Display time as implicit feedback: Understanding task effects

Proceedings of Sheffield SIGIR - Twenty-Seventh Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 377-384

  Kelly, Diane ^a   Belkin, Nicholas J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Display time; Implicit feedback; Information seeking context; Personalization; Tailored retrieval; Task; User modeling; User profiling

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; DATABASE SYSTEMS; ONLINE SYSTEMS; OPTIMIZATION; PROBLEM SOLVING; SERVERS; WEB BROWSERS;

DISPLAY TIME; IMPLICIT FEEDBACK; INFORMATION-SEEKING CONTEXT; USER MODELING; USER PROFILING;

FEEDBACK;

EID: 8644246883     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. Borlund, P. & Ingwersen, P. (2000). The development of a method for evaluating interactive information retrieval systems. Journal of Documentation, 53(3), 225-250.
2. Bystrom, K. (2002). Information and information sources in tasks of varying complexity. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, 581-591.
3. Bystrom, K., & Jarvelin, K. (1995). Task complexity affects information seeking and use. Information Processing & Management, 31(2), 191-213.
4. th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, 33-40.
5. Cooper, M. D., & Chen, H.-M. (2001). Predicting the relevance of a library catalog search. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 52(10), 813-827.
6. Cooper, W. S. (1973). On selecting a measure of retrieval effectiveness, part I: The "subjective" philosophy of evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24, 87-100.
7. Haas, S. W., & Grams, E. S. (2000). Readers, authors and page structure: A discussion of four questions arising from a content analysis of web pages. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(2), 181-192.
8. Kelly, D., & Belkin, N. J. (2002). A longitudinal, naturalistic study of reading behavior as implicit feedback: Preliminary findings. (Technical Report #02-100), Rutgers University, SCILS Information Interaction Lab.
9. Kelly, D., & Teevan, J. (2003). Implicit feedback for inferring user preference: A bibliography. SIGIR Forum 37(2), 18-28.
10. Kim, J., Oard, D. W., & Romanik, K. (2000). Using implicit feedback for user modeling in internet and intranet searching. University of Maryland CLIS Technical Report.
11. McDonnell, J., Koehler, W., & Carroll, B. (2000). Cataloging challenges in an area studies virtual library catalog (ASVLC): Results of a case study. Journal of Internet Cataloging, 2(2), 15-42.
12. Miller, B. N., Riedl, J. T., & Konstan, J. A. (2003). GroupLens for Usenet: Experiences in applying collaborative filtering to a social information system. In C. Lueg & D. Fisher (Eds.) From Usenet to CoWebs: Interacting With Social Information Spaces (pp. 206-231), London: Springer Press.
13. Morita, M., & Shinoda, Y. (1994). Information filtering based on user behavior analysis and best match text retrieval. In Proceedings of SIGIR '94, 272-281.
14. th Annual ASIST Conference, 38-45.
15. Rafter, R., & Smyth, B. (2001). Passive profiling from server logs in an online recruitment environment. In Proceedings of the IJCAI Workshop on Intelligent Techniques for Web Personalization, 35-41.
16. Tang, R., Shaw, M., & Vevea, J. L. (1999). Towards the identification of the optimal number of relevance categories. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(3), 254-264.
17. Vakkari, P. (1999). Task complexity, problem structure and information actions: Integrating studies on information seeking and retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 35, 819-837.
18. Vakkari, P. (2001). A theory of the task-based information retrieval. Journal of Documentation, 57(1), 44-60.
19. Vakkari, P. (2003). Task-based information searching. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 37, 413-464.
20. White, R. W., Ruthven, I., & Jose, J. M. (2002). Finding relevant documents using top ranking sentences: An evaluation of two alternative schemes. In Proceedings of SIGIR '02, 57-64.
21. Wilson, P. (1973). Situational relevance. Information Storage and Retrieval, 9, 457-469.