The combined conceptual life cycle model of information quality in user perceptions of IQ on the web

ICIQ 2011 - Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Information Quality

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 570-590

  Knight, Shirlee Ann ^a  

^a EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

CCLC; Combined conceptual life cycle model of iq; Information quality; Information retrieval; User perceptions

Indexed keywords

CCLC; INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES; INFORMATION LIFE CYCLE; INFORMATION QUALITY; IQ DIMENSIONS; LIFE CYCLE MODEL; RELATIVE IMPACT; USER PERCEPTIONS; USERS PERCEPTIONS;

INFORMATION ANALYSIS; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL;

LIFE CYCLE;

EID: 84871549212     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (78)

1. Aladwani, A. M., & Palvia, P. C. (2002). Developing and validating an instrument for measuring userperceived web quality. Information & Management, 39(6), p467-476. (Pubitemid 34249525)
2. Alexander, J. E., & Tate, M. A. (1999). Web wisdom: how to evaluate and create information quality on the web. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Bailou, D. P., Wang, R., Pazer, H.L., & Tayi G.K. (1998) Modelling Information Manufacturing Systems to Determine Information Product Quality. Management Science, 44(4).
4. Bates, M. J. (1989). The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the on-line search interface, online Review, 13(5), pp.407-431.
5. Bates, M. J. (2002). The cascade of interactions in the digital library interface. Information Processing and Management, 38, pp.381-400.
6. Beck, S. (1997). Evaluation criteria: the good, the bad & the ugly; or why it's a good idea to evaluate Web sources. http://lib.nmsu.edu/ instruction/evalerit.html
7. Bovee, M., Srivastava, R. P., & Mak, B. (2003). A conceptual framework and belief-function approach to assessing overall information quality. Internationaljournal of Intelligent Systems, 18(1), 51-74.
8. Brooks, T. A. (2003). Web search: how the Web has changed information retrieval. Information Research, 8(3).
9. Bryant, S. L. (2000). The information needs and information seeking behaviour of family doctors: a selective literature review. Health Libraries Review, 17(2), 83-90.
10. Chang, I. C., Li, Y.-C, Hung, W.-F., & Hwang, H.-G. (2005). An empirical study on the impact of quality antecedents on tax payers' acceptance of Internet tax-filing systems. Government Information Quarterly, 22(3), 389-410. (Pubitemid 41478699)
11. Chung, W. Y., Fisher, C., & Wang, R. (2002). What skills matter in data quality. Proc. of the 7th International Conference on Information Quality, (MITIQ Conference), 331-342.
12. Cosijn, E., & Ingwersen, P. (2000). Dimensions ofrelevance. Information Processing & Management, 36(4), 533-550.
13. Croft, D. R., & Peterson, M. W. (2002). An evaluation of the quality and contents of asthma education on the world wide web. Chest [NLM - MEDLINE], 121(4), 1301.
14. Dedeke, A. (2000). A Conceptual framework for developing quality measures for information systems. Proc. of 5th International Conference on information quality, 126-128.
15. Dziadosz, S., & Chandrasekar, R. (2002). Do thumbnail previews help users make better relevance decisions about web search results? Proc. of the 25th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in information retrieval, Tampere, Finland, p. 365-366.
16. Eppler, M. J., & Wittig, D. (2000). Conceptualizing information quality: A Review of information quality Frameworks from the Last Ten Years. Proc. of 5th International Conference on information quality, p.83-96.
17. Eppler, M., & Muenzenmayer, P. (2002). Measuring information quality in the web context: a survey of state-of-the-art instruments and an application methodology. Proc. of 7th International Conference on information quality, 187-196.
18. Even, A., & Shankaranarayanan, G. (2005). Value-driven data quality assessment. 10th International Conference on Information Quality.
19. Fidel, R., Pejtersen, A. M., Cleal, B., & Bruce, H. (2004). A Multidimensional approach to the study of human-information interaction: a case study of collaborative information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(11), 939-953.
20. Forslund, H. (2007). Measuring information quality in the order fulfilment process. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 24(5), 515-524.
21. Gaizauskas, R. & Robertson, A. (1997). Coupling information retrieval & information extraction: a new text technology for gathering information from the web. Proc. of RIAO 97: Computer-Assisted Information Searching on the Internet, Montreal, Canada, 356-370.
22. Gendron, M., Shanks, G., & Alampi, J. (2004). Next steps in understanding information quality and its effect on decision making and organizational effectiveness. Proc. of DSS 2004 Conference, 283-294.
23. Harris, R. (1997). Evaluating Internet Research Sources. Virtual Salt -http://www.vtrualsalt.com/evalu8ti.htm, Viewed: Feb 2005.
24. Hawkins, D. T. (1999). What is credible information? ONLINE Magazine, 23(5), pp.86-89.
25. Hernon, P. (1994). Information life cycle: Its place in the management of U.S. government information resources. Government Information Quarterly, 11(2), 143-170.
26. Kahn, B. K., Strong, D. M., & Wang, R. Y. (2002). Information quality benchmarks: product and service performance. Communications of the ACM, 45(4), 184-192.
27. Katerattanakul, P., & Siau, K. (1999). Measuring information quality of web sites: development of an instrument. Proc. of the 20th International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS'99), Charlotte, North Carolina, United States, 279-285.
28. Keast, G., Toms, E. G., & Cherry, J. (2001). Measuring the reputation of web sites: a preliminary exploration. Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL'01), June 24-28, Roanoke, Virginia, United States, 77-78.
29. Klein, B. D. (2001). user perceptions of data quality: Internet and traditional text sources. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 41(4), 9-18.
30. Klein, B. D. (2002a). When do users detect information quality problems on the world wide web? 8th Americas Conference on Information Systems, 1101-1103.
31. Knight, S. A., & Burn, J. M. (2005). Developing a framework for assessing information quality on the world wide web. Informing Science, 8, 159-172.
32. Knight, S. A. (2008). User perceptions of information quality in World Wide Web information retrieval behaviour. Doctoral dissertation, School of MIS, Edith Cowan University.
33. Knight, S. A., & Spink, A. (2008). Toward a Web search information behavior model, in A. Spink & M. Zimmer (Eds) Web Search: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, Berlin, Springer, 209-234.
34. Knight, S.A. (2011). The combined conceptual life-cycle model of information quality: Part 1, an investigative framework. International Journal of Information Quality, 2(3), 205-230
35. Knight, S. A., & Burn, J. M. (2011). A Preliminary introduction to the OTAM: Exploring users"perceptions of their on-going interaction with adopted technologies. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 17(1)
36. Kovac, R., & Weickert, C. (2002). Starting with quality: Using TDQM in a start-up organization. Proc. of the 7th International Conference on Information Quality, MITIQ Conference, 2002, 69-78.
37. Kumar, R. L., Smith, M. A., & Bannerjee, S. (2004). User interface features influencing overall ease of use and personalization. Information & Management, 41(3), 289-302.
38. Lee, Y. W., Strong, D. M., Kahn, B. K., & Wang, R. Y. (2002). AIMQ: a methodology for information quality assessment. Information & Management, 40(2), p133
39. Lee, Y., Kozar, K. A., & Larsen, K. R. T. (2003a). The technology acceptance model: past, present, and future. Communications of the AIS, 12(50).
40. Leung, H. K. N. (2001). Quality metrics for intranet applications. Information & Management, 38(3), 137-152.
41. Li, S., & Lin, B. (2006). Accessing information sharing and information quality in supply chain management. Decision Support Systems, 42(3), 1641-1656. (Pubitemid 44649333)
42. Liu, L., & Chi, L. (2002). Evolutional data quality: A theory-specific view. Proc. of the 7th International Conference on Information Quality, (MIT IQ Conference) 2002, 292-304.
43. Marchionini, G. (1995). Information Seeking in Electronic Environments. Cambridge Series on human computer interaction, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1995.
44. Marion, C. (2003). Quality of health information on the Web: user perceptions of relevance and reliability. New Review of Information Behaviour Research, 4(1), 195-206.
45. Michnik, J., & Lo, M.-C. (2007). The assessment of the information quality with the aid of multiple criteria analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, Article in Press, Corrected Proof, November 2007.
46. Moraga, A., Calero, C., & Piattini, M. (2006). Comparing different quality models for portals. Online Information Review, 30(5), 555-568. (Pubitemid 44574360)
47. Naumann, F., & Rolker, C. (2000). Assessment methods for information quality Criteria. Proc. of 5th International Conference on information quality, 148-162.
48. Neely, M. P. (2005). The product approach to data quality and fitness for use: a framework for analysis. Proc. of 10th International Conference on Information Quality.
49. Nielsen, J. (1999). User interface directions for the web. Communications of the ACM, 42(1), 65-72
50. Palmquist, R. A. (1996). The search for an Internet metaphor: a comparison of literatures. American Society of Information Science Conference.
51. Pernici, B., & Scannapieco, M. (2002). Data quality in web information systems. Proc. of ER-2002, 21st International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Tampere, Finland.
52. Prabha, C., Connaway, L. S., Olszewski, L., & Jenkins, L. R. (2007). What is enough? Satisficing information needs. Journal of Documentation, 63(1), 74-89.
53. Price, R. & Shanks, G. (2004) A semiotic information quality framework, Proc. IFIP International Conference on Decision Support Systems (DSS2004): Decision Support in an Uncertain and Complex World, Prato, July
54. Price, R., & Shanks, G. (2005). A semiotic information quality framework: development and comparative analysis. Journal of Information Technology, 20, 88-102. (Pubitemid 40818707)
55. Rieh, S. Y. (2000). Information Quality and Cognitive Authority in the World Wide Web. Dissertation Research at Rutgers University School of Communication, Information, and Library Studies (Advisor: Nicholas J. Belkin).
56. Savolainen, R., & Kari, J. (2006). User-defined relevance criteria in web searching. Journal of Documentation, 62(6), 685-707. (Pubitemid 44704537)
57. Scannapieco, M., Pernici, B., & Pierce, E. (2002). IP-UML: Towards a methodology for quality improvement based on the IP-MAP framework. Proc of the Seventh International Conference on Information Quality
58. Shankar, G., & Watts, S. (2003). A Relevant, believable approach for data quality assessment. Proc. of 8th International Conference on information quality, 178-189.
59. Shankaranarayan, G., Wang, R. Y., & Ziad, M. (2000). Modeling the manufacture of an information product with IPMAP. Proceedings of Conference on Information Quality, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1-16.
60. Shanks, G., & Corbitt, B. (1999). Understanding data quality: Social and cultural aspects. Proc. 10th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, 785-797.
61. Song, J., & Zahedi, F. M. (2006). Trust in health infomediaries. Decision Support Systems, 43(2), 390-407. (Pubitemid 46216543)
62. Spink, A., & Saracevic, T. (1998). Human-computer interaction in information retrieval: Nature and manifestations of feedback. Interacting with Computers, 10(3), 249-267. (Pubitemid 128696860)
63. Strong, D. M., Lee, Y. W., & Wang, R. Y. (1997a). Data quality in context. Communications of the ACM, 40(5), p.103-110. (Pubitemid 127442929)
64. Strong, D., Lee, Y., & Wang, R. (1997b). 10 Potholes in the Road to information quality. IEEE Computer, 30(8), 38-46. (Pubitemid 127546090)
65. Sturges, P., & Griffin, A. (2003). The Archaeologist Undeceived: Selecting Quality Archaeological Information from the Internet. Informing Science Journal, 6, pp.221-232. (Pubitemid 40640726)
66. Stvilia, B., Twidale, M. B., Smith, L. C., & Gasser, L. (2005). Assessing information quality of a communitybased encyclopedia. 10th International Conference on Information Quality
67. Tayi, G. K., & Bailou, D. P. (1998). Examining data quality. Communications of the ACM, 41(2), 54 - 57.
68. Taylor, R. S. (1982). Value-added processes in the information life cycle. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 33(5), 341-346.
69. Tombros, A., Ruthven, L., & Jose, J. M. (2003). Searchers" criteria For assessing web pages. Proc. 26th annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Toronto, Canada, July 28 - Aug 01, 2003, p.385-386.
70. Toms, E. G. (1997). Information interaction: providing a framework for information architecture. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 55(10), 855-862.
71. Toms, E. G., O'Brien, H. L., Kopak, R., & Freund, L. (2005). Searching for relevance in the relevance of search: In F. Crestani & I. Ruthven (Eds.): CoLIS 2005, LNCS 3507, pp.59-78.
72. Vakkari, P., & Sormunen, E. (2004). The influence of relevance levels on the effectiveness of interactive information retrieval. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(11), 963-969.
73. Varlander, S. (2007). Online information quality in experiential consumption: An exploratory study. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 14(5), 328-338.
74. Wang, R. Y., & Strong, D. M. (1996). Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12(4), 5-34. 27
75. Whitmire, E. (2004). The relationship between undergraduates' epistemological beliefs, reflective judgment, and their information-seeking behavior. Information Processing & Management, 40(1), 97-111.
76. Wu, M., Fuller, M., & Wilkinson, R. (2001). Using clustering and classification approaches in interactive retrieval. Information Processing & Management, 37(3), 459-484. (Pubitemid 32196066)
77. Zeist, R. H. J., & Hendriks, P. R. H. (1996). Specifying software quality with the extended ISO model. Software Quality Management IV - Improving Quality, pp.145-160.
78. Zhu, X., & Gauch, S. (2000). Incorporating quality metrics in centralized/distributed information retrieval on the World Wide Web. Proc. 23rd annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Athens, Greece, 288-295.