Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Supporting the Process - Adapting Search Systems To Search Stages (ECIL15)

536 views

Published on

Presentation at the European Conference on Information Literacy (ECIL) 2015. Tallin University, Tallinn, Estonia.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Supporting the Process - Adapting Search Systems To Search Stages (ECIL15)

  1. 1. Hugo Huurdeman, Jaap Kamps University of Amsterdam huurdeman@uva.nl, kamps@uva.nl Presentation at ECIL 2015, Tallinn Supporting the Process
 Adapting Search Systems to Search Stages
  2. 2. Introduction • Search engines • indispensable tools for 
 information-related tasks • “89 percent of college student information searches begin with 
 a search engine” [OCLC05] • Widely varying context of use • information literacy searchers varies • tasks range from simple to complex • Complex tasks: multiple stages Search • not necessarily supported by search engines
  3. 3. The concept of ‘Task-sharing’ • We look at the concept of task- sharing (Beaulieu, 2000) • Both user and system playing active and passive roles in performing tasks • How should we design web search systems to better facilitate task- sharing between user and search system? • context: domain novice in research- based tasks user system task
  4. 4. 1. Process Models and the Conceptual Implications for Search Support IL perspective
  5. 5. 1.1 Information Literacy • information literacy [Bawden01,Doyle94,,Virkus03] • ability to “recognize when information is needed” & “to locate, evaluate and use” information effectively [ACRL00] • ‘skills-based literacy’ [Lloyd10] • equated with abilities and information skills • ‘complex phenomenon’ [Lloyd10] • which acts as a catalyst for learning • Various process models: • Kuhlthau’s ISP model [Kuhlthau91] • Big Six Model [Eisenberg&Berkowitz90] • Research Process Model [Stripling&Pitts88] information search information
 seeking information 
 behavior [Wilson99]
  6. 6. 1.2 Kuhlthau: Information Search Process [1991]+uncertainty- feelings thoughts actions vague focused seeking general information (exploring) seeking pertinent information (documenting) uncertainty optimism confusion clarity confidence (dis)satisfaction doubt direction FormulationInitiation Selection Exploration Collection Presentation
  7. 7. 1.2 Big Six Model [Eisenberg/Berkowitz1990] • Level 1: Process approach to solving information problems • General problem-solving process • Level 2: The Big Six Skills “Unified set of information and technology skills” • six skills necessary to solve information problems • Level 3: Components of the Big Six Skills • ‘series of questions that students can learn to ask and answer’ Use of information Task definition Inf.seeking strategies Location & access Synthesis Evaluation “Each stage necessary for resolution of a problem, but not necessarily linear” “General approach to information problem-solving consisting of six logical steps or stages”
  8. 8. 1.4 Summary • Higher level aspects of information seeking and problem-solving • Information skills are not “isolated incidents”, but “connected activities” • Essential: • providing support at appropriate moments of the inf. seeking (task) process • allowing reflexive understanding of one’s own process • To what extent do current search systems meet these needs? user system task process
  9. 9. 2. Search Support for Stages of 
 Complex Tasks System perspective
  10. 10. 2.1 Past approaches • Dialogue systems • Various systems in the 1980s and early 1990s also explicitly supported “all stages of task performance”
 [Ingwersen05] • Later IR systems: • increasingly streamlined • focusing on query formulation and results list inspection • leaving it to the user to perform the task itself [Oddy77] [Pejtersen89]
  11. 11. 2.2 Present approaches to Web search • Google, Bing, Yahoo… • “Streamlined” approaches • Personalization • “tailoring search results to an individual’s interests” [Hearst09] • Based on • explicit preferences • implicit preferences
  12. 12. 2.3 Other paradigms • Exploratory Search: support for open- ended tasks [Marchionini06] • Sensemaking: support for analysis and synthesis [Hearst09] [Yee03] [Hearst13] • [Marchionini06]
  13. 13. [Hearst13]
  14. 14. Few features have made it to the general search engines, however
  15. 15. 2.4 Limitations in search support • Online search systems still do 
 not provide explicit support for complex tasks • Relevant results for query and context, not necessarily relevant for stage of search • Personalization does not support learning and construction within tasks • Hence, there is still limited task sharing between user and system • similar to Beaulieu’s statement in 2001 user system task
  16. 16. system user 2.5 Towards more supportive systems • Increase of support needed for the information seeking process • How can we design more supportive systems? task
  17. 17. 3. Reconciling Perspectives: Towards Stage-Aware Systems
  18. 18. search system 3.1 Towards stage-aware systems complex information seeking task interaction cycle proposed macro-
 level support current micro-
 level support interaction cycle interaction cycle interaction cycle • Different strategies for stage-aware systems: • stage-based adaptation • stage-based instruction
  19. 19. 3.2.1 Adapt system based on stages (content) • Adaptively introduce content • e.g. based on Kuhlthau’s ISP model complex information seeking task show introductory sources show specific sources do not “overwhelm” users search system
  20. 20. Introductory Introductory
  21. 21. Specific
  22. 22. 3.2.2 Adapt system based on stages (features) • Adaptively introduce functionality complex information seeking task sensemaking featuresexploratory search features search suggestions facets, word clouds, .. histories, saved items, organize, note-taking, .. search system
  23. 23. • Interactive Social Book Search track at CLEF • [Gäde, Hall, Huurdeman, Kamps, Koolen, Skov, Toms, Walsh, 2015] • Experimental multistage interface for book search: 3 panels • Aim: support different stages in the search process: browse, search & review • Inspired by various models of the information seeking process [Vakkari01,Kuhlthau03] Multistage interface: search Multistage interface: browse Multistage interface: review 3.2.2 Example
  24. 24. 3.3 (2) Provide instruction based on stages • ISP & Big6: importance of “being aware” of one’s information seeking process • Ask for reflection • Provide feedback • Potential integration in VLEs Use of information Inf.seeking strategies Location & access Synthesis Evaluation Task definition
  25. 25. 3.3 Provide instruction based on stages Use of information Inf.seeking strategies Location & access Synthesis Evaluation Task definition Explicitly ask to 
 weigh criteria Introduce and support 
 notetaking and organisation Show statistics of the process effectivity, efficiency comparisons with others Articulate understanding of
 information problem and needs instructions for 
 search engine use [MoravejiEtAl11] [BatemanEtAl12]
  26. 26. Requirements • Not straightforward: • detection current stage of a user • manual • automatic • complex in practice, some evidence may be found in interaction patterns [Vakkari01,10] • ongoing research
  27. 27. 4. Discussion and Conclusion
  28. 28. Towards process support • Past systems: explicit 
 “dialog”[Ingwersen05] • current systems: more limited interaction • Introducing process 
 support may have 
 positive effects • evidence in various 
 studies, e.g. [WaltonEtAl11] • Not easy to implement • should be flexible system user task • no ‘tick the box’ approach [Johnston&Webber03] • appropriate support
  29. 29. Reflections and future work • Ongoing work and experiments: • detecting search stages,‘guidance’ of searchers • “multistage” interfaces • in search & research settings (WebART) • Approach could have benefits for education • e.g. better insights into search process of students • learn how they perform and allow educators 
 to perform interventions if needed Search Prefocus Search Postfocus Search Focus formulation
  30. 30. References (1/3) • [ACRL00] American Library Association and Association for College and Research Libraries: Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (2000) • [BatemanEtAl12] Bateman, S., Teevan, J., White, R.W.: The Search Dashboard: How Reflection and Comparison Impact Search Behavior. In: Proceedings CHI. pp. 1785– 1794, 2012. • [Bawden01] Bawden, D.: Information and Digital Literacies: A Review of Concepts. J.Doc. 57(2), 218-259 (2001) • [Beaulieu00] Beaulieu, M.: Interaction in Information Searching and Retrieval. J.Doc. 56(4), 431-439 (2000) • [Doyle94] Doyle, C.S.: Information Literacy in an Information Society: A Concept for the Information Age. Information Resources Publications, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY (Jun 1994) • [Eisenberg&Berkowitz90] Eisenberg, M.B., Berkowitz, R.: (1990), Information-Problem Solving: The Big Six Skills Approach to Library & Information Skills Instruction. Norwood: Ablex. Ablex, Norwood (1990) • [GadeEtAl15] Gäde, M., Hall, M., Huurdeman, H., Kamps, J., Koolen, M., Skov, M., Toms, E., Walsh, D.: Overview of the INEX 2015 Interactive Social Book Search Track. In: CLEF 2015 Online Working Notes. CEUR (2015)
  31. 31. References (2/3) • [Hearst09] M. A. Hearst. Search user interfaces. Cambridge University Press, 2009. • [Ingwersen05] Ingwersen, P., & Järvelin, K. (2005). The Turn - Integration of Information Seeking and Retrieval in Context. Dordrecht: Springer. • [Johnston&Webber03] Johnston, B., & Webber, S. (2003). Information Literacy in Higher Education: A review and case study. Studies in Higher Education, 28(3), 335– 352. • [Lloyd10] Lloyd, A. (ed.) Information Literacy Landscapes, pp. 35-70. Chandos Infor- mation Professional Series, Chandos Publishing (2010) • [Kuhlthau91] C. C. Kuhlthau. Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user’s perspective. JASIS, 42:361–371, 1991. • [Marchionini06] G. Marchionini. Exploratory search: from finding to understanding. CACM, 49(4):41–46, 2006.
  32. 32. References (3/3) • [MoravejiEtAl11] Moraveji, N., Russell, D., Bien, J., Mease, D.: Measuring Improvement in User Search Performance Resulting from Optimal Search Tips. In: Proceedings SIGIR. pp. 355–364. 2011. • [Vakkari01] P. Vakkari. A theory of the task-based information retrieval process: a summary and generalisation of a longitudinal study. Journal of Documentation, 57:44– 60, 2001. • [Vakkari10] P. Vakkari. Exploratory Searching as Conceptual Exploration. In: Proceedings HCIR. pp. 24-27 (2010) • [WaltonEtAl11] Walton, G., Hepworth, M.:A Longitudinal Study of Changes in Learners’ Cognitive States During and Following an Information Literacy Teaching Intervention. J. Doc. 67(3), 449–479 (2011) • [White09] R. W. White and R. A. Roth. Exploratory search: Beyond the query-response paradigm. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services, 1:1– 98, 2009. • [Wilson99] T. D. Wilson. Models in information behaviour research. Journal of Documentation, 55:249–270, 1999.
  33. 33. Hugo Huurdeman, Jaap Kamps University of Amsterdam huurdeman@uva.nl, kamps@uva.nl Presentation at ECIL 2015, Tallinn Supporting the Process
 Adapting Search Systems to Search Stages

×