User Perspectives on Relevance Criteria: A Comparison among Relevant, Partially Relevant, and Not-Relevant Judgments

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105087
Title:
User Perspectives on Relevance Criteria: A Comparison among Relevant, Partially Relevant, and Not-Relevant Judgments
Author:
Maglaughlin, Kelly L.; Sonnenwald, Diane H.
Citation:
User Perspectives on Relevance Criteria: A Comparison among Relevant, Partially Relevant, and Not-Relevant Judgments 2002-03, 53(5):327-342 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
Publisher:
Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Journal:
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology
Issue Date:
Mar-2002
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105087
Submitted date:
2006-08-18
Abstract:
This study investigates the use of criteria to assess relevant, partially relevant and not relevant documents. Each study participant identified passages within 20 document representations that were used in making relevance judgments, judged each document representation as a whole to be relevant, partially relevant or not relevant to their information need, and explained their decisions in an interview. Analysis revealed 29 criteria, discussed positively and negatively, used by the participants when selecting passages that contributed or detracted from a document's relevance. These criteria can be grouped into 6 categories: author, abstract, content, full text, journal or publisher and personal. Results indicate that multiple criteria are used when making relevant, partially relevant and not relevant judgments. Additionally, most criteria can have both a positive or negative contribution to the relevance of a document. The criteria most frequently mentioned by study participants in this study was content, followed by criteria concerning the full text document. These findings may have implications for relevance feedback in information retrieval systems, suggesting that users give relevance feedback using multiple criteria and indicate positive and negative criteria contributions. Systems designers may want to focus on supporting content criteria followed by full text criteria as this may provide the greatest cost benefit.
Type:
Journal Article (Paginated)
Language:
en
Keywords:
Information Retrieval; Information Seeking Behaviors
Local subject classification:
Searching; Search term selection; Professional librarian

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorMaglaughlin, Kelly L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSonnenwald, Diane H.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-08-18T00:00:01Z-
dc.date.available2010-06-18T23:19:03Z-
dc.date.issued2002-03en_US
dc.date.submitted2006-08-18en_US
dc.identifier.citationUser Perspectives on Relevance Criteria: A Comparison among Relevant, Partially Relevant, and Not-Relevant Judgments 2002-03, 53(5):327-342 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technologyen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/105087-
dc.description.abstractThis study investigates the use of criteria to assess relevant, partially relevant and not relevant documents. Each study participant identified passages within 20 document representations that were used in making relevance judgments, judged each document representation as a whole to be relevant, partially relevant or not relevant to their information need, and explained their decisions in an interview. Analysis revealed 29 criteria, discussed positively and negatively, used by the participants when selecting passages that contributed or detracted from a document's relevance. These criteria can be grouped into 6 categories: author, abstract, content, full text, journal or publisher and personal. Results indicate that multiple criteria are used when making relevant, partially relevant and not relevant judgments. Additionally, most criteria can have both a positive or negative contribution to the relevance of a document. The criteria most frequently mentioned by study participants in this study was content, followed by criteria concerning the full text document. These findings may have implications for relevance feedback in information retrieval systems, suggesting that users give relevance feedback using multiple criteria and indicate positive and negative criteria contributions. Systems designers may want to focus on supporting content criteria followed by full text criteria as this may provide the greatest cost benefit.en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subjectInformation Retrievalen_US
dc.subjectInformation Seeking Behaviorsen_US
dc.subject.otherSearchingen_US
dc.subject.otherSearch term selectionen_US
dc.subject.otherProfessional librarianen_US
dc.titleUser Perspectives on Relevance Criteria: A Comparison among Relevant, Partially Relevant, and Not-Relevant Judgmentsen_US
dc.typeJournal Article (Paginated)en_US
dc.identifier.journalJournal of the American Society for Information Science and Technologyen_US
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.