; RESEARCH DESIGNS; SPECIFIC TASKS;

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INFORMATION SCIENCE; INTERNET; MACHINE DESIGN;

SEARCH ENGINES;

EID: 84865209921     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.22675     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Barry, C., (1994). User-defined relevance criteria: An exploratory study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45 (3), 149-159.
2. Beheshti, J., Large, A., &, Tam, M., (2010). Transaction logs and search patterns on a children's portal. Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science, 34 (4), 391-402.
3. Bilal, D., (1998). Children's search processes in using World Wide Web search engines: An exploratory study. In Proceedings of the 61st ASIS Annual Meeting, 35, October 24-29, 1998, Pittsburgh, PA (pp. 45-53). Medford, NJ: Information Today. (Pubitemid 128704171)
4. Bilal, D., (1999). Web search engines for children: A comparative study and performance evaluation of Yahooligans! Ask Jeeves Kids, and Super Snooper. In Proceedings of the 62nd ASIS Annual Meeting, October 31-Nov. 4, 1999, Washington, DC (pp. 70-83). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
5. Bilal, D., (2000). Children's use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: I. Cognitive, physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51 (7), 646-665.
6. Bilal, D., (2001). Children's use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: II. Cognitive and physical behaviors on research tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52 (2), 118-137.
7. Bilal, D., (2002). Children's use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: III. Cognitive and physical behaviors on fully self-generated tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53 (13), 1170-1183. (Pubitemid 35359185)
8. Bilal, D., (2003). Draw and tell: Children as designers of Web interfaces. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 40 (1), 135-141. doi: 10.1002/meet.1450400117
9. Bilal, D., (2007). Grounding children's information seeking and system design in child development theories. In, D. Nahl, &, D. Bilal, (Eds.), Information and emotion: The emergent affective paradigm in information behavior research and theory (pp. 39-50). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
10. Bilal, D., &, Bachir, I., (2007). Children's interaction with international and multilingual digital libraries: II. Information seeking, success, and affective experience. Information Processing & Management, 43 (1), 65-80. (Pubitemid 44332716)
11. Bilal, D., &, Ellis, R., (2011). Evaluating leading Web search engines on children's queries. In, J.A. Jacko, (Ed.), HCII'11: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Users and Applications, Part IV (pp. 549-558). Berlin: Springer.
12. Bilal, D., &, Kirby, J., (2002). Differences and similarities in information seeking: Children and adults as web users. Information Processing & Management, 38 (5), 649-670. (Pubitemid 34288165)
13. Borlund, P., (2003). The concept of relevance in IR. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54 (10), 913-925.
14. Buckley, C., &, Voorhees, E.M., (2000). Evaluating evaluation measure stability. Proceedings of the 23rd annual International Association for Computer Machinery Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR) Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 33-40), Athens, Greece. New York: ACM Press.
15. Chu, H., (2010). Information representation and retrieval in the Digital Age. Medford, NJ.: Information Today.
16. Chu, H., &, Rosenthal, M., (1996). Search engines for the World Wide Web: A comparative study and evaluation methodology. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science (pp. 127-135). Medford, NJ: Information Today. (Pubitemid 126730555)
17. Cosijn, E., &, Ingwersen, P., (2000). Dimensions of relevance. Information Processing & Management, 36 (4), 533-550. (Pubitemid 30594068)
18. Ding, W., &, Marchionini, G., (1996). A comparative study of web search service performance. Proceedings of the 59th annual meeting of the American Society for Information Science (pp. 136-142).
19. Druin, A., Foss, E., Hately, L., Golub, E., Guha, M.L., Fails, J., Hutchinson, H.,. (2009). How children search the Internet with keyword interfaces. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Interaction Design and Interaction Design and Children (IDC 2009) (pp. 89-96), Como, Italy.
20. Druin, A., Foss, E., Hutchinson, H., Golub, E., &, Hatley, L., (2010). Children's roles using keyword search interfaces at home. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'10) (pp. 413-422), New York.
21. Enochsson, A., (2005). The development of children's Web searching skills-A non-linear model. Retrieved from http://informationr.net/ir/11-1/ paper240.html
22. Goodwin, D., (2011). May 2011 search engine market share from comScore, Compete, Hitwise. Retrieved from http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2080003/ May-2011-Search-Engine-Market-Share-from-comScore-Compete-Hitwise
23. Griesbaum, J., (2004). Evaluation of three German search engines: Altavista.de, Google.de and Lycos.de. Information Research, 9 (4). Retrieved from http://informationr.net/ir/9-4/paper189.html
24. Harter, S.P., (1992). Psychological relevance and information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 53 (4), 602-615.
25. Hirsh, S.G., (1999). Children's relevance criteria and information seeking on electronic resources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50 (14), 1265-1283. (Pubitemid 30518839)
26. Hjørland, B., (2010). The foundation of the concept of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61 (2), 217-237.
27. Ingwersen, P., &, Järvelin, K., (2005). The turn: Integration of information seeking and retrieval in context. Amsterdam: Springer.
28. Järvelin, K., (2009). Explaining user performance in information retrieval: Challenges to IR evaluation. In ICTIR '09: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Theory of Information Retrieval: Advances in Information Retrieval Theory (pp. 289-296). Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-04417-5-28
29. Järvelin, K., &, Kekalainen, J., (2002). Cumulated gain-based evaluation of IR techniques. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 20 (4), 422-446. (Pubitemid 44642296)
30. Jochmann-Mannak, H., &, Lentz, L., (2010). Children searching information on the Internet: Performance on children's interfaces compared to Google. Proceedings of the of the 33rd annual International Association for Computer Machinery Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval (ACM SIGIR) Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval: Workshop on Accessible Search Systems (pp. 27-35), Geneva, Switzerland.
31. Kafai, Y., &, Bates. M.J., (1997). Internet web-searching instruction in the elementary classroom: Building a foundation for information literacy. School Library Media Quarterly, 25 (2), 103-111.
32. Large, A., Beheshti, J., &, Rahman, T., (2002). Design criteria for children's Web portals: The users speak out. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53 (2), 79-94. (Pubitemid 34138422)
33. Leighton, H.V., &, Srivastava, J., (1999). First 20 Precision among World Wide Web Search Services (search engines). Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50 (10), 870-881.
34. Lewandowski, D., (2008). The retrieval effectiveness of Web search engines: Considering results descriptions. Journal of Documentation, 64 (6), 915-937.
35. Lewandowski, D., (2011). The retrieval effectiveness of search engines on navigational queries. ASLIB Proceedings, 63, 354-363.
36. Mizzaro, S., (1997). Relevance: The whole history. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48 (9), 810-832. (Pubitemid 127628564)
37. Nahl, D., &, Bilal, D., (Eds.). (2007). Information and emotion: The emergent affective paradigm in information behavior research and theory. Medford, NJ: Information Today.
38. Nesset, V., (2011). Following the signs: Children's use of visual cues to facilitate website evaluation. In, J.A. Jacko, (Ed.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 6764, Human-computer interaction (pp. 599-606), Part IV, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI 2011 International). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
39. Nielsen, J., (2010). Children's websites: Usability issues in designing for kids. Retrieved from http://www.nngroup.com/reports/kids.
40. Olsen, S., (2009). Google seeks to help children search better. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/26/technology/internet/26kidsearch.html
41. Papaeconomou, C., Zijlema, A.F., &, Ingwersen, P., (2008). Searchers' relevance judgments and criteria in evaluating web pages in a learning style perspective. In Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Information Interaction in Context (IIiX '08) (pp. 123-132), London.
42. Pariser, E., (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. New York: Penguin.
43. Sakai, T., (2007). On the reliability of information retrieval metrics based on graded relevance. Information Processing & Management, 43, 531-548. (Pubitemid 44646706)
44. 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, 26 (6), 321-343.
45. Saracevic, T., (2007b). Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for thinking on the notion in information science: Part III. Behavior and effects of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58 (13), 2126-2144. (Pubitemid 350229713)
46. Schamber, L., (1994). Relevance and information behavior. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 29, 3-48.
47. Schamber, L., &, 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, 33, 1218-1225.
48. Schamber, L., Eisenberg, M.B., &, Nilan, M.S., (1990). A re-examination of relevance: Toward a dynamic, situational definition. Information Processing & Management, 26 (6), 755-776.
49. Schacter, J., Chung, G.K.W.K., &, Dorr, A., (1998). Children's Internet searching on complex problems: Performance and process analyses. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49 (9), 840-849. (Pubitemid 128599348)
50. Shenton, A., Nesett, V., &, Hayter, S., (2008). Children's conceptualizations of the word "information." Retrieved from http://lis.sagepub.com/content/40/3/151
51. Spink, A., (2002). A user-centered approach to evaluating human interaction with web search engines: An exploratory study. Information Processing & Management, 38 (3), 401-426. (Pubitemid 34040561)
52. Spink, A., &, Greisdorf, H., (2001). Regions and levels: Measuring and mapping users' relevance judgments. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52, 161-173. (Pubitemid 32134188)
53. Spink, A., &, Jansen, B.J., (2004). Web search: Public searching of the Web. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
54. Spink, A., Jansen, B.J., Blakely, C., &, Koshman, S., (2006). A study of overlap and uniqueness among major Web search engines. Information Processing & Management, 42, 1379-1391. (Pubitemid 44316686)
55. Spink, A., Wolfram, D., Jansen, M., &, Saracevic, T., (2001). Searching the Web: The public and their queries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53 (2), 226-234.
56. Su, L.T., (1996). Value of search results as a whole as a measure of information retrieval performance. Proceedings of the annual meeting of the American Society for Information Science (Vol. 33, pp. 226-237). Medford, NJ: Information Today.
57. Thelwall, M., (2008). Quantitative comparisons of search engine results. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59 (11), 1702-1710.
58. Torres, S.D., Hiemstra, D., &, Serdyukov, P., (2010). An analysis of queries intended to search information for children. In Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Information Interaction in Context (IIiX'10), (pp. 235-244). New York: ACM Press. Retrieved from http://wwwhome.cs.utwente.nl/hiemstra/papers/ iiix10.pdf
59. Vakkari, P., &, Hakala, N., (2000). Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in task performance. Journal of Documentation, 56 (5), 540-562.
60. Vaughan, L., (2004). New measurements for search engine evaluation proposed and tested. Information Processing & Management, 40, 677-691.
61. Véronis, J., (2006). A comparative study of six search engines. Retrieved from http://www.up.univ-mrs.fr/veronis/pdf/2006-comparative-study.pdf
62. Wallace, R., &, Kupperman, J., (1997). Online search in the science classroom: Benefits and possibilities. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu. edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.22.8030&rep=rep1&type=pdf
63. Wang, P., (2011). Information behavior and seeking. In, I. Ruthven, &, D. Kelly, (Eds.), Interactive information seeking, behavior and retrieval (pp. 15-28). London: Facet.
64. Wang, P., &, Soergel, D., (1998). A cognitive model of document use during a research project: Study I. Document selection. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49 (2), 115-133. (Pubitemid 128594911)
65. Webber, W, Moffat, A., Zobel, J., &, Sakai, T., (2008). Precision at-ten considered redundant. Retrieved from http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/∼wew/ papers/wmzs08-sigir-poster.pdf
66. Xu, Y., &, Wang, D., (2008). Order effects in relevance judgment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59 (8), 1264-1275.