Modalities, motivations, and materials - Investigating traditional and social online Q&A services

Journal of Information Science

Volumn 40, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 669-687

  Shah, Chirag ^a   Kitzie, Vanessa ^a   Choi, Erik ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Framework; online question answering; review; social Q A; user generated content; virtual reference

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; REVIEWS;

BROKEN DOWN; CONSTANT FLUXES; FRAMEWORK; ON-LINE INFORMATION; QUESTION ANSWERING; RESEARCH QUESTIONS; USER-GENERATED CONTENT; VIRTUAL REFERENCE;

MOTIVATION;

EID: 84907101923     PISSN: 01655515     EISSN: 17416485     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0165551514534140     Document Type: Review

References (68)

1. Marchionini G Information concepts: From books to cyberspace identities. Morgan and Claypool ; 2010 :
2. Gazan R. Social Q&A. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2011 ; 62 (12). 2301-2312
3. ShahC. Measuring effectiveness and user satisfaction in Yahoo! Answers. First Monday2February2011; 16(2), http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3092
4. ShahCOhJSOhS. Exploring characteristics and effects of user participation in online social Q&A sites. First Monday1September2008; 13(9), http://firstmonday.org/article/view/2182/2028.
5. Shah C, Kitzie V. Social Q&A and virtual reference-comparing apples and oranges with the help of experts and users. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2012 ; 63 (10). 2020-2036
6. Gazan R. Seekers, sloths and social reference: Homework questions submitted to a question answering community. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia. 2007 ; 13 (2). 239-248
7. ConnawayLRRadfordMR. Seeking synchronicity: Revelations and recommendations for virtual reference. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research, http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/reports/synchronicity/full.pdf
8. Evans B, Kairam S, Pirolli P. Do your friends make you smarter? An analysis of social strategies in online information seeking. Information Processing and Management. 2010 ;: 679-692
9. Rosenbaum H, Shachaf P. A structuration approach to online communities of practice: The case of Q&A communities. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2010 ; 61 (9). 1933-1944
10. Gazan R. When online communities become self-aware. Proceedings of Hawaii international conference on system sciences ; 2009 Hawaii, HI ; 2009. 1.
11. Wu D, He D. A study on Q&A services between community-based question answering and collaborative digital reference in two languages. Proceedings of iConference ; 2013 Forth Worth, TX ; 2013. 326.
12. Hsu CHC, Cai LA, Li M. Expectation, motivation, and attitude: A tourist behavioral model. Journal of Travel Research. 2010 ; 49: 282-296
13. Ronan J, Reakes P, Ochoa M. Application of reference guidelines in chat reference interactions: A study of online reference skills. College & Undergraduate Libraries. 2006 ; 13 (4). 3-23
14. Morin AC The virtual reference experience: Integrating theory into practice. Lankes RD Janes JS Linda C Finneran CM, ed. New York: Neal-Schuman ; 2004: 185-198.
15. RadfordML. Relational aspects of reference interactions: A qualitative investigation of the perceptions of users and librarians in the academic library. Unpublished doctoral dissertation (DAI A54/07, 2368), Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 1993.
16. Bolander RC, Connaway LS, Radford ML. Seeking synchronicity: OCLC and Rutgers researchers explore virtual reference services by analyzing chat transcripts. NextSpace. 2006 ; 2: 18-19
17. Connaway LS. Mountains, valleys, and pathways: Serials users' needs and steps to meet them. Part I: Preliminary analysis of focus group and semi-structured interviews at colleges and universities. Serials Librarian. 2007 ; 52: 223-236
18. Carter DS, Janes J. Unobtrusive data analysis of digital reference questions and service at the Internet Public Library: An exploratory study. Library Trends. 2000 ; 49 (2). 251-265
19. Kim S, Oh JS, Oh S Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. WI: Milwaukee ; 2007: 1-15.
20. Surowiecki J The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and nations. New York: Little, Brown ; 2004 :
21. Nam KK, Ackerman MS, Adamic LA. Questions in, knowledge in?: A study of Naver's question answering community. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems ; 2009 Boston, MA ; 2009. 779.
22. Oh S. The characteristics and motivations of health answerers in social Q&A. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2012 ; 63 (3). 543-557
23. Lou J, Fang Y, Lim KH, Peng JZ. Contributing high quantity and quality knowledge contribution. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2013 ; 64 (2). 356-371
24. Morris MR, Teevan J, Panovich K. What do people ask their social networks, and why?: A survey study of status message Q&A behavior. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems ; 2010 1739 Atlanta, GA ; 2010 1739..
25. Shah C, Oh S, Oh JS. Research agenda for social Q&A. Library & Information Science Research. 2009 ; 31 (4). 205-209
26. Cool C, Belkin NJ, Frieder O, Kantor P. Characteristics of texts affecting relevance judgments. Proceedings of the 14th National Online Meeting ; 1993 ; 1993. 77.
27. Saracevic T. Relevance: A review of and a framework for the thinking on the notion of information science. Journal of American Society for Information Science. 1975 ; 26 (6). 321-343
28. Barry CL, Schamber L. Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: A cross-situational comparison. Information Processing & Management. 1998 ; 34 (2/3). 219-236
29. Taylor A. User relevance criteria choices and the information search process. Information Processing & Management. 2012 ; 48 (1). 136-153
30. Hung TY, Zoeller C, Lyon S Relevance judgments for image retrieval in the field of journalism: A pilot study. Berlin: Springer ; 2005: 72-80.
31. Hamid RA, Thom JA. Criteria that have an effect on users while making image relevance judgments. Proceedings of the fifteenth Australasian document computing symposium ; 2010 Melbourne ; 2010. 76.
32. Laplante A. Users' relevance criteria in music retrieval in everyday life: An exploratory study. Proceedings of the eleventh International Society for Music Information Retrieval conference ; 2010 Utrecht ; 2010. 601.
33. Alonso O, Mizzaro S. Relevance criteria for e-commerce: A crowdsourcing-based experimental analysis. Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval ; 2009 Boston, MA ; 2009. 760.
34. Panovich K, Miller R, Karger D. Tie strength in question & answer on social network sites. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work ; 2012 Seattle, WA ; 2012. 1057.
35. Kim S, Oh S. Users relevance criteria for evaluating answers in a social Q&A site. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2009 ; 60 (4). 716-727
36. WorrallAOhS. The place of health information and socio-emotional support in social questioning and answering. Information Research2013; 18(3), http://www.informationr.net/ir/18-3/paper587.html ( accessed September 2013).
37. Kim S, Oh S, Oh JS Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. OH: Columbus ; 2008 :
38. Arai K, Handayani AN. Predicting quality of answer in collaborative Q&A community. International Journal of Advanced Research in Artificial Intelligence. 2013 ; 2 (3). 21-25
39. Cai Y, Chakravarthy S. Improving answer quality prediction in Q&A social networks by leveraging temporal features. Proceedings of International Journal of Next-Generation Computing. 2013 ;:
40. Harper FM, Raban D, Rafaeli S, Konstan JA. Predictors of answer quality in online Q&A sites. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems ; 2008 Florence ; 2008. 865.
41. Jeon GYJ, Kim YM, Chen Y. Re-examining price as a predictor of answer quality in an online Q&A site. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems ; 2010 Atlanta, GA ; 2010. 325.
42. Liu Y, Bian J, Agichtein E. Predicting information seeker satisfaction in community question answering. Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval ; 2008 Singapore ; 2008. 483.
43. Shah C, Pomerantz J. Evaluating and predicting answer quality in community QA. Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval ; 2010 Geneva ; 2010. 411.
44. Li F, Gao Y, Zhou S, Si X, Dai D. Deceptive answer prediction with user preference graph. Proceedings of the 51st annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics ; 2013 Sofia ; 2013. 1723.
45. Chua AYK, Banerjee S. A comparison of quality, speed, scope and usability between English and Chinese CQAs. IAENG International Journal of Computer Science. 2013 ; 40 (2). 53-61
46. Chua AYK, Banerjee S. So fast so good: An analysis of answer quality and answer speed in community question-answering sites. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2013 ; 64 (10). 2058-2068
47. Foley M. Instant messaging reference in an academic library: A case study. College and Research Libraries. 2002 ; 63 (1). 36-45
48. GrossMMcClureC. Assessing quality in digital reference services site visit reports. Information Use Management and Policy Institute, Florida State University, http://dlis.dos.state.fl.us/bld/ResearchOffice/VRD.StLibFLRpt.Sept29.doc
49. GrossMMcClureC. Assessing quality in digital reference services: Overview of key literature on digital reference. Information Use Management and Policy Institute, Florida State University, http://dlis.dos.state.fl.us/bld/ResearchOffice/VRDphaseII.LitReview.doc
50. KaskeNArnoldJ. An unobtrusive evaluation of online real time library reference services. In: American Library Association, annual conference, Atlanta, GA, http://www.lib.umd.edu/groups/digref/784kaskearnoldunobtrusive.html
51. Pomerantz J, Luo L, McClure CR. Peer review of chat reference transcripts: Approaches and strategies. Library & Information Science Research. 2006 ; 28 (1). 24-48
52. Shachaf P, Horowitz SM. Virtual reference service evaluation: Adherence to RUSA behavioral guidelines and IFLA digital reference guidelines. Library & Information Science Research. 2008 ; 30 (2). 122-137
53. White MD, Abels EG, Kaske N. Evaluation of chat reference service quality. D-Lib Magazine. 2003 ; 9 (2). 1-13
54. Harper FM, Moy D, Konstan JA. Facts or friends? Distinguishing informational and conversational questions in social Q&A sites. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems ; 2009 Boston, MA ; 2009. 759.
55. Choi E, Kitzie V, Shah C. Developing a typology of online Q&A models and recommending the right model for each question type. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology ; 2012 Baltimore, MD ; 2012. 1.
56. Duff WM, Johnson CA. A virtual expression of need: An analysis of e-mail reference questions. American Archivist. 2001 ; 64 (1). 43-60
57. HarperFMWeinbergJLogieJKonstanJA. Question types in social Q&A sites. First Monday15(7), http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2913
58. Lee IJ. Do virtual reference librarians dream of digital reference questions?: A qualitative and quantitative analysis of email and chat reference. Australian Academic & Research Libraries. 2004 ; 35 (2). 95-109
59. Borlund P. The concept of relevance in IR. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2003 ; 54 (10). 913-925
60. Froehlich TJ. 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). 124-134
61. Schamber L. Relevance and information behavior. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. 1994 ; 29: 3-48
62. Barry CL. User-defined relevance criteria: An exploratory study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 1994 ; 45 (3). 149-159
63. Hjørland B. The foundation of the concept of relevance. Journal of the American Society of Information Science and Technology. 2010 ; 61 (2). 217-237
64. Saracevic T. The stratified model of information retrieval interaction: Extension and applications. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science. 1997 ; 34: 313-327
65. Bernhard D, Gurevych I. Answering learners' questions by retrieving question paraphrases from social Q&A sites. Proceedings of the 3rd workshop on innovative use of NLP for building educational applications in conjunction with ACL ; 2008 Columbus, OH ; 2008. 44.
66. Chen Y, Ho T, Kim Y. Knowledge market design: A field experiment at Google Answers. Journal of Public Economics Theory. 2008 ; 12 (4). 641-664
67. Kitzie V, Shah C. Faster, better, or both? Looking at both sides of the online question and answering coin. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology ; 2011 New Orleans, LA ; 2011. 1.
68. Naaman M, Boase J, Lai C. Is it really about me? Message content in social awareness streams. Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work ; 2010 Savannah, GA ; 2010. 189.