This document discusses using Anderson and Krathwohl's taxonomy of cognitive learning to model online searching behavior. The researchers conducted a laboratory experiment with 72 participants performing 426 searching tasks classified according to the taxonomy's six categories (remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating). Results showed applying and analyzing tasks generally required the most search effort. Interestingly, the lowest two categories (remembering and understanding) exhibited similar searching characteristics to the highest two categories (evaluating and creating). This suggests searchers rely primarily on internal knowledge for higher-level needs and use search primarily for fact-checking. Overall, results indicate a learning theory may better describe the information searching process than problem solving or decision making paradigms.
The document discusses educational data mining and a proposed Student-Staff-Tutor (SSTT) framework. It summarizes the following:
1) Educational data mining uses techniques like machine learning, statistics and data mining to analyze educational data to better understand the learning process and student performance.
2) The SSTT framework models relationships between students, staff, and tutors and how these interactions impact student learning and outcomes.
3) An experiment applies clustering and social network analysis to educational data to analyze student knowledge distribution and interactions under the SSTT framework. The results found tutors play an important role in strengthening student-staff relationships and improving student performance.
Data Mining for Education
Ryan S.J.d. Baker, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
rsbaker@cmu.edu
Article to appear as
Baker, R.S.J.d. (in press) Data Mining for Education. To appear in McGaw, B., Peterson, P.,
Baker, E. (Eds.) International Encyclopedia of Education (3rd edition). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
This is a pre-print draft. Final article may involve minor changes and different formatting.
The document summarizes a study that examined the psychometric properties of a shortened version of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) for junior high school students. The study involved two samples of students in Singapore. An initial exploratory factor analysis identified issues with some items, which were removed. A confirmatory factor analysis on the remaining items with a second sample supported a five-factor model consisting of motivational beliefs and cognitive/self-regulation strategies scales. Tests for validity and invariance across gender also supported the modified measurement model of the MSLQ for assessing motivation and learning strategies of junior high students.
This document discusses a study that investigated how individual differences in thinking dispositions may affect student learning from multiple-document science inquiry tasks. Middle school students were given documents about global temperature patterns and asked to understand how and why recent patterns differ from the past. Understanding was assessed through an essay and verification tasks. The study found that reading skills and commitment to logic, evidence, and reasoning uniquely predicted understanding, even after accounting for prior knowledge and interest. This suggests these thinking dispositions and reading ability independently influence how students learn from multiple documents during science inquiries.
In the library sciences, information seeking has long been recognized as a collaborative activity, and recent work has attempted to model group information seeking behavior. Until recently, technological support for group-based information seeking has been limited to collaborative filtering and "social search" applications. In the past two years, however, a new kind of technologically-mediated collaborative search has been demonstrated in systems such as SearchTogether and Cerchiamo. This approach is more closely grounded in the library science interpretation of collaboration: rather than inferring commonality of interest through similarity of queries (social search), the new approach assumes an explicitly-shared information need for a group. This allows the system to focus on mediating the collaboration rather than detecting its presence. In this talk, we describe a model that captures both user behavior and system architecture, describe its relationship to other models of information seeking, and use it to classify existing multi-user search systems. We also describe implications this model has for design and evaluation of new collaborative information seeking systems.
Talk presented at NIST on October 22, 2009.
Learning Relations from Social Tagging DataHang Dong
An interesting research direction is to discover structured knowledge from user generated data. Our work aims to find relations among social tags and organise them into hierarchies so as to better support discovery and search for online users. We cast relation discovery in this context to a binary classification problem in supervised learning. This approach takes as input features of two tags extracted using probabilistic topic modelling, and predicts whether a broader-narrower relation holds between them. Experiments were conducted using two large, real-world datasets, the Bibsonomy dataset which is used to extract tags and their features, and the DBpedia dataset which is used as the ground truth. Three sets of features were designed and extracted based on topic distri- butions, similarity and probabilistic associations. Evaluation results with respect to the ground truth demonstrate that our method outperforms existing ones based on various features and heuristics. Future studies are suggested to study the Knowledge Base Enrichment from folksonomies and deep neural network approaches to process tagging data.
In the discovery with models method identification relationships among students behaviors and characteristics or contextual variables are key applications.
This study aimed to provide validity evidence for the Classroom Appraisal of Resources and Demands (CARD) measure. The CARD measures teacher stress by examining their subjective experience of classroom demands and the resources provided by the school. The study found empirical support for the factor structure of the CARD. It also found evidence of construct and concurrent validity by correlating CARD scores with other measures of teacher well-being, health, efficacy, attitudes and burnout symptoms. The CARD was found to be sensitive to differences between teachers in their perceptions of demands and resources within the same school.
The document discusses educational data mining and a proposed Student-Staff-Tutor (SSTT) framework. It summarizes the following:
1) Educational data mining uses techniques like machine learning, statistics and data mining to analyze educational data to better understand the learning process and student performance.
2) The SSTT framework models relationships between students, staff, and tutors and how these interactions impact student learning and outcomes.
3) An experiment applies clustering and social network analysis to educational data to analyze student knowledge distribution and interactions under the SSTT framework. The results found tutors play an important role in strengthening student-staff relationships and improving student performance.
Data Mining for Education
Ryan S.J.d. Baker, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
rsbaker@cmu.edu
Article to appear as
Baker, R.S.J.d. (in press) Data Mining for Education. To appear in McGaw, B., Peterson, P.,
Baker, E. (Eds.) International Encyclopedia of Education (3rd edition). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
This is a pre-print draft. Final article may involve minor changes and different formatting.
The document summarizes a study that examined the psychometric properties of a shortened version of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) for junior high school students. The study involved two samples of students in Singapore. An initial exploratory factor analysis identified issues with some items, which were removed. A confirmatory factor analysis on the remaining items with a second sample supported a five-factor model consisting of motivational beliefs and cognitive/self-regulation strategies scales. Tests for validity and invariance across gender also supported the modified measurement model of the MSLQ for assessing motivation and learning strategies of junior high students.
This document discusses a study that investigated how individual differences in thinking dispositions may affect student learning from multiple-document science inquiry tasks. Middle school students were given documents about global temperature patterns and asked to understand how and why recent patterns differ from the past. Understanding was assessed through an essay and verification tasks. The study found that reading skills and commitment to logic, evidence, and reasoning uniquely predicted understanding, even after accounting for prior knowledge and interest. This suggests these thinking dispositions and reading ability independently influence how students learn from multiple documents during science inquiries.
In the library sciences, information seeking has long been recognized as a collaborative activity, and recent work has attempted to model group information seeking behavior. Until recently, technological support for group-based information seeking has been limited to collaborative filtering and "social search" applications. In the past two years, however, a new kind of technologically-mediated collaborative search has been demonstrated in systems such as SearchTogether and Cerchiamo. This approach is more closely grounded in the library science interpretation of collaboration: rather than inferring commonality of interest through similarity of queries (social search), the new approach assumes an explicitly-shared information need for a group. This allows the system to focus on mediating the collaboration rather than detecting its presence. In this talk, we describe a model that captures both user behavior and system architecture, describe its relationship to other models of information seeking, and use it to classify existing multi-user search systems. We also describe implications this model has for design and evaluation of new collaborative information seeking systems.
Talk presented at NIST on October 22, 2009.
Learning Relations from Social Tagging DataHang Dong
An interesting research direction is to discover structured knowledge from user generated data. Our work aims to find relations among social tags and organise them into hierarchies so as to better support discovery and search for online users. We cast relation discovery in this context to a binary classification problem in supervised learning. This approach takes as input features of two tags extracted using probabilistic topic modelling, and predicts whether a broader-narrower relation holds between them. Experiments were conducted using two large, real-world datasets, the Bibsonomy dataset which is used to extract tags and their features, and the DBpedia dataset which is used as the ground truth. Three sets of features were designed and extracted based on topic distri- butions, similarity and probabilistic associations. Evaluation results with respect to the ground truth demonstrate that our method outperforms existing ones based on various features and heuristics. Future studies are suggested to study the Knowledge Base Enrichment from folksonomies and deep neural network approaches to process tagging data.
In the discovery with models method identification relationships among students behaviors and characteristics or contextual variables are key applications.
This study aimed to provide validity evidence for the Classroom Appraisal of Resources and Demands (CARD) measure. The CARD measures teacher stress by examining their subjective experience of classroom demands and the resources provided by the school. The study found empirical support for the factor structure of the CARD. It also found evidence of construct and concurrent validity by correlating CARD scores with other measures of teacher well-being, health, efficacy, attitudes and burnout symptoms. The CARD was found to be sensitive to differences between teachers in their perceptions of demands and resources within the same school.
This article discusses assessment methods used by middle school science teachers. It asserts that:
1) A teacher's views on knowledge and learning (i.e. objectivism vs. constructivism) influence their approach to assessment.
2) Current teacher assessment practices may not validly measure student understanding, instead rewarding task completion.
3) A major threat to assessment validity is whether students and teachers can construct the intended meanings from tasks and responses.
Preguntas significativas en Investigación Educación MatemáticaAlejandra Marin Rios
This editorial discusses what makes a research question significant in mathematics education research. It argues that significant questions address instructional problems experienced by multiple teachers, focus on important mathematical concepts, and aim to understand how and why proposed solutions work. The editorial also discusses how to clearly communicate the significance of a research question through precise statement, justification based on prior research, and coherent connection to methods.
1) The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between visual static models and students' written solutions to fraction problems using a large sample of student work.
2) The results indicate that common student errors relate to how students interpret the given model or their own model of the situation. Students' flexibility with visual models is related to successful written solutions.
3) Researchers hypothesize that exposure to varied mathematical representations influences students' ability to flexibly use static visual representations. Students need a solid understanding of real-world situations to successfully create and interpret visual models.
A study of undergraduate physics students’ understanding of heat conduction b...Putry QueenBee
This study examined undergraduate physics students' mental models of heat conduction through clinical interviews. The researchers developed a framework to represent students' mental models that combines their ontological beliefs about heat and the process analogies they use to explain heat conduction. Five process analogies and three ontological beliefs were identified. The relationships between students' mental models, predictions, and scientific understanding were also examined. While scientifically accepted mental models were more likely to lead to correct predictions, incorrect predictions did not necessarily mean the underlying mental model was unscientific. The study aimed to advance understanding of how students learn and reason about heat transfer processes.
Effect of Multitasking on GPA - Research PaperDivya Kothari
This document describes a study examining the impact of internet and communication technology (ICT) multitasking on graduate students' grade point averages (GPAs). The researchers conducted a quantitative survey of 62 graduate students, measuring time spent on Facebook, email, texting, and non-school online searches while studying. They found Facebook, texting, and non-school searches negatively correlated with GPA, while email showed a weak positive correlation. Qualitative interviews revealed students felt multitasking harmed their academic performance. The study aimed to understand the effects of ICT multitasking on students and determine if findings were generalizable to other student populations.
11.the efficacy of homogeneous groups in enhancing individual learningAlexander Decker
This document summarizes a study that analyzed the effects of homogeneous versus heterogeneous group composition on individual student learning in a computer science course. The study found that making groups homogeneous, with students of similar academic performance levels in the same group, led to significantly better individual student performance on assessments compared to when groups were heterogeneous. A survey also found that students reported higher levels of enjoyment, deeper understanding, and equal contribution to group work when in homogeneous compared to heterogeneous groups. The document discusses relevant literature on collaborative learning and factors that influence group composition and performance. It describes the methodology used in the study, which analyzed assessment results from students over three years while varying the type of group composition.
The efficacy of homogeneous groups in enhancing individual learningAlexander Decker
This document summarizes a study that examined the impact of homogeneous versus heterogeneous group composition on individual student learning in a computer science course. The study found that making groups homogenous based on prior performance led to a statistically significant improvement in individual student performance compared to heterogeneous groups. Specifically, students performed better and reported enjoying the learning process more when grouped with others at a similar ability level. However, some prior research has found heterogeneous groups can also be effective depending on how the groups are formed and activities tailored. The optimal group composition depends on the learning objectives and how group work is implemented and assessed.
Wilson's 1996 model of information behavior expanded on his 1981 model. The 1996 model explains why information seeking occurs in response to some needs more than others, why some information sources are used more, and how self-efficacy influences meeting information goals. The model includes theoretical concepts like stress/coping theory, risk/reward theory, and social learning theory. It represents a major revision that draws from various fields and makes it a richer source of hypotheses than the 1981 model.
1) Stereotyping of computer science as a male-dominated field has discouraged girls from pursuing related careers. Research shows using gaming to teach computing concepts at a young age and providing female mentors may help break down stereotypes.
2) Studies found that girls had lower self-efficacy and interest in computer science due to societal stereotypes. However, programs that used gaming to teach concepts and matched girls with STEM mentors were shown to increase girls' skills, knowledge of careers, and intentions to study STEM fields.
3) Research also found that using a female interface agent when teaching math and engineering concepts helped raise girls' self-efficacy, interest, and performance compared to groups without
Technological persuasive pedagogy a new way to persuade students in the compu...Alexander Decker
This document introduces a new pedagogical approach called "technological persuasive pedagogy" to more effectively persuade students in computer-based mathematics learning. It discusses prior models and theories of persuasion and identifies 16 principles that can be used to 1) improve negative attitudes, 2) increase positive attitudes, or 3) prevent declines in positive attitudes. The document outlines the content analysis method used to extract these principles from literature on persuasion in education. It describes coding and reliability testing of the principles to develop a codebook for applying them in computer-based mathematics classrooms.
The document discusses models of information seeking behavior and definitions. It provides an overview of several models:
1. Wilson's 1981 model proposes that information needs arise from basic physiological, cognitive, or affective needs, and that barriers related to personal, social, or environmental contexts can impede information seeking.
2. Dervin's 1983 sense-making theory focuses on how individuals make sense of information.
3. Ellis's 1989/1993 model outlines common information seeking strategies.
4. Kuhlthau's 1991 model describes stages of information seeking, from initial uncertainty to increased understanding.
5. Wilson's 1996 expanded model incorporates insights from other fields to provide a more comprehensive understanding of information behavior
This study examined how social-cognitive factors influence students' interest in research-related careers. The researchers hypothesized that a student's perception of their research environment would impact their research self-efficacy and outcome expectations, which would in turn influence their research interests and career goals. Ninety-nine undergraduate students completed questionnaires assessing these variables. Results found the research environment indirectly influenced interests through its effect on self-efficacy and outcomes expectations. Self-efficacy and outcomes expectations also indirectly impacted goals by influencing interests. This study suggests cognitions like self-efficacy that develop from the undergraduate research experience can shape career interests and decisions during this pivotal period.
THE INFLUENCE OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING COMMUNITIES ON RESEARCH LITERACY AND ...ijejournal
The current study investigates two Problem-Based Learning (PBL) processes that were carried out in two different Online Learning Communities of 62 pre-service teachers who took a Research Literacy course as a part of their academic obligation. The first one was combined with the moderator based learning
scaffoldings (OLC+M), and the other one with the social based learning scaffoldings (OLC+S). The study seeks to map the differences between these two OLCs in terms of Achievement Goal Motivation and Research Literacy skills as a result of the PBL intervention, and the correlation between these aspects as is expressed in each group. The findings indicated that PBL had a significant positive effect on AGM in both groups, while only the OLC+S showed the significant outperforming in some of the Research Literacy skills, as well as the positive correlation between them and the Mastery Approach component of AGM. The discussion raises possible interpretations of theoretical and practical relationships between Research Literacy skills in the educational field and motivational factors among adult students, as they are expressed in online communication environments.
Analysis of Media Graphs and Significant SenseAM Publications
This paper discusses aspects of interpretation of graphs including those related to the interface between
different contexts of interpretation. Particularly it is discussed the notion of Critical Sense as a skill to analyse data its
interrelations rather than simply accepting the initial impression given by the graph. We suggest that Critical Sense in
graphing can help readers to balance several aspects involved interpretation of media graphs in certain contexts. This
paper also presents initial findings from our analyses of study with student teachers interpreting media graphs. We
are concerned to study Critical Sense in student teachers as a way of helping us, and them, think about teaching and
learning graphing in ways that will support the development of Critical Sense.
System dynamics is a methodology for studying complex feedback systems over time. It involves identifying a problem, developing a hypothesis, building a computer simulation model, testing the model, devising alternative policies, and implementing solutions. Transactional distance in distance education can be modeled using system dynamics by representing the dynamic relationship between dialogue and structure over time, and how varying these rates can control transactional distance. System dynamics provides a way to study interrelated educational variables and their relationships over a period of time.
The document discusses Wilson's model of information behavior from 1981. [1] It proposes expanding the concept of information seeking to include other modes of behavior such as avoiding information. [2] Wilson defined information behavior as encompassing information seeking as well as unintentional, passive, and purposeful behaviors not involving seeking. [3] The model suggests that information seeking behavior arises from a need perceived by the user and may involve formal or informal sources to satisfy that need.
This document provides an overview of a proposed session at the 2008 American Educational Research Association conference on using student logs and other data to inform the design of dynamic visualizations for science learning. The session objectives are to explore data-driven approaches to designing interactive visualizations and establish their effectiveness. Seven studies will present strategies informed by analyzing student interaction data during learning with visualizations. The session will include an introduction, individual poster presentations from each study, and a discussion among presenters and attendees.
An investigation of_factors_influencing_student_use_of_technology_in_k-12_cla...Cathy Cavanaugh
The purpose of this research was to examine the effects of teachers’ characteristics,
school characteristics, and contextual characteristics on classroom
technology integration and teacher use of technology as mediators of student
use of technology. A research-based path model was designed and tested
based on data gathered from 732 teachers from 17 school districts and 107
different schools in the state of Florida. Results show that a teacher’s level
of education and experience teaching with technology positively and significantly
influence his/her use of technology. Teacher use of technology
strongly and positively explains classroom technology integration and
student use of technology. Further, how a teacher integrates technology
into the classroom explains how frequently students use technology in a
school setting. The findings provided significant evidence that the path
model is useful in explaining factors affecting student use of technology
and the relationships among the factors.
The World Testifies Of Data And Our Understanding Of It EssaySandy Harwell
The document discusses qualitative research methods. It defines qualitative research as exploring and describing phenomena through subjective and inductive strategies. Some key points made include:
- Qualitative research aims to answer questions about why and how things occur.
- There are three main purposes: exploratory, explanatory, and descriptive. Exploratory research discovers patterns in phenomena, while explanatory research identifies relationships shaping phenomena and descriptive research documents phenomena of interest.
- Qualitative research relies on non-experimental and phenomenological approaches to collect data through open-ended questions and observations.
This document provides an overview of qualitative research methods, including data collection and analysis. It discusses the key principles of qualitative inquiry, such as understanding multiple realities and natural contexts. Common sources of qualitative data are interviews, observations, and documents. The goal of analysis is to uncover themes and patterns to understand phenomena. Five common qualitative research designs are described: case study, phenomenology, ethnography, narrative research, and mixed methods. The document contrasts the qualitative paradigm with the quantitative paradigm.
This document provides an overview of descriptive research. Descriptive research aims to describe current phenomena and characteristics without manipulating variables. It answers questions like "what is" rather than "why". Common methods include surveys, interviews, and observations. Descriptive research is used to investigate topics like attitudes, activities, and relationships between variables. It seeks to accurately report existing conditions and identify problems or abnormalities.
This article discusses assessment methods used by middle school science teachers. It asserts that:
1) A teacher's views on knowledge and learning (i.e. objectivism vs. constructivism) influence their approach to assessment.
2) Current teacher assessment practices may not validly measure student understanding, instead rewarding task completion.
3) A major threat to assessment validity is whether students and teachers can construct the intended meanings from tasks and responses.
Preguntas significativas en Investigación Educación MatemáticaAlejandra Marin Rios
This editorial discusses what makes a research question significant in mathematics education research. It argues that significant questions address instructional problems experienced by multiple teachers, focus on important mathematical concepts, and aim to understand how and why proposed solutions work. The editorial also discusses how to clearly communicate the significance of a research question through precise statement, justification based on prior research, and coherent connection to methods.
1) The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between visual static models and students' written solutions to fraction problems using a large sample of student work.
2) The results indicate that common student errors relate to how students interpret the given model or their own model of the situation. Students' flexibility with visual models is related to successful written solutions.
3) Researchers hypothesize that exposure to varied mathematical representations influences students' ability to flexibly use static visual representations. Students need a solid understanding of real-world situations to successfully create and interpret visual models.
A study of undergraduate physics students’ understanding of heat conduction b...Putry QueenBee
This study examined undergraduate physics students' mental models of heat conduction through clinical interviews. The researchers developed a framework to represent students' mental models that combines their ontological beliefs about heat and the process analogies they use to explain heat conduction. Five process analogies and three ontological beliefs were identified. The relationships between students' mental models, predictions, and scientific understanding were also examined. While scientifically accepted mental models were more likely to lead to correct predictions, incorrect predictions did not necessarily mean the underlying mental model was unscientific. The study aimed to advance understanding of how students learn and reason about heat transfer processes.
Effect of Multitasking on GPA - Research PaperDivya Kothari
This document describes a study examining the impact of internet and communication technology (ICT) multitasking on graduate students' grade point averages (GPAs). The researchers conducted a quantitative survey of 62 graduate students, measuring time spent on Facebook, email, texting, and non-school online searches while studying. They found Facebook, texting, and non-school searches negatively correlated with GPA, while email showed a weak positive correlation. Qualitative interviews revealed students felt multitasking harmed their academic performance. The study aimed to understand the effects of ICT multitasking on students and determine if findings were generalizable to other student populations.
11.the efficacy of homogeneous groups in enhancing individual learningAlexander Decker
This document summarizes a study that analyzed the effects of homogeneous versus heterogeneous group composition on individual student learning in a computer science course. The study found that making groups homogeneous, with students of similar academic performance levels in the same group, led to significantly better individual student performance on assessments compared to when groups were heterogeneous. A survey also found that students reported higher levels of enjoyment, deeper understanding, and equal contribution to group work when in homogeneous compared to heterogeneous groups. The document discusses relevant literature on collaborative learning and factors that influence group composition and performance. It describes the methodology used in the study, which analyzed assessment results from students over three years while varying the type of group composition.
The efficacy of homogeneous groups in enhancing individual learningAlexander Decker
This document summarizes a study that examined the impact of homogeneous versus heterogeneous group composition on individual student learning in a computer science course. The study found that making groups homogenous based on prior performance led to a statistically significant improvement in individual student performance compared to heterogeneous groups. Specifically, students performed better and reported enjoying the learning process more when grouped with others at a similar ability level. However, some prior research has found heterogeneous groups can also be effective depending on how the groups are formed and activities tailored. The optimal group composition depends on the learning objectives and how group work is implemented and assessed.
Wilson's 1996 model of information behavior expanded on his 1981 model. The 1996 model explains why information seeking occurs in response to some needs more than others, why some information sources are used more, and how self-efficacy influences meeting information goals. The model includes theoretical concepts like stress/coping theory, risk/reward theory, and social learning theory. It represents a major revision that draws from various fields and makes it a richer source of hypotheses than the 1981 model.
1) Stereotyping of computer science as a male-dominated field has discouraged girls from pursuing related careers. Research shows using gaming to teach computing concepts at a young age and providing female mentors may help break down stereotypes.
2) Studies found that girls had lower self-efficacy and interest in computer science due to societal stereotypes. However, programs that used gaming to teach concepts and matched girls with STEM mentors were shown to increase girls' skills, knowledge of careers, and intentions to study STEM fields.
3) Research also found that using a female interface agent when teaching math and engineering concepts helped raise girls' self-efficacy, interest, and performance compared to groups without
Technological persuasive pedagogy a new way to persuade students in the compu...Alexander Decker
This document introduces a new pedagogical approach called "technological persuasive pedagogy" to more effectively persuade students in computer-based mathematics learning. It discusses prior models and theories of persuasion and identifies 16 principles that can be used to 1) improve negative attitudes, 2) increase positive attitudes, or 3) prevent declines in positive attitudes. The document outlines the content analysis method used to extract these principles from literature on persuasion in education. It describes coding and reliability testing of the principles to develop a codebook for applying them in computer-based mathematics classrooms.
The document discusses models of information seeking behavior and definitions. It provides an overview of several models:
1. Wilson's 1981 model proposes that information needs arise from basic physiological, cognitive, or affective needs, and that barriers related to personal, social, or environmental contexts can impede information seeking.
2. Dervin's 1983 sense-making theory focuses on how individuals make sense of information.
3. Ellis's 1989/1993 model outlines common information seeking strategies.
4. Kuhlthau's 1991 model describes stages of information seeking, from initial uncertainty to increased understanding.
5. Wilson's 1996 expanded model incorporates insights from other fields to provide a more comprehensive understanding of information behavior
This study examined how social-cognitive factors influence students' interest in research-related careers. The researchers hypothesized that a student's perception of their research environment would impact their research self-efficacy and outcome expectations, which would in turn influence their research interests and career goals. Ninety-nine undergraduate students completed questionnaires assessing these variables. Results found the research environment indirectly influenced interests through its effect on self-efficacy and outcomes expectations. Self-efficacy and outcomes expectations also indirectly impacted goals by influencing interests. This study suggests cognitions like self-efficacy that develop from the undergraduate research experience can shape career interests and decisions during this pivotal period.
THE INFLUENCE OF PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING COMMUNITIES ON RESEARCH LITERACY AND ...ijejournal
The current study investigates two Problem-Based Learning (PBL) processes that were carried out in two different Online Learning Communities of 62 pre-service teachers who took a Research Literacy course as a part of their academic obligation. The first one was combined with the moderator based learning
scaffoldings (OLC+M), and the other one with the social based learning scaffoldings (OLC+S). The study seeks to map the differences between these two OLCs in terms of Achievement Goal Motivation and Research Literacy skills as a result of the PBL intervention, and the correlation between these aspects as is expressed in each group. The findings indicated that PBL had a significant positive effect on AGM in both groups, while only the OLC+S showed the significant outperforming in some of the Research Literacy skills, as well as the positive correlation between them and the Mastery Approach component of AGM. The discussion raises possible interpretations of theoretical and practical relationships between Research Literacy skills in the educational field and motivational factors among adult students, as they are expressed in online communication environments.
Analysis of Media Graphs and Significant SenseAM Publications
This paper discusses aspects of interpretation of graphs including those related to the interface between
different contexts of interpretation. Particularly it is discussed the notion of Critical Sense as a skill to analyse data its
interrelations rather than simply accepting the initial impression given by the graph. We suggest that Critical Sense in
graphing can help readers to balance several aspects involved interpretation of media graphs in certain contexts. This
paper also presents initial findings from our analyses of study with student teachers interpreting media graphs. We
are concerned to study Critical Sense in student teachers as a way of helping us, and them, think about teaching and
learning graphing in ways that will support the development of Critical Sense.
System dynamics is a methodology for studying complex feedback systems over time. It involves identifying a problem, developing a hypothesis, building a computer simulation model, testing the model, devising alternative policies, and implementing solutions. Transactional distance in distance education can be modeled using system dynamics by representing the dynamic relationship between dialogue and structure over time, and how varying these rates can control transactional distance. System dynamics provides a way to study interrelated educational variables and their relationships over a period of time.
The document discusses Wilson's model of information behavior from 1981. [1] It proposes expanding the concept of information seeking to include other modes of behavior such as avoiding information. [2] Wilson defined information behavior as encompassing information seeking as well as unintentional, passive, and purposeful behaviors not involving seeking. [3] The model suggests that information seeking behavior arises from a need perceived by the user and may involve formal or informal sources to satisfy that need.
This document provides an overview of a proposed session at the 2008 American Educational Research Association conference on using student logs and other data to inform the design of dynamic visualizations for science learning. The session objectives are to explore data-driven approaches to designing interactive visualizations and establish their effectiveness. Seven studies will present strategies informed by analyzing student interaction data during learning with visualizations. The session will include an introduction, individual poster presentations from each study, and a discussion among presenters and attendees.
An investigation of_factors_influencing_student_use_of_technology_in_k-12_cla...Cathy Cavanaugh
The purpose of this research was to examine the effects of teachers’ characteristics,
school characteristics, and contextual characteristics on classroom
technology integration and teacher use of technology as mediators of student
use of technology. A research-based path model was designed and tested
based on data gathered from 732 teachers from 17 school districts and 107
different schools in the state of Florida. Results show that a teacher’s level
of education and experience teaching with technology positively and significantly
influence his/her use of technology. Teacher use of technology
strongly and positively explains classroom technology integration and
student use of technology. Further, how a teacher integrates technology
into the classroom explains how frequently students use technology in a
school setting. The findings provided significant evidence that the path
model is useful in explaining factors affecting student use of technology
and the relationships among the factors.
The World Testifies Of Data And Our Understanding Of It EssaySandy Harwell
The document discusses qualitative research methods. It defines qualitative research as exploring and describing phenomena through subjective and inductive strategies. Some key points made include:
- Qualitative research aims to answer questions about why and how things occur.
- There are three main purposes: exploratory, explanatory, and descriptive. Exploratory research discovers patterns in phenomena, while explanatory research identifies relationships shaping phenomena and descriptive research documents phenomena of interest.
- Qualitative research relies on non-experimental and phenomenological approaches to collect data through open-ended questions and observations.
This document provides an overview of qualitative research methods, including data collection and analysis. It discusses the key principles of qualitative inquiry, such as understanding multiple realities and natural contexts. Common sources of qualitative data are interviews, observations, and documents. The goal of analysis is to uncover themes and patterns to understand phenomena. Five common qualitative research designs are described: case study, phenomenology, ethnography, narrative research, and mixed methods. The document contrasts the qualitative paradigm with the quantitative paradigm.
This document provides an overview of descriptive research. Descriptive research aims to describe current phenomena and characteristics without manipulating variables. It answers questions like "what is" rather than "why". Common methods include surveys, interviews, and observations. Descriptive research is used to investigate topics like attitudes, activities, and relationships between variables. It seeks to accurately report existing conditions and identify problems or abnormalities.
Respond in a paragraph to the discussion board. In your response.docxpeggyd2
1) The document discusses various methods for analyzing qualitative data collected from student interviews at Highland Park High School, including identifying themes by carefully reading interview transcripts, developing a coding scheme, and sorting data by themes.
2) It also discusses using concept maps to visualize major influences on the study from different perspectives like students, parents, teachers and administrators.
3) The analysis process included connecting findings to personal experiences of the researchers and seeking insights from critical friends to further interpret and clarify the data.
This document discusses how a kindergarten teacher, Ms. Randall, assesses her students during a unit on conservation. She uses a formative assessment approach involving feeding up, feedback, and feed forward. She establishes the purpose of the unit to engage students and guide assessments. Through observation and student work, she provides feedback to understand student learning and inform next steps. Her assessment allows for adjustments to instruction to meet evolving student needs.
The document discusses an action research project that evaluated academics' views of an academic librarian's role and investigated ways to promote partnerships between librarians and faculty. Semi-structured interviews found that academics viewed the librarian's role as either reactive, supportive, or an equal partner. Follow-up one-on-one and group sessions with academics led to new plans for integrating information literacy instruction into courses. While the sample was too small to generalize, questionnaires indicated the sessions positively changed academics' views of the librarian's role and generated new ideas about how the library could support their courses.
This document summarizes the key differences between quantitative and qualitative research. Quantitative research uses numeric data and statistics to objectively test hypotheses, while qualitative research relies on words and themes to subjectively understand participant perspectives. The document outlines characteristics, steps, and common designs for each type of research. It emphasizes that the research question should dictate the appropriate methodology.
Grounded theory is a qualitative research method that aims to generate theory from data. The document discusses grounded theory's development by Glaser and Strauss and its key assumptions. It proposes using grounded theory to study workplace bullying in small organizations as a research topic. Both the merits and disadvantages of using grounded theory are discussed, such as the risk of producing a poorly designed framework if not fully understanding grounded theory's paradigm and methodology.
Journal of Experimental PsychologyLearning, Memory, and CogTatianaMajor22
Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning, Memory, and Cognition
Semantic Processes in Preferential Decision Making
Sudeep Bhatia
Online First Publication, July 19, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000618
CITATION
Bhatia, S. (2018, July 19). Semantic Processes in Preferential Decision Making. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. Advance online publication.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000618
Semantic Processes in Preferential Decision Making
Sudeep Bhatia
University of Pennsylvania
This article examines how semantic memory processes influence the items that are considered by
decision makers in memory-based preferential choice. Experiments 1A through 1C ask participants to list
the choice items that come to their minds while deliberating in a variety of everyday choice settings.
These experiments use semantic space models to quantify the semantic relatedness between pairs of
retrieved items and find that choice item retrieval displays robust semantic clustering effects, with
retrieved items increasing the retrieval probabilities of related items. Semantic clustering can be
disassociated from the effect of item desirability and can lead to inefficiencies such as the consideration
and evaluation of undesirable items early on in the decision. Experiments 2A through 2C use a similar
approach to study the effects of contextual cues on item retrieval and find that decision makers are biased
toward retrieving choice items that are semantically related to the choice context. This effect is usually
strongest early on in deliberation and weakens as additional items are retrieved. Overall, the results
highlight the role of semantic memory processes in guiding the generation of memory-based choice sets,
and illustrate the value of semantic space models for studying preferential decision making.
Keywords: decision making, semantic memory, semantic clustering, preregistration, open science
Preferential decision making involves the selection of a favored
item from a set of feasible choice items. Most experiments on
preferential decision processes explicitly present a choice set to
participants. Correspondingly, psychological theories of decision
making have been concerned primarily with how decision makers
choose between such an exogenously determined set of items, that
is, the decision rules they use to evaluate these items, as well as the
effects of the composition of the choice set, and other related
contextual factors, on their choices (Busemeyer & Rieskamp,
2014; Oppenheimer & Kelso, 2015).
However, many common decision scenarios do not involve a
fixed, exogenous set of choice items. Rather, decision makers must
construct such choice sets by themselves, typically through the use
of memory processes (see Alba & Hutchinson, 1987; Lynch &
Srull, 1982 for early discussions). Consider, for example, the task
of planning what to eat, buying a gift for a friend or family
member, or deciding on a vacation destinati ...
1-Qualitative data are words, instead of numbers. According to Bsandibabcock
1-Qualitative data are words, instead of numbers. According to Burns, Gray and Grove (2015) “Qualitative research is a systematic approach used to describe experiences and situations from the perspective of the person in the situation. The researcher analyzes the words of the participant, finds meaning in the words, and provides a description of the experience that promotes deeper understanding of the experience". Initially you want to state the purpose of the study. In a Qualitative study there are different types of perspectives that can be associated with a qualitative study. Phenomenological, grounded theory, ethnographic, exploratory-descriptive, qualitative and historical are types of research (Grove, 2015). To assist with the management of the study, according to White, Oleke, and Friesen (2012) they had eight recommendation as follow
Have one person manages and organize the study.
Provide a through documentation collection and analysis details
Strict timeline for data collection, coding and analysis
Use of iterative process for data collection and analysis
Comprehensive internal audits
communications among all members of the team
resources are to be utilized to meet dead line
re-assess and determine if any changes need to be made.
According to Burns, Gray and Grove (2015) when collecting research, a way to manage the data is by organizing the information into themes and subthemes to form meaning from the data. Data analysis and interpretation allows the researcher to place the findings into the correct category, finding correlation or the non-correlation of the data being obtained. They must be consistent with the method and the philosophy of the study, allow the data and meaning to be revealed, thus demonstrating the rigor of the study.
Reference
Grove, S., Gray, J., Burns, N., (2015).
Understanding Nursing Research, 6th Edition
. Retrieved from
https://viewer.gcu.edu/DPBXHG
White, D., Oleke, N., & Friesen, S. (2012, July). "Qualitative Data Has Been Described As Voluminous And Sometimes Overwhelming To The Researcher In What Ways Could A Researcher Manage And Organize The Data" Essays and Research Papers. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1177/160940691201100305
2-Qualitative data can be difficult to process and analyze if not organized properly but the organizing itself is often a difficult task because qualitative data by its very meaning has no numerical data that can be placed in any order or sorted. For this very reason, the data almost always has to be separated and sorted by a human being rather than a computer system that would have to be programed to search for a numerical characteristic that doesn’t exist. In the place of these numerical characteristics, the researcher would need to sort their data into themes based around patterns found in their work. These patterns would differ based on the nature of their research. Once these patterns were decided upon they ...
Li802 Applying Information Seeking Models to Student Researchamytaylor
The document discusses the development of a new student research model called the Workflow Research Model. It was created by analyzing existing information seeking and research models, including Dervin's Sense-Making Theory, Wilson's 1996 model, Elis's model, the Big 6 model, and the Dialogue model. The Workflow Research Model presents the research process as a non-linear workflow that guides students through discrete steps with clear requirements and explanations. It aims to help students effectively plan, conduct, and evaluate their research.
Strategies on How to Infer & Explain Patterns and Themes from DataNoMore2020
A research that we presented and submitted to our teacher, Mrs. Lopez. I uploaded this because I wanted to help other students in the ABM track especially to Senior High Students who have Reseach in Daily Life in their subjects.
Academic Users Information Searching On Research Topics Characteristics Of ...Michele Thomas
The document summarizes a study that investigated how academic users search for information on real research tasks. The study observed 11 PhD students searching for information on their own research topics using information retrieval systems. It found that research tasks were explorative, uncertain, multifaceted, logical, variable, and successive in nature. The search strategies used included interacting with multiple search systems, exploring popular search engines, using basic search functions, constructing multiple queries, multi-tasking and parallel reformulation of queries. The study aimed to better understand academic search behaviors to help libraries better support researchers' information needs.
This document summarizes the key differences between quantitative and qualitative research methods. Quantitative research involves collecting numerical data to test hypotheses and analyze relationships between variables, using instruments with predetermined questions. It aims to be objective and unbiased. Qualitative research relies on collecting text or image data, using open-ended questions to understand participant perspectives. It aims to provide detailed insights into phenomena and experiences in a subjective manner. The document outlines the main characteristics and steps of each approach, as well as common research designs associated with them such as experiments, surveys, grounded theory, ethnography, narratives, and mixed methods.
This document discusses organizational behaviour and defines key concepts. It identifies structure as a key element of organizational effectiveness and efficiency. Structure involves delegation of authority and levels of centralization. A clear chain of command is important for setting lines of authority and responsibility. Structure can be flat or tall depending on span of control and chain of command. Organizations tend toward flatter structures for improved efficiency. Organizational behaviour concerns how people behave in organizations and is fundamental to management since organizational success relies on human input.
PAGE 52What is Action ResearchViaA review of the Literat.docxgerardkortney
PAGE
52What is Action Research?
Via
A review of the Literature
A Dissertation Extract
By
Dr. George SlentzIf you choose to use this document as part of your research, use the following reference notation:Slentz, G.M. (2003). A collaborative action research approach to developing
statewide information standards supporting the Delaware education
network.
CHAPTER II
Literature Review
Inclusion Criteria
After determining the focus of this dissertation, several Wilmington College faculty members including academic advisors offered suggestions of relevant literature references. In addition to those recommendations, two annotated AR bibliographies by Dick (2002a & 2002b) provided a wealth of relevant material to review.
The Internet served as both an independent resource as well as a method to access EBSCOhost an electronic search engine which accesses numerous academic databases, such as Academic Search Premier, Masterfile, and Business Source Elite. Only articles that offered text availability through EBSCOhost were reviewed. Most Internet searches were conducted using www.Google.com an excellent, in depth publicly available search engine. In utilizing either EBSCOhost or Google, various combinations of search words were used. For example, one search would consist of “research and action” and the second “action research.” Since most search engines used, search, based on word sequence, interchanging the searching sequence of the words was essential. The searches centered in two specific topic areas: action research methodologies and information technology standards.
The Wilmington College Library provided some additional resources dealing with “research” and “researching techniques,” as well completed Wilmington College dissertations.
Overview of Action Research Literature
Action research literature was reviewed first, including definitions, methodologies, origins, and evolution. An in depth examination of AR literature revealed there was no universal AR methodology, but rather a confusing conglomeration of methodologies all alleged to be AR. In some instances, the differences were subtle, such as who identified the research setting, the researcher, or the client (Schein, 2001). In other more diverse examples, conflicting paradigms, epistemologies, and methodologies emerged (Heron & Reason, 1997). Swepson (1998) said, “I found some of the literature on the practice of action research to be contradictory and this left me confused about how to practice it” (p.2). Comments such as this one helped this researcher appreciate that other researchers were equally confused. The context of an AR study may appear disparate to different researchers. This lack of clarity and definition was quite common in AR literature, and these discrepancies often hindered understanding and comprehension of AR processes.
A variety of reasons for the shortcomings in AR discipline were identified: a lack of integration in the literature, de.
Exploratory Research
Exploratory Case Study
Exploratory Research
Exploratory Talk Essay
Exploratory Observation
An Exploratory Research..
Exploratory Essay Outline
Exploratory Essay
Exploratory Questions
Exploratory Research Essay
Exploratory Research
Love: an Exploratory Paper
Quantitative and Qualitative research-100120032723-phpapp01.pptxKainatJameel
This document provides an overview of the key differences between quantitative and qualitative research. Quantitative research involves collecting numerical data to objectively test hypotheses, while qualitative research relies on collecting text or image data from participants to gain an in-depth understanding of their experiences. The stages of research and common research designs are also compared for quantitative and qualitative approaches. Experimental, correlational, and survey designs are more common for quantitative research, while grounded theory, ethnographic, narrative, and action research designs are more qualitative in nature. The best approach depends on matching the research problem, intended audience, and researcher's experience.
This document provides an overview of the key differences between quantitative and qualitative research. Quantitative research involves collecting numerical data to objectively test hypotheses, while qualitative research relies on collecting text or image data from participants to understand their subjective experiences. The stages of research are also compared, with quantitative research using predetermined questions and large sample sizes, and qualitative research using emerging questions and smaller sample sizes. Common research designs are also outlined for each approach.
Quantitative and qualitative research methods differ in important ways. Quantitative research uses statistical analysis of numeric data from standardized instruments, while qualitative research relies on descriptive analysis of text or image data collected from a small number of individuals. The two approaches also differ in how the research problem is identified, how literature is reviewed, how data is collected and analyzed, and how findings are reported. Common quantitative designs include experimental, correlational, and survey designs, while qualitative designs include grounded theory, ethnographic, narrative, and action research designs. The best approach depends on matching the research questions and goals.
Similar to Jansen using the_taxonomy_of_cognitive_learning_to_model_online_searching_2 (20)
This presentation was provided by Steph Pollock of The American Psychological Association’s Journals Program, and Damita Snow, of The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), for the initial session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session One: 'Setting Expectations: a DEIA Primer,' was held June 6, 2024.
This presentation includes basic of PCOS their pathology and treatment and also Ayurveda correlation of PCOS and Ayurvedic line of treatment mentioned in classics.
Leveraging Generative AI to Drive Nonprofit InnovationTechSoup
In this webinar, participants learned how to utilize Generative AI to streamline operations and elevate member engagement. Amazon Web Service experts provided a customer specific use cases and dived into low/no-code tools that are quick and easy to deploy through Amazon Web Service (AWS.)
How to Make a Field Mandatory in Odoo 17Celine George
In Odoo, making a field required can be done through both Python code and XML views. When you set the required attribute to True in Python code, it makes the field required across all views where it's used. Conversely, when you set the required attribute in XML views, it makes the field required only in the context of that particular view.
ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, and GDPR: Best Practices for Implementation and...PECB
Denis is a dynamic and results-driven Chief Information Officer (CIO) with a distinguished career spanning information systems analysis and technical project management. With a proven track record of spearheading the design and delivery of cutting-edge Information Management solutions, he has consistently elevated business operations, streamlined reporting functions, and maximized process efficiency.
Certified as an ISO/IEC 27001: Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) Lead Implementer, Data Protection Officer, and Cyber Risks Analyst, Denis brings a heightened focus on data security, privacy, and cyber resilience to every endeavor.
His expertise extends across a diverse spectrum of reporting, database, and web development applications, underpinned by an exceptional grasp of data storage and virtualization technologies. His proficiency in application testing, database administration, and data cleansing ensures seamless execution of complex projects.
What sets Denis apart is his comprehensive understanding of Business and Systems Analysis technologies, honed through involvement in all phases of the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC). From meticulous requirements gathering to precise analysis, innovative design, rigorous development, thorough testing, and successful implementation, he has consistently delivered exceptional results.
Throughout his career, he has taken on multifaceted roles, from leading technical project management teams to owning solutions that drive operational excellence. His conscientious and proactive approach is unwavering, whether he is working independently or collaboratively within a team. His ability to connect with colleagues on a personal level underscores his commitment to fostering a harmonious and productive workplace environment.
Date: May 29, 2024
Tags: Information Security, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, Artificial Intelligence, GDPR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find out more about ISO training and certification services
Training: ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management System - EN | PECB
ISO/IEC 42001 Artificial Intelligence Management System - EN | PECB
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - Training Courses - EN | PECB
Webinars: https://pecb.com/webinars
Article: https://pecb.com/article
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about PECB:
Website: https://pecb.com/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/pecb/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PECBInternational/
Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/PECBCERTIFICATION
This document provides an overview of wound healing, its functions, stages, mechanisms, factors affecting it, and complications.
A wound is a break in the integrity of the skin or tissues, which may be associated with disruption of the structure and function.
Healing is the body’s response to injury in an attempt to restore normal structure and functions.
Healing can occur in two ways: Regeneration and Repair
There are 4 phases of wound healing: hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling. This document also describes the mechanism of wound healing. Factors that affect healing include infection, uncontrolled diabetes, poor nutrition, age, anemia, the presence of foreign bodies, etc.
Complications of wound healing like infection, hyperpigmentation of scar, contractures, and keloid formation.
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering.pptxDenish Jangid
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering
Syllabus
Chapter-1
Introduction to objective, scope and outcome the subject
Chapter 2
Introduction: Scope and Specialization of Civil Engineering, Role of civil Engineer in Society, Impact of infrastructural development on economy of country.
Chapter 3
Surveying: Object Principles & Types of Surveying; Site Plans, Plans & Maps; Scales & Unit of different Measurements.
Linear Measurements: Instruments used. Linear Measurement by Tape, Ranging out Survey Lines and overcoming Obstructions; Measurements on sloping ground; Tape corrections, conventional symbols. Angular Measurements: Instruments used; Introduction to Compass Surveying, Bearings and Longitude & Latitude of a Line, Introduction to total station.
Levelling: Instrument used Object of levelling, Methods of levelling in brief, and Contour maps.
Chapter 4
Buildings: Selection of site for Buildings, Layout of Building Plan, Types of buildings, Plinth area, carpet area, floor space index, Introduction to building byelaws, concept of sun light & ventilation. Components of Buildings & their functions, Basic concept of R.C.C., Introduction to types of foundation
Chapter 5
Transportation: Introduction to Transportation Engineering; Traffic and Road Safety: Types and Characteristics of Various Modes of Transportation; Various Road Traffic Signs, Causes of Accidents and Road Safety Measures.
Chapter 6
Environmental Engineering: Environmental Pollution, Environmental Acts and Regulations, Functional Concepts of Ecology, Basics of Species, Biodiversity, Ecosystem, Hydrological Cycle; Chemical Cycles: Carbon, Nitrogen & Phosphorus; Energy Flow in Ecosystems.
Water Pollution: Water Quality standards, Introduction to Treatment & Disposal of Waste Water. Reuse and Saving of Water, Rain Water Harvesting. Solid Waste Management: Classification of Solid Waste, Collection, Transportation and Disposal of Solid. Recycling of Solid Waste: Energy Recovery, Sanitary Landfill, On-Site Sanitation. Air & Noise Pollution: Primary and Secondary air pollutants, Harmful effects of Air Pollution, Control of Air Pollution. . Noise Pollution Harmful Effects of noise pollution, control of noise pollution, Global warming & Climate Change, Ozone depletion, Greenhouse effect
Text Books:
1. Palancharmy, Basic Civil Engineering, McGraw Hill publishers.
2. Satheesh Gopi, Basic Civil Engineering, Pearson Publishers.
3. Ketki Rangwala Dalal, Essentials of Civil Engineering, Charotar Publishing House.
4. BCP, Surveying volume 1
This slide is special for master students (MIBS & MIFB) in UUM. Also useful for readers who are interested in the topic of contemporary Islamic banking.
हिंदी वर्णमाला पीपीटी, hindi alphabet PPT presentation, hindi varnamala PPT, Hindi Varnamala pdf, हिंदी स्वर, हिंदी व्यंजन, sikhiye hindi varnmala, dr. mulla adam ali, hindi language and literature, hindi alphabet with drawing, hindi alphabet pdf, hindi varnamala for childrens, hindi language, hindi varnamala practice for kids, https://www.drmullaadamali.com
Strategies for Effective Upskilling is a presentation by Chinwendu Peace in a Your Skill Boost Masterclass organisation by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan on 08th and 09th June 2024 from 1 PM to 3 PM on each day.
Your Skill Boost Masterclass: Strategies for Effective Upskilling
Jansen using the_taxonomy_of_cognitive_learning_to_model_online_searching_2
1. Using the taxonomy of cognitive learning to model online searching
Bernard J. Jansen *, Danielle Booth, Brian Smith
College of Information Sciences and Technology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 2 October 2008
Received in revised form 10 March 2009
Accepted 7 May 2009
Available online 6 June 2009
Keywords:
Web searching
Information searching
To Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy
Bloom’s taxonomy
a b s t r a c t
In this research, we investigated whether a learning process has unique information
searching characteristics. The results of this research show that information searching
is a learning process with unique searching characteristics specific to particular learning
levels. In a laboratory experiment, we studied the searching characteristics of 72 partic-
ipants engaged in 426 searching tasks. We classified the searching tasks according to
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy of the cognitive learning domain. Research results
indicate that applying and analyzing, the middle two of the six categories, generally take
the most searching effort in terms of queries per session, topics searched per session, and
total time searching. Interestingly, the lowest two learning categories, remembering and
understanding, exhibit searching characteristics similar to the highest order learning cat-
egories of evaluating and creating. Our results suggest the view of Web searchers having
simple information needs may be incorrect. Instead, we discovered that users applied
simple searching expressions to support their higher-level information needs. It appears
that searchers rely primarily on their internal knowledge for evaluating and creating
information needs, using search primarily for fact checking and verification. Overall,
results indicate that a learning theory may better describe the information searching pro-
cess than more commonly used paradigms of decision making or problem solving. The
learning style of the searcher does have some moderating effect on exhibited searching
characteristics. The implication of this research is that rather than solely addressing a
searcher’s expressed information need, searching systems can also address the underly-
ing learning need of the user.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
In this research, we investigate learning theory for understanding information searching. Specifically, we aim to dis-
cover an inferential framework based on learning theory for indentifying the cognitive category of a searcher’s need
based on characteristics of the information searching process. By information searching, we mean ‘‘the ‘micro-level’
of behavior employed by the searcher in interacting with an information system” (Wilson, 2000, p. 49). While many
have studied individual differences in information searching (c.f., Saracevic, 1991), no one has proposed a model that
relates individual differences to information searching. Saracevic comments, ‘‘We are still lacking a theoretical frame-
work and/or explanation for all these findings (concerning individual differences). Without such a framework, the work
on individual differences in (information retrieval) will continue to proceed as in the past, using a shotgun approach.”
(Saracevic, 1991, p. 85). Ford, Miller, and Moss (2003) make similar assertions concerning the need for such a concep-
tual model.
0306-4573/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2009.05.004
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 814 865 6459.
E-mail addresses: jjansen@acm.org (B.J. Jansen), dlb5000@psu.edu (D. Booth), bsmith@ist.psu.edu (B. Smith).
Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Information Processing and Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/infoproman
2. There has been prior work on classifying individual searching tasks rather than the specific need that generates these
tasks. Several researchers have investigated individual searching tasks classifications. For example, MacMullin and Taylor
(1984) present a classification of information seeking tasks. Byström and Järvelin (1995) explore the relationship between
task and complexity in a work environment. Rose and Levinson (2004) present a classification of Web searching tasks based
on the type of content desired. The research presented here is related to these prior efforts (and many others in the searching
task research stream); however, our focus is in discovering a framework for classifying the underlying need that leads to a
specific searching task.
The most commonly presented frameworks for understanding information searching needs are problem solving and
decision making. Donohew and Tipton (1973) comment on the close relationship between information seeking (of which
information searching is a component) and decision making (p. 251). March (1994) distinguishes between decision mak-
ing and problem solving, commenting that searching relates directly to making decisions. Many other researchers have
investigated aspects of information searching from a decision making or problem solving perspective (c.f., Belkin,
1988; Kraft, 1973; Lopatovska, 2007), and Case (2007) provides a review of decision making research for information
seeking research.
However, the recognition of problem solving as a conceptual framework for information searching is not universally ac-
cepted. Sperber and Wilson (1995) argue that problem solving does not apply to all information searching situations. More
importantly, there is a notable lack of empirical data to support the relationship between information searching and problem
solving. Most of the published works that discuss the relationship between decision making and searching are descriptive in
nature (i.e., the proposed decision making model is not predictive). Few laboratory studies linking information searching
behaviors with decision making currently exist.
Some researchers have questioned whether decision making and searching are actually related. For example, in investi-
gating the relationship between decision making and information searching, Jansen and McNeese (2005) administered the
Problem Solving Inventory (PSI) survey instrument to approximately 40 participants of an information searching study. The
PSI consists of a 35-item self-report measured in a 6-point Likert-style format (strongly agree to strongly disagree). The PSI
instrument assesses an individual’s perceptions of his or her problem solving capabilities (i.e., a person’s level of efficacy as a
problem solver). A person’s self-efficacy in a given domain is correlated to actual performance in that area (Bandura, 1994).
Jansen and McNeese (2005) showed no statistically significant relationship between problem solving self-efficacy and
searching performance or between perceptions of problem solving ability and searching characteristics. If prior work on
information searching as a problem solving activity is correct, one would expect some relationship between problem solving
and information searching behavior (Bandura, 1994). Bandura (1996) reports that self-efficacy in a particular task influences
choice of activities, effort expended, and duration of effort. Jansen and McNeese (2005) failed to show a relationship, and we
have found no studies that reveal a statistically significant correlation between decision making and information searching.
Based on these findings, we sought potential approaches other than problem solving or decision making to describe accu-
rately the information searching process.
One likely potential approach is that searching is a learning process. Schmeck (1988), p. 3 defines learning as ‘‘an inter-
pretative process aimed at understanding reality”. Davis and Palladino (1995) p. 194 state that learning is ‘‘a relatively per-
manent change in behavior potential that occurs as a result of experience”. Bloom, Englehard, Furst, and Krathwohl (1956)
state that learning occurs at the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains.
Prior work has often linked information searching, albeit anecdotally, as a learning activity. For example, Dewey’s ‘‘learn-
ing-by-doing” (1916) is often used to provide the pedagogical underpinning for interactive learning environments. Wittrock
(1974) describes the process of knowledge construction in which the learner relates new information to old, building en-
hanced knowledge structures. Yankelovich, Meyrowitz, and van Dam (1985) draw an analogy between education and hyper-
media information as seeing connections and following links. Marchionini (1995) states that information searching is closely
related to both problem solving and learning (p. 5–6). Budhu and Coleman (2002) consider information processing as a fun-
damental cognitive activity underlying the process of learning.
Are there specific searching behaviors that one can map to a particular learning model? If so, what are these mappings?
What does this insight tell us about the underlying need of the searcher? These questions motivate our research. In the fol-
lowing sections, we present a literature review of learning as a model for understanding information searching, followed by
our research questions, research results. We conclude discussion of implications for online searching systems and future re-
search aims.
2. Review of literature
Information need is a core concept of information science (Wilson, 1981) and typically refers to the underlying motivation
of the user to seek specific types of content. In this research, we replace ‘information need’ with just ‘need, as research has
shown searching is motivated by needs other than just information (Jansen, Booth, & Spink, 2008). Users select search strat-
egies based, at least in part, on how they conceptualize the need. Moreover, need also influences a variety of factors concern-
ing the evaluation of the usefulness, relevance, and authority of retrieved content in searching. As such, a better
understanding of and a methodology for classifying needs is central to adequately addressing the variety of motivations that
cause individuals to engage in searching.
644 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
3. 2.1. Searching as learning
The information science literature contains some hints of learning as a vehicle for understanding people’s needs (Leh-
mann, 1999; Zhang, Jansen, & Spink, 2006), although many times the learning element is subsumed within other frame-
works, including sense making and searching in online environments.
In a sense-making paradigm, Dervin (1992) defines information need as something constructed internally to address a
gap or discontinuity. One can view information searching as a learning progress to address this gap. Case (2002) states that
sense-making is theoretically grounded in the constructivist learning theories of Dewey (1933). Dewey argued that learning
can only occur through problem solving. Similarly, Kuhlthau’s information seeking process (1993) includes a significant
learning component, the beginning of which is uncertainty. In fact, part of the basis of Kuhlthau’s information seeking pro-
cess is Kelly’s Theory of Learning (Kelly, 1963). According to Kuhlthau (1993), uncertainty in the earlier stages of informa-
tion seeking is caused by the introduction of new information that conflicts with previously held constructs. Kuhlthau does
not view this uncertainty as a negative, but rather, as the beginning of innovating and creating, which are part of a learning
process.
Defining learning as the development of new knowledge, Marchionini (2006) elaborates on the learning elements inher-
ent in information searching by describing searching in order to learn as increasingly viable in a content rich, online envi-
ronment. Marchionini (2006) conjectures that searching can be a learning process requiring multiple iterations and cognitive
evaluation of retrieved results. The researcher specifically employs terminology from Bloom’s categorization to describe
attributes of learning while searching for information.
Some researchers have investigated elements of learning within a searching framework using empirical methods. Hill and
Hannafin (1997) attempt to identify strategies that adult learners employ when using a hypermedia information system. The
researchers report that learners use a variety of strategies and that self-reported knowledge of both system and topic appear
to affect the strategies employed. Budhu and Coleman (2002) propose that Web technologies allow for interactive learning
environments that in turn can foster an increased understanding of science and engineering concepts.
Continuing this empirical line of research, Tang (2002) analyzed the searching behaviors of 41 public library patrons and
categorized them into two groups based on their exhibited searching strategies, either resource-oriented or query-oriented.
The resource-oriented searchers made only minor changes to their initial queries. The query-oriented users exhibited a lot of
query reformulation. Halttunen (2003) studied whether there were relationships between learning style, academic domain,
and teaching information retrieval techniques. The researcher reported that learning styles generated differences in concep-
tions of information retrieval understanding. The students who were primarily concrete learners reported computer skills
and information retrieval methods as important. Students who were reflective learners viewed information retrieval as
the knowledge of information needs analysis, methods, and assessment.
Tsai and Tsai (2003) explored the relationship among students’ information searching strategies in Web-based science
learning activities and the influence of students’ Internet self-efficacy. The researchers reported that students with high
self-efficacy employed better searching strategies and learned better relative to those students with low self-efficacy. Noting
the similarity between the features of the Web and those characterizing creative individuals, Shoshani and Hazi (2007) pos-
tulate that the Web encourages creativity, a higher order of learning, by providing content access in a variety of disciplines.
Focusing on query construction as a learning process, Zhang et al. (2006) discuss the similarities between the linguistic
characteristics of query formulation and learning to formulate words in a spoken language. Most queries are lists of one or
more noun terms (Jansen, Spink, & Pfaff, 2000; Wang, Berry, & Yang, 2003). Gentner (1982) reports that ‘‘children learn
nouns before predicate terms” (1982, p. 327) and ‘‘in early-production vocabularies, nouns greatly outnumber verbs” (p.
327). Nouns are ‘‘object-reference terms” (Gentner, 1982, p. 328) and have ‘‘fewer psychological constraints on their possible
conflationary patterns” (Gentner, 1982, p.328) than verbs have. Thus, every time searchers seek ‘new’ information, they use
nouns to articulate their needs. Researchers in cognitive science also pointed out that, in many languages, nouns have pro-
totypical functions in discourses” (Lakoff, 1987, p. 64).
Related to learning, Ford et al. (2003) have investigated the influence of study habits, building from a series of pre-
vious investigations in this area (c.f., Ford, Miller, & Moss, 2001; Ford, Wood, & Walsh, 1994; Wood, Ford, Miller, Sob-
czyk, & Duffin, 1996). Ford et al. (1994) analyzed the relationship between study habits and searching strategies in an
electronic environment. The researchers reported that comprehension learners used broader search strategies while
operational learners used narrower strategies. In a subsequent study on the relationship between preferred study habits
and searching strategy, Wood et al. (1996) found that comprehension learners used a greater number of searches, more
new terms, and more unique terms. These students were also more aware of search techniques for broadening or nar-
rowing the query. Ford et al. (2001) investigated the association between individual differences at the cognitive level
on searching outcome. Ford et al. (2003) investigated to what extent the selection of search strategies is influenced by
study approaches. Using factor analysis, the researchers found correlations with the use of Boolean searching by ac-
tively interested but anxious individuals. Students who were effective time managers used either Boolean or best
match.
Previous research has postulated the relationship between searching and learning; however, limited prior empirical re-
search exists to show how or even if learning explicitly manifests itself in the information searching process. By analyzing
exhibited information searching behavior, we can understand the nature of the underlying information need (Allen, 1996),
and importantly, we can posit a learning process as an appropriate model to view information searching. To accomplish this
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 645
4. we employed an established taxonomy of cognitive learning and a survey of individual learning styles as a possible moder-
ating effect.
2.2. Anderson and Krathwohl’s refine to Bloom’s taxonomy
One of the most widely accepted cognitive learning frameworks is Bloom’s taxonomy. In 1956, a team of educational the-
orists led by Benjamin Bloom developed a series of learning categories that categorized questions by level of abstraction, and
Bloom’s taxonomy is now a well known classification of learning in the cognitive domain (Bloom et al., 1956). Bloom’s tax-
onomy is based on difficulty of abstraction, ranging from recognition of facts to development of creative concepts. Since its
initial publication, a number of investigations have examined the theoretical validity of Bloom’s taxonomy with mixed re-
sults. For comprehensive reviews of the studies, see (c.f., Furst, 1981; Seddon, 1978). However, Bloom’s taxonomy is widely
accepted in a variety of research fields and has had substantial impact in the field of learning. Given its wide acceptance and
use, the taxonomy is regarded as a functional and, therefore, successful tool (Seddon, 1978).
One of the governing principles of the taxonomy is its descriptive scheme in which every type of learning goal can be
represented in a relatively context free manner (Bloom et al., 1956, p. 14). In this respect, one can use the taxonomy to deter-
mine the level of existing questions. However, one can also use the taxonomy to develop appropriate questions for each le-
vel. There are several articles on how to develop questions based on Bloom’s taxonomy (c.f., Lord & Baviskar, 2007). Anderson
and Krathwohl’s taxonomy is an updated and redefinition of Bloom’s original classification (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001),
which is the specific taxonomy that we employed in this research.
2.3. Individual learning styles
It is widely acknowledged that people have a variety of preferences when they learn and process information, and
there are many learning style systems to describe and categorize such preferences (c.f., Felder & Silverman, 1988;
McCarthy, 1980). Therefore, we believed that we had to assess the learning styles of the individuals in some way. For this
research, we desired a survey instrument that would identify a searcher’s general learning style, so we selected a simpli-
fied test (Al-Mahmood, McLean, Powell, & Ryan, 1998) based on Kolb’s experiential learning theory model (Kolb, 1985). A
similar learning style approach was used by (Halttunen, 2003), so we this provides some comparison among findings.
Kolb’s learning theory articulates four distinct learning preferences and is based on a four-stage learning cycle. For the
first stage, concrete experience (CE), the learner actively experiences an activity. In the second stage, reflective observation
(RO), the learner consciously reflects on that experience. For the third stage, abstract conceptualization (AC), the learner at-
tempts to conceptualize a theory or model of what they observed. Finally, in the fourth stage, active experimentation (AE), the
learner tries to plan how to test the model, validate the theory, or plan for a forthcoming experience. Therefore, Kolb’s model
offers both a way to understand individuals’ different learning styles and an explanation of a cycle of experiential learning. In
this cycle of learning, immediate or concrete experiences provide a basis for observations and reflections. These observations
and reflections are assimilated and distilled into abstract concepts producing new implications for action which can be ac-
tively tested, creating new experiences (Kolb, 1985).
The simplified test (Al-Mahmood et al., 1998) identifies one’s preferred processing and perception styles and is adapted
from (Carter, Bishop, & Kravits, 1998). The survey instrument classifies one’s learning styles into four types across two spec-
trums. The active/reflective spectrum refers to how the person processes information, and the abstract/concrete spectrum
refers to how the person perceives information. Each category’s learning traits are summarized in Table 1, adapted from Car-
ter et al. (1998), p. 58 and Al-Mahmood et al. (1998).
We selected Kolb’s experiential learning theory model because the four-stage learning model fits nicely with the concept
of information searching and the data-information-knowledge-wisdom (Ackoff, 1989) classification. Additionally, Kolb’s
experiential learning theory model is aimed specifically at adult learners, which fit the demographic population from which
we would draw our sample. We selected a simplified version of instrument, as assessment of learning styles was not our
main research focus but a moderating component.
Table 1
Explanation of learning styles.
Learning spectrums
Active learners Reflective learners
Are flexible
Are creative
Are dynamic and fast paced
Always want to help others
Have good communication skills
Like sharing ideas with others
Abstract learners Concrete learners
Have good analytical skills
Deal well with complex problemsare thorough and precise
Manage heavy work loads
Have leadership qualities
646 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
5. 3. Research questions and hypotheses
A variety of information science models address the concept of individual differences and interaction with information
searching (c.f., Choo, Detlor, Turnbull, 1998; Ingwersen, 1996; Marchionini, 1995; Saracevic, 1996; Wilson, 1999). How-
ever, such models are primarily descriptive. Our aim in this research is develop inference constructs based on search tactics
and infer the learning context underlying the information need. As such, this research will significantly inform aspects of
various models of information searching, including search tactics and cognitive aspects of the searcher.
To these aims, we specifically address two research questions.
3.1. Research question I: are searching episodes learning events?
If searching episodes are learning events, then one would expect differences in behaviors from different learning levels. In
order to analyze this question, we used Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001) redesign of Bloom’s taxonomy of learning in the
cognitive domain to develop searching tasks for each of the six categories within the taxonomy. In a user study, we then
analyzed the exhibited searching characteristics of each searching category with established online searching parameters
to detect if there were differences in exhibited searching behavior.
Prior to design the research study, we had to operationalize this research question. During the normal interaction be-
tween a searcher and Web search engine during information searching, there are a limited number of measures that occur
(e.g., submit query, view results, refine query, etc.). Based on a ethogram of Web searching behaviors (Hargittai, 2004; Jan-
sen, Taksa, Spink, 2008), we investigate seven hypotheses addressing this research question, which are:
Hypothesis 1. There will be a significant difference in the number of queries per session among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Hypothesis 2. There will be a significant difference in the average query length per session among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Hypothesis 3. There will be a significant difference in the number of unique terms per session among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Our first three hypotheses focus on the query. Although an acknowledged imprecise representation of the underlying
information need (Croft Thompson, 1987), the query is the central aspect of information searching and information
retrieval (Robertson, 1977; van Rijsbergen, 1975). Numerous empirical studies have focused on the various aspects of
the query as surrogates for the expression of need, including session length (Park, Bae, Lee, 2005), number of terms
(Wang et al., 2003), and use of keywords (Wolfram, 1999). Therefore, we believe the number of queries per session, query
length, and number of unique terms used in the session are appropriate searching characteristics for this study. We define
a session as the series of interactions between the searcher and information system(s) while addressing one of the given
searching scenarios.
Hypothesis 4. There will be a significant difference in the number of topics per session among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
For simple information needs, a one-to-one correlation usually exists between need and topic. For complex information
needs, one or more topics may comprise the overall need. Due to the dynamics and complexity of the Web information
environment, people are becoming more involved in coordinating multiple searching behaviors (Waller, 1997). Studies
also indicate that users’ searches may have multiple goals, topics, or problems in information seeking and retrieval con-
texts (Miwa, 2001; Spink, 2004). Therefore, this hypothesis examines the number of topics searched in a given session.
Hypothesis 5. There will be a significant difference in the duration of sessions among the classifications in Anderson and
Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Time on a system has been a consistent measure of information searching and retrieval studies as one of a variety of indic-
tors of task difficulty (c.f., Hsieh-Yee, 1993; Kelly Belkin, 2001; Kelly Belkin, 2004; Su, 2003; Wang, Hawk, Tenopir,
2000).
Hypothesis 6. There will be a significant difference in the number of result pages viewed per session among the
classifications in Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
The number of result pages viewed is one aspect of implicit feedback used to determine the level of difficulty of a
searching task or how well a searching system is satisfying a user’s information need. Researchers have explored var-
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 647
6. ious aspects of interactions as measurements of implicit feedback. For example, Goecks and Shivalik (2000) used hyper-
links clicked, scrolling performed, and processor cycles consumed. Seo and Zhang (2000) studied reading time, scroll-
ing, link selection, and bookmarking as potential implicit feedbacks and found that bookmarking had the strongest
relationship with interesting documents, but scrolling had no relationship. Claypool and colleagues (Claypool, Le,
Waseda, Brown, 2001) measured mouse clicks, mouse movement, scrolling, and elapsed time as the implicit feedback
metrics. Kelly and Belkin (2001) studied reading time, scrolling, and interaction. Kelly and Belkin (2004) also examined
the display time as the implicit feedback and found no direct relationship between the display time and the usefulness
of documents. Shen, Tan, and Zhai (2005) employed previous queries and clickthrough information as the implicit feed-
back measures.
Hypothesis 7. There will be a significant difference in the number of search systems used among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Anderson and Krathwohl (2001), p. 85 state that the higher order learning processes are multiple phases and that the stu-
dent draws upon elements from many sources, piecing them together, crafting a novel structure or pattern relative to
prior knowledge. As such, we are interested in the number of information systems used, expecting that higher order clas-
sification will require more systems than the lower order classifications require. We define an information system as a
mechanism for acquiring, storing. Indexing, and retrieving an organized body of data, information, or knowledge (e.g.,
Wikipedia, WebMD, HowStuffWork). We also include search engines in this definition (e.g., Ask, Googe, MSN Live,
Yahoo!).
3.2. Research question II: Are searching characteristics within Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy affected by the searcher’s
learning style?
While research question one is the major focus of the paper, research question two addresses possible moderating effects
of individual learning styles. Other researchers have worked to integrate learning levels and styles (Howard, Carver, Lane,
1996). In order to analyze this question, each participant in the study completed a learning style assessment survey. We then
analyzed the same seven searching characteristics from research question one (i.e., number of queries, number of topics, dura-
tion of sessions, average query length, number of unique terms, number of result pages viewed, number of search systems used),
controlling for learning styles.
Hypothesis 8. There will be a difference in exhibited searching characteristics based on learning styles.
One would expect some difference among learning styles in exhibited searching behaviors, although there would be ben-
efits for search engine designers if there were no differences. A learning style is a somewhat fixed characteristic of an indi-
vidual, and it refers to an individual’s preferred and habitual approach to processing information (Riding Rayner, 1998).
A strategy is a well-planned series of actions that may be used to cope with situations and tasks (Riding Cheema, 1991),
such as an information searching scenario. Halttunen (2003) reports that learning styles generate differences in informa-
tion retrieval self-efficacy. Therefore, we would expect some differences in searching characteristics among searchers
with difference learning styles. Some other information searching and seeking studies have highlighted that individual
learning styles may affect aspects of the searching process (Ford et al., 1994; Wood et al., 1996). For this hypothesis,
we investigate the information searching characteristics of queries per session, topics per session, duration of session,
query length, number of unique terms, number of result pages, and number of search systems used.
4. Methods
As the foundational elements for our research, we draw on constructs of learning levels in the cognitive domain and pre-
ferred learning styles of individuals, specifically a variation of Bloom’s taxonomy of the learning domains (Bloom et al., 1956)
and Kolb’s learning styles (Kolb, 1985).
4.1. Anderson and Krathwohl’s Taxonomy
For this research, we devised two searching scenarios for each of the six-levels of Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy,
with each scenario correlated to one of the six classifications. We selected four domains (entertainment, health, ecommerce,
and travel) to provide a common grounding for the participants as they moved through the searching scenarios.
We pilot-tested the scenarios twice before using them in a laboratory study. Similar to Bloom’s, Anderson and Kra-
thwohl’s taxonomy is a six-tiered model for classifying learning according to cognitive levels of complexity. The six classi-
fications with definitions (Anderson Krathwohl, 2001, p. 67–68) and sample searching scenarios are shown in Table 2, with
the complete list of searching scenarios presented in Appendix A.
648 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
7. Budhu and Coleman (2002) suggest that information use behaviors for learning can be indentified using educational the-
ories. We take the opposite approach, namely deducing levels of learning based on online searching behaviors.
We use the phrase searching scenarios to be consistent with user study literature calling for information searching re-
search to situational place laboratory participants (Borlund Ingwersen, 1997). These scenarios have inherent information
needs and information tasks. Defining what is an information need or task has been the subject of much debate and with
multiple definitions (Wilson, 1981). Given this, for this research, a search scenario for each level of Anderson and Krathwohl’s
taxonomy was the most appropriate approach.
Developing questions based on Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy is not straightforward. Although the categories re-
flect distinctions among the behavior of learners, Bloom acknowledges that classifications may not be sharp and rigid (Bloom
et al., 1956, p. 15). We also concede that the scenarios we developed may not be exclusive of each other. However, there are
prior works on developing such questions and objectives (c.f., Ferguson, 2002; Lord Baviskar, 2007), and we leveraged
these literature in the development of our searching scenarios. Table 3 highlights the key elements of the scenario develop-
ment process for each level.
Our scenario development went through several rounds of redesign before we arrived at a set that we were happy with
implementing in a study. After two rounds of pilot testing, we were comfortable that our scenarios were in line with the
learning levels for our target demographic of traditional college age students. There are several guides for writing objec-
tives using Bloom’s and Anderson and Krathwohl’s learning taxonomies. In addition to published works, we utilized the
guidelines from the Center for Teaching and Learning at the University of North Caroline – Charlotte.1
Most of the guide-
lines for implementing Bloom’s and Anderson and Krathwohl’s learning taxonomies take similar approaches, namely a link-
age from the learning level – to keywords – to questions or objectives. We followed this approach for our scenario
generation.
4.2. Kolb’s learning styles
To identify a searcher’s general learning style for this study, we used simplified test (Al-Mahmood et al., 1998) based on
Kolb’s experiential learning theory model (Kolb, 1985). The survey identifies the searcher’s preferred processing and percep-
Table 2
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy with searching scenarios.
Classification Definition Example scenario
Remembering Retrieving, recognizing, and recalling relevant knowledge from
long-term memory
List 5 movies directed by Steven Spielberg
Understanding Constructing meaning from oral, written, and graphic messages
through interpreting, exemplifying, classifying, summarizing,
inferring, comparing, and explaining
Give a brief plot summary of the TV show, Veronica Mars
Applying Carrying out or using a procedure through executing, or
implementing
What are some possible characteristics of a person who would
enjoy hip-hop music?
Analyzing Breaking material into constituent parts, determining how the
parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose
through differentiating, organizing, and attributing
A certain television show contains intense violence and coarse
language. Which rating should it receive?
Evaluating Making judgments based on criteria and standards through
checking and critiquing
Create a list of pros and cons for the new iPod shuffle. Based on
this list, would you purchase it (assuming you had the money to
do so)? Why or why not?
Creating Putting elements together to form a coherent or functional whole;
reorganizing elements into a new pattern or structure through
generating, planning, or producing
Which do you think will have better overall sales – the XBox 360,
the Nintendo Wii, or the Playstation 3? Why?
Table 3
Development characteristics of searching scenarios.
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy
classification
Key element(s) for developing the searching scenarios
Remembering Scenario must have participant describe, list, or name factual information
Understanding Scenario must have participant translate, construe, interpret, or extrapolate information
Applying Scenario must have participant exploit information and put the resulting knowledge into action
Analyzing Scenario must have participant deduce, scrutinize, or survey information
Evaluating Scenario must have participant appraise or relate information to the real world
Creating Scenario must have participant formulate, generate, restructure, or combine information in a novel
way
1
http://teaching.uncc.edu/resources/best-practice-articles/goals-objectives/objectives-using-bloom.
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 649
8. tion styles and classifies one’s learning styles into four types across two spectrums. To complete the survey instrument, we
gave the participants a series of questions with a set of responses arranged in a row for each question. Participants ranked
each of the responses for each question from ‘most like me’ (5), to ‘least like me’ (1) in the manner that suited them best. We
then totaled the columns, providing preferences for each of the learning styles. See Appendix B for the complete survey
instrument.
4.3. User study procedure
To investigate our research questions, we conducted a quantitative study using a laboratory experimental design. A con-
trolled laboratory approach gave us the advantage of being able to control for external variables in order to gauge the effect
of learning levels. As with all approaches, there are limitations to adopting such a course of action, namely the lack of realism
that is present in naturalistic studies. However, given that we sought to investigate quantifiable hypotheses as the basis for
further investigation in more naturalistic settings, we considered a laboratory experiment a valid choice for this research.
Several studies have taken similar approaches (c.f., Armitage Enser, 1997; Barry, 1994; Hargittai, 2002; Kellar, Watters,
Shepherd, 2007; Meadow, 1982; Toms, Dufour, Hesemeier, 2004).
Over the course of two weeks, 72 participants engaged in a laboratory study (59 males and 13 females; mean age 20 years
with a standard deviation of 1.9 years). Concerning, the imbalance of gender, Hupfer and Detlor (2006) found no gender dif-
ference in exhibited searching characteristics. The participants were all undergraduates attending a major US university and
enrolled in one of several information technology courses. The participants had high self-efficacy of their searching ability,
self-rating their searching expertise a mean 4.1 on a five-point scale (standard deviation 0.5).
A moderator first had each participant complete administrative and demographic paperwork. Then, the moderator pre-
sented each participant with six searching scenarios and instructed them to answer the questions and verify their answers.
The six searching scenarios were each on an individual sheet of paper with blank spaces on the sheet for answers or notes.
We imposed no time limit on searching sessions. We counterbalanced the searching scenarios among the participants using
a Graeco-Latin square approach. At the conclusion of the searching session, the moderator administered the learning style
inventory to the participants.
During the study, participants recorded their answers to the searching scenarios on the worksheets. Each participant had
access to an individual computer with Internet access. All user interactions with the computer were logged using a non-inva-
sive logging software package developed for use in information searching studies (Jansen, Ramadoss, Zhang, Zang, 2006).
Once all participants had completed the study, we analyzed participant interactions in accordance with standard
characteristics of information searching using transaction log analysis as the methodological approach and ANOVA for
the statistical evaluation. We analyzed the data using SPSS version 15. We employed the parametric tests, ANOVA, rather
than non-parametric tests, such as the Wilcoxon signed test, because the parametric tests are more stringent in their
analysis. The main advantage of using non-parametric tests is they do not need data in normal distribution. However,
Hull (1993) has shown that the parametric tests performed extremely well with skewed and non-parametric data, rec-
ommends that they be used whenever possible, and are well-suited for the use in studies such as this one.
5. Results
In the following sections, we report our results and examine if there is any differences in searching characteristics among
the six classifications of cognitive learning. We present our results using terminology similar to that used in other user stud-
ies (c.f., Wang et al., 2000). A query is string of terms submitted by a searcher in a given instance. A session is a series of que-
ries submitted by a user during one interaction with the Web search engine. A topic is the information focus of a series of one
or more queries. A single session may have several topics. The session duration is the temporal length. Earlier and partial re-
sults were reported in a workshop submission (Jansen, Smith, Booth, 2007a) and two conference posters (Jansen, Smith,
Booth, 2007b; Jansen, Smith, Booth, 2007c).
5.1. First research question
5.1.1. Queries per session
Hypothesis 1. There will be a significant difference in the number of queries per session among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
We used a one-way ANOVA statistical analysis to compare means and variance among the classifications. The one-way
ANOVA tests whether two or more groups are significantly different. Our results indicate that there is a significant difference
among the groups (F(5) = 5.778, p 0.01). We ran a Tamhane’s T2 Test comparing group means to identify specific differ-
ences. Tamhane’s T2 Test does not assume equal variances among the samples.
650 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
9. Tamhane’s T2 results indicate that the collection of learning tasks classified as applying was significantly different from
the classifications of remembering, understanding, and evaluating (p 0.05). Applying was not significantly different in number
of queries per session from analyzing and creating. Understanding was also significantly different from creating, and evaluating
was significantly different from creating. So, Hypothesis 1 is partially supported. By partially supported, we mean that at least
one but less than all six of the classifications were statistically different from the others. All six classifications statistically
different from the others would be a fully supported hypothesis. Fig. 1 shows the mean queries per sessions of the six
classifications.
5.1.2. Average query length
Hypothesis 2. There will be a significant difference in the average query length per session among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Using a one-way ANOVA, our results indicate that there is a significant difference among the groups (F(5) = 2.86, p 0.01).
Tamhane’s T2 results indicate that the classification analyzing was significantly different from the classifications of applying
and creating. Hypothesis 2, therefore, is partially supported. Fig. 2 shows the mean query length for each of the six
classifications.
5.1.3. Unique terms per session
Hypothesis 3. There will be a significant difference in the number of unique terms per session among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Again using a one-way ANOVA, our results indicate that there is a significant difference among the groups (F(5) = 3.34,
p 0.01). Tamhane’s T2 results indicate that the classification analyzing was significantly different from the classifications
of remembering and evaluating. Hypothesis 3, therefore, is partially supported. Fig. 3 shows the mean number of unique terms
for each of the six classifications.
5.1.4. Topics per session
Hypothesis 4. There will be a significant difference in the number of topics per session among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Using a one-way ANOVA, our results indicate that there is a significant difference among the groups (F(5) = 8.613,
p 0.01). Tamhane’s T2 results again indicated significant differences among the classifications. Applying was significantly
1.205
1.116
1.973
1.362
1.029
1.507
1.86
1.57
2.92
2.45
1.57
2.28
0.000
0.500
1.000
1.500
2.000
2.500
3.000
3.500
Remembering Understanding Applying Analyzing Evaluating Creating
Anderson and Krathwohl’s Taxonomy
MeanValue
Topics per session Queries per Session
Fig. 1. Queries per session and topics per session.
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 651
10. different from the classifications of remembering, understanding, and evaluating (p 0.05). Understanding was significantly
different from creating, and evaluating was significantly different from creating. Therefore, Hypothesis 4 is partially sup-
ported. Fig. 1 shows the mean topics per sessions of the six classifications.
5.1.5. Duration of session
Hypothesis 5. There will be a significant difference in the duration of sessions among the classifications in Anderson and
Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
3.31
3.48
3.04
4.07
3.30
3.10
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
Remembering Understanding Applying Analyzing Evaluating Creating
Anderson and Krathwohl's Taxonomy
MeanValue(meanquerylength)
Query Length
Fig. 2. Mean query length.
4.14
4.28
5.40
5.70
4.09
4.76
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Remembering Understanding Applying Analyzing Evaluating Creating
Anderson and Krathwohl's Taxonomy
MeanValue(meanuniqueterms)
Unique Terms
Fig. 3. Number of unique terms.
652 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
11. Again using a one-way ANOVA, our results indicate that there is a significant difference among the groups (F(5) = 2.68,
p 0.05). Tamhane’s T2 results indicate that the classification applying was significantly different from the classification
of remembering. Hypothesis 5, therefore, is partially supported. Fig. 4 shows the mean durations of sessions for each of
the six classifications.
5.1.6. Result pages view per session
Hypothesis 6. There will be a significant difference in the number of result pages viewed per session among the
classifications in Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Session Duration
178.6
194.9
294.6
235.7
212.3
249.9
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
Remembering Understanding Applying Analyzing Evaluating Creating
Anderson and Krathwohl’s Taxonomy
MeanValue(seconds)
Session Duration
Fig. 4. Session duration in seconds.
2.95
2.64
5.25
3.54
3.33
4.55
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
Anderson and Krathwohl's Taxonomy
MeanValue(meanresultpages)
Result Pages
Remembering Understanding Applying Analyzing Evaluating Creating
Fig. 5. Number of result pages viewed.
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 653
12. Again using a one-way ANOVA, our results indicate that there is a significant difference among the groups (F(5) = 2.26,
p 0.05). Tamhane’s T2 results indicate that the classification applying was significantly different from the classifications
of remembering and evaluating. Hypothesis 6, therefore, is partially supported. Fig. 5 shows the mean number of result pages
viewed for each of six classifications.
5.1.7. Systems used per session
Hypothesis 7. There will be a significant difference in the number of search systems used among the classifications in
Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
Again using a one-way ANOVA, our results indicate that there is a significant difference among the groups (F(5) = 2.21,
p 0.05). Tamhane’s T2 results indicate that the classification applying was significantly different from the classifications
of remembering and evaluating. Hypothesis 7, therefore, is partially supported. Fig. 6 shows the mean number of systems
for each of six classifications.
The distribution of systems that the participants used is interesting because of the predominance of Google as the main
information system and the fact that none of the participants directly accessed the university’s library system in addressing
the searching scenarios. Table 4 shows the use of systems for all searching scenarios for all participants in the study.
1.19
1.10
1.28
1.04
1.18
1.32
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
Remembering Understanding Applying Analyzing Evaluating Creating
Anderson and Krathwohl's Taxonomy
MeanValue(meansystemsused)
Systems Used
Fig. 6. Number of information systems used.
Table 4
Systems used by participants.
Information system Occurrences of use Percentage (%)
1 Google 358 72.3
2 Wikipedia 40 8.1
3 MSN 16 3.2
4 Ask 12 2.4
5 Ebay 12 2.4
6 IMBD 12 2.4
7 Amazon 7 1.4
8 Yahoo! 7 1.4
9 Froogle 3 0.6
10 WebMD 3 0.6
11 Metacrawler 2 0.4
12 Orbitz 2 0.4
13 Other 21 4.20
Total 495 100.0
Note: Used one times, the others were: about, Apple, Best Buy, CheapFlights, CheapTickets, Dictionary, Dogpile, FindArticles, Graduates Hotline, Greyhound,
Hotwire, HowStuffWorks, Ikea, LinxBest, Mapquest, NetDoctor, Nielsen Media, Overstock, SortPrice, Target, Travelocity.
654 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
13. As shown in Table 4, there were 495 total instances of use of 33 systems. The general-purpose search engine, Google, rep-
resented more than 72% of all instances of use. Most participants used one information system to address the searching sce-
narios, along with some destination Website or page. However, more than 18% of the participants used two systems, with the
remainder using between three and five information systems for a given scenario. Naturally, what is or is not an information
system is a matter of discussion. Is Google an information system, an information portal, or a navigational aid? Is a personal
Website an information system or just a ‘document’? Based on our definition of information system, for this research, we
have included the general-purpose search engines.
5.1.8. Second research question
Research Question 2: Are searching characteristics within Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy affected by the learning
style of the searcher?
Table 5 shows the numbers of the participants in each learning style.
From Table 5, more than 45% of the participants were concrete learners, although there where sizable numbers of reflec-
tive, active, and abstract learners as well. Investigating whether or not learning style affects exhibited searching behaviors,
we examined hypothesis 8 (There will be a difference in exhibited searching characteristics based on learning styles.) using a one-
way ANOVA and Tamhane’s T2 Test to compare group means to identify specific differences. Our results are reported in Table
6.
We did not perform post hoc tests for concrete – active and concrete – active – reflective due their low occurrences. From
Table 6, it appears that learning does affect searching characteristics based on learning level. There were notable differences
between those with an abstract learning preference and those with a concrete learning preference. These findings are in line
with what one would expect if information searching were a learning process. Focusing primarily on groups with nine or
more participants (Concrete, Reflective, Active, and Abstract), we see that Abstract learners exhibited the most unique
searching behaviors, with significant differences in queries per session, topics per session duration of session, and result
pages viewed. The implications are that in studies of searching systems, those users with Abstract learning styles probably
should be control variables.
6. Discussion and implications
In this research, we conducted a laboratory study to investigate whether learning theory provides a basis for investigating
online searching. The implications being that if searching needs could be classified into an appropriate learning model based
Table 5
learning styles of participants.
Learning style Occurrences Percentage (%)
Concrete 33 45.8
Reflective 13 18.1
Active 10 13.9
Abstract 9 12.5
Active, abstract 3 4.2
Concrete, reflective 2 2.8
Concrete, active 1 1.4
Concrete, active, reflective 1 1.4
Total 72 100.0
Table 6
ANOVA results of learning styles of participants and searching characteristics.
ANOVA F value (df = 5)
Queries per
session
Topics per
session
Duration of
sessions
Average query
length
Unique
terms
Result pages
viewed
Search systems
used
Abstract 3.73**
3.01*
2.53*
2.72*
Active 2.51*
Active, abstract 3.62*
Concrete 2.74*
3.79**
Concrete,
reflective
5.39*
4.40*
7.20**
Reflective
*
p 0.05.
**
p 0.01.
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 655
14. on searcher behavior, information systems could provide results that are not just relevant to the query but also to the under-
lying learning need.
Utilizing Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy of the cognitive domain as the overall learning paradigm, we designed
searching scenarios consistent with each classification of the six-levels of the taxonomy. We employed two searching sce-
narios for each classification, used a large number of participants, and logged their searching actions. We then measured
searching characteristics of number of queries, query length, unique terms, number of topics, session duration, number of result
pages viewed, and number of search systems for each classification. Research results indicate that learning appears to be an
appropriate model through which to view searching. All hypotheses were partially support using these designated searching
characteristics.
Primarily, the middle classification of applying was generally statistically different than remembering and sometimes
understanding (i.e., number of queries, number of topics, session duration, number of result pages viewed, and number of
systems used). Analyzing was also statistically different from remembering (i.e., unique terms). Searching tasks at these learn-
ing levels appear to be the most challenging for searchers, exhibiting more complex searching characteristics. In some ways,
one would expect these findings given that remembering and understanding are relatively ‘lower level’ cognitive tasks relative
to applying and analyzing. However, in many cases applying and/or analyzing were also different from the ‘higher level’ cog-
nitive tasks of evaluating and creating (i.e., number of queries, unique terms, number of topics, number of result pages
viewed, and number of systems used).
In examining the overall relationship between learning level in the cognitive domain and exhibited searching difficulty
(i.e., lengthier, longer, higher, etc.) of the task, we get an inverted curve as shown in Fig. 7.
At the lower level of cognitive learning (remembering and understanding) and at the higher level (evaluating and creating),
the exhibited searching characteristics are what one would deem indicative of relatively non-difficult searching tasks. At the
lower levels, searchers seem to engage in fact checking and homepage-like finding activities (Kellar et al., 2007). Interest-
ingly, they seem to engage in the same activities at the higher level, presumably just to verify facts and information they
already possess. The implication is that the ‘simple’ task searching behaviors exhibited by Web searchers (c.f., Hölscher
Strube, 2000; Silverstein, Henzinger, Marais, Moricz, 1999) may relate to more complex underlying learning needs. While
the higher levels tasks are more difficult, especially in terms of searching time and result pages viewed, they appear to de-
pend more on the users’ creativity and viewpoints. The additional knowledge that searchers need to complete the task ap-
pear to be fact-finding tasks. Obviously, in these cases, searchers may be missing serendipitous findings and alternative
viewpoints. This aspect would be a case for developing searching interfaces to facilitate exploratory searching. However,
at the middle cognitive levels (applying and analyzing), the exhibited searching characteristics are characteristics of more
complex searching needs.
Fig. 7. Relationship between Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy levels and exhibition of searching difficulty.
656 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
15. Interestingly, these factors appear to be consistent across users with different learning styles, although there are some
statistically significant differences in exhibited search behaviors. These differences are especially notable with Abstract
learners, so there may have to be some allowance for these types of searchers. Concrete, reflective, and active learners appear
to be relative homogenous in their searching behaviors. Therefore, it appears that learning style has limited effect on exhib-
ited differences in searching characteristics, with the exception of Abstract learners.
Naturally, there are limitations with a controlled laboratory study; namely the lack of realism that is present in natu-
ralistic studies. However, we believe that the methodology is consistent with our research aims of isolating to the degree
possible the learning aspect that appear inherent in information searching tasks. Another limitation is, of course, the
searching scenarios. Although we designed the scenarios to be consistent with each level of cognitive learning, there is
no guarantee that each participants actually engaged in these cognitive processes. Certainly additional studies in this area
with a variety of searching scenarios would be beneficial. However, given the study design, it appears that some unique
process is occurring at the different levels. Also, while the cognitive learning process certainly appears to impact how users
search, it seems reasonable that other cognitive, affective, and situational factors also influence the expression of the
underlying information needs. A wide range of information science, computer science, and other domain literature well
documents these factors. For example, Oliver and Oliver (1997) have commented that the amount of retained knowledge
gained is influenced by the activity context and purpose. We also acknowledge that learning and decision making may be
inter-related processes or embedded with each other, as noted by (Tang, 2002). Learning and problem solving activities
may also be intertwined in the performance of a Web searching activity. Further research is necessary to tease apart these
multiple and intertwined factors. Finally, there is the issue of gender imbalance (i.e., were more male than female partic-
ipants). Some prior work (Large, Beheshti, Rahman, 2002; Roy Chi, 2003; Roy, Taylor, Chi, 2003) has reported some
gender differences within information searching. However, Hupfer and Detlor (2006) in their comprehensive study re-
ported no such difference.
There are several strengths to this research. First, there is the grounding of the searching scenarios in a well established
learning taxonomy, which anchors the study within both the learning and searching domains. Second, the use of a controlled
Table 7
Knowledge and cognitive dimensions of Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy.
The knowledge dimension The cognitive process dimension
Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create
Factual knowledge List Summarize Classify Order Rank Combine
Conceptual knowledge Describe Interpret Experiment Explain Assess Plan
Procedural knowledge Tabulate Predict Calculate Differentiate Conclude Compose
Meta-cognitive knowledge Appropriate use Execute Construct Achieve Action Actualize
Fig. 8. Possible predictive relationship of cognitive need, exhibited searching, and desired content.
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 657
16. laboratory study to examine the relationship of individual variables highlighted the effect of the searching scenarios on
exhibited searching characteristics. Third, we examined multiple searching characteristics for differences among the learn-
ing categories, which allowed for multiple dimensional examination of searching as learning.
There are several important implications of this study, including insights into searching needs, a learning model for infor-
mation searching that is inferential, and possibly improved identification of needed content. First, the commonly held notion
that Web searchers have simple information needs may not be correct. Some of these simple expressions may be indicative
of higher-level information needs at the evaluating and creating levels of learning. While these tasks are more difficult, they
depend more on the users’ creativity or opinions; therefore, any additional information they need to complete the task is fact
finding.
Second, learning theory may be a way of modeling online searching in a predictive manner. There are many paradigms for
information searching (Dervin, 1992; Kuhlthau, 1993; Saracevic, 1996; Wang et al., 2000), many studies on information
searching (Kellar et al., 2007; Wang et al., 2003), and many studies on information needs (Taylor, 1991; Wilson, 1981); how-
ever, linking these three areas of study in a meaningful way has been lacking. Formulation of need is an important and usu-
ally neglected part of searching and retrieval instruction. Some have argued that given the current state of the development
of information retrieval systems, emphasis should be directed from query construction to analyzing search tasks, informa-
tion needs, and problem formulation (c.f., Halttunen, 2003). The formulation of meaningful search has been considered with-
in the context of information literacy instruction (Webber Johnston, 2000). Based on the results of this research, framing
these needs, tasks, and problems within the learning framework of Anderson and Krathwohl’s taxonomy appears to be
appropriate.
Finally, there are benefits of modeling searching as a cognitive learning process, namely that Anderson and Krathwohl’s
taxonomy also presents a second dimension concerning the information needed (the Knowledge Dimension), as shown in
Table 7 (Forehand, 2005).
Anderson and Krathwohl’s Taxonomy has a knowledge dimension that, when combined with the cognitive process
dimension, results in a 24-cell matrix where one can link cognitive process to the type of knowledge required. These infor-
mation needs follow nicely with information needs as noted in various information science and information retrieval liter-
ature (c.f., Detlor, 2003; Kellar et al., 2007; Taylor, 1991), although some searching needs common on the Web still need to be
researched (c.f., Rose Levinson, 2004). Although requiring more research, Fig. 8 illustrates the possible linkage between
need and content by viewing information searching as a learning process.
The implications of this linkage between the cognitive processes, searching characteristics, and desired content are extre-
mely beneficial. Several researchers have lamented the lack of real system impact on information searching user studies, the
shotgun approach (c.f., Saracevic, 1991) to the identification of user characteristics, and the lack of granular searching models
for the development of information searching systems. Marchionini (2006) speaks of building supporting information tools if
we can define types of information-searching with associated strategies and tactics. What has been lacking is an inferential
model that links the cognitive aspects of the user, searching characteristics, and type of content. From the results of this
study, it appears that classifying information searching episodes by levels of the cognitive domain can possibly provide
the linkage to content, as illustrated in Fig. 8. Again, this is an area that will need considerable future research but may lead
to a real linkage between users, system features, and content.
7. Conclusion and future research
From the results of this research, it may be possible to model searching episodes as levels of learning in the cognitive do-
main. If so, then one can design search interfaces that facilitate different information seeking needs using the results of this
study. For example, providing tools to collect and annotate findings might enhance applying tasks as searchers could develop
their arguments during the search process. Similarly, we could present people with multiple perspectives on an argument
(e.g., Budzik Hammond, 2000; Sack, 1995) in order to enhance their viewpoints when engaged in evaluating. We envision
search interfaces assuming various modes that correspond to searcher goals and intentions.
Although this research provides a solid basis, it is clear that more work is needed to highlight the relationship between
learning level and exhibited searching characteristics, especially in terms of other moderating effects such as expertise and
environment. People search for information for a variety of reasons, and this research investigated categorizing some of these
reasons in terms of learning needs. The results from this research suggest one can categorize such searching intentions and
that these intentions vary in terms of their cognitive demands. In addition to the future research outlined above in linking
searching characteristic to learning level to type of content desired, an additional area of research would be isolate specific
searching characteristics that actually link to some cognitive process such as applying or creating.
Appendix A. Questions for searching based on learning taxonomy
Entertainment
s Remembering
658 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
17. – List 5 movies directed by Steven Spielberg
– Who wrote the Macarena?
s Understanding
– Give a brief plot summary of the TV show, Veronica Mars.
– Briefly explain the meaning of the lyrics of ‘‘You are the Moon” by the Hush Sound.
s Applying
– What are some possible characteristics of a person who would enjoy trip-hop music?
– About how many songs can a 80G portable mp3 player hold?
s Analyzing
– What are the main differences between techno and trance music?
– A certain show has intense violence and coarse language. What television rating should it receive?
s Evaluating
– Create a list of pros and cons for the new iPod Shuffle. Based off of this, would you purchase it (assuming you had
the money to do so)? Why or why not?
– Which of the new ipods would be most suitable for the average college student? Why?
s Creating
– Design a radio ad for the movie, Fearless.
– Which do you think will have better overall sales – the XBox 360, the Nintendo Wii, or the Playstation 3?
Why?
Health
s Remembering
– List 5 symptoms of a heart attack.
– What is Klinefelter’s Syndrome?
s Understanding
– What are the benefits of Vitamin K?
– What are the differences between a cold and the flu?
s Applying
– Your friend has Chickenpox, but (for whatever reason) does not want to consult a doctor. Develop a list of instruc-
tions to aid in his or her recovery.
– What are the characteristics of someone who would be highly susceptible to heat stroke?
s Analyzing
– What are the main things to look for when selecting a health care provider?
– What is one problem with America’s current health care system? What is a possible solution for this problem?
s Evaluating
– What are the current available methods for tattoo removal, and how effective are they? Which method do you think
is the most practical? Why?
– You just moved to a new town and are looking for a chiropractor. Prepare a list of criteria to judge the practices in
your area and indicate priority.
s Creating
– Your friend just got back from studying abroad and suddenly developed a high fever. Dry cough, chills, and breath-
ing difficulties soon followed. What could your friend have?
– Given the current medical technology, when (if ever) do you think scientists will develop a cure for AIDS?
Why?
Ecommerce
s Remembering
– List 5 states in America that have a sales tax on clothing.
– What is Pennsylvania’s state sales tax, and which items are exempt?
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 659
18. s Understanding
– Explain the steps you would have to take if you wanted to sell a lamp on Ebay.
– Which websites would you check if you were looking for car listings online?
s Applying
– You and a roommate are planning on refurnishing your living room. You want to get a new couch, recliner, televi-
sion, and lamp. Considering the average budget of a college student, calculate an estimated cost for each of the
items as well as a total estimated cost.
– You want to sell one of your old pairs of boots on Ebay. Create a listing for your boots (include all relevant infor-
mation you’d need to sell them).
s Analyzing
– Explain how ecommerce has affected the retail industry.
– You find a great deal online, but it’s from a company that you have never heard of before. How do you determine of
the website is legitimate or not before you make your purchase?
s Evaluating
– Would you get better results if you listed an item for sale on Ebay or Amazon? Why?
– Do you think it is more beneficial for clothing companies to sell their goods online or in a physical store? Why or
why not?
s Creating
– What do you think will be the next advancement in ecommerce? Give reasons for your choice.
– You notice a recent charge on your credit card that you did not make, and you suspect that someone has stolen your
credit card information. What steps would you take to correct the recent fraudulent charge and to prevent more
fraudulent purchases on your card?
Travel
s Remembering
– What are the top 10 US vacation spots?
– In terms of aircrafts, what does the acronym CAT stand for?
s Understanding
– Terrorism and hijacking aside, what kind of things does the average traveler need to consider when traveling some-
where by plane?
– Is it statistically safer to travel by car, boat, train, or airplane?
s Applying
– You are planning a trip to Africa with your travel agent. What questions would you ask with regard to health and
safety?
– You decide to spend your Spring Break in Orlando, Florida. You want to leave from Philadelphia March 5th and
return on the 12th. Which website offers the cheapest airline ticket for your trip, and how much does it cost?
s Analyzing
– What problems do airlines face because of commuter response to terrorism in the media? How can they overcome
these issues?
– What are the benefits of planning a trip (researching destinations, purchasing tickets, and making reservations)
online as opposed to using a travel agency?
s Evaluating
– Your friend is planning on studying abroad next year, but has no idea where to go. He is a business major and will be
funding the trip himself. Recommend a country for him to visit and give reasons to support your recommendation.
– You live in New York City and want to take a trip to Boston. Which method of transportation would be most effec-
tive? Why?
s Creating
– You and a friend are planning a trip to NYC. Both of you live in Philadelphia, have no car, and have $200 each to
spend on the whole day. Create travel plans and a tentative itinerary for the day.
– Considering current technology, how long do you think it take until cars running on alternative fuel (i.e. not fossil
fuel) will become commonplace? Why?
660 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
19. Appendix B. Questionnaire on learning styles
Rank each of the items below across the columns from most like you (5), to least like you (1). Place the number next to each
of the items that best suit you and add up each column at the end.
Rank each of the items below across the columns from most like you (5), to least like you (1). Place
the number next to each of the items that best suit you and add up each column at the end.
1 2 3 4 5
least like me most like me
1. I prefer lecturers/tutors/demonstrators who
give me step-by-step
instructions
provide active and
stimulating learning
have a supportive
classroom
provide challenging
materials
2. I prefer materials that are
well arranged hands-on about humanity and
improving the world
intellectually
challenging
3. Other people view me as
loyal and reliable creative and
dynamic
caring and
compassionate
intelligent and
inventive
4. When I’m stressed I would prefer to
take control of life do something
adventurous
talk to friends reflect alone about
my circumstances
5. I dislike people who are
irresponsible rigid and like routine selfish and
unsympathetic
illogical
6. One word that describes me is
sensible spontaneous giving analytical
7. My holidays can be described as
traditional adventurous pleasing to others new learning
experiences
Total Total Total Total
References
Ackoff, R. L. (1989). From data to wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16, 3–9.
Allen, B. L. (1996). Information tasks: Toward a user-centered approach to information systems. New York: Academic Press.
Al-Mahmood, R., McLean, P., Powell, E., Ryan, J. (1998). Towards success in tertiary study discovering your learning style: National Library Australia.
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. A. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York:
Longman.
Armitage, L., Enser, P. G. B. (1997). Analysis of user need in image archives. Journal of Information Science, 23(4), 287–299.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.). Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71–81). New York: Academic Press.
Bandura, A. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67(3), 1206–1222.
Barry, C. L. (1994). User-defined relevance criteria: An exploratory study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45(3), 149–159.
Belkin, N. (1988). On the nature and function of explanation in intelligent information retrieval. In Y. Chiaramella (Ed.), Paper presented at the 11th annual
international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, 13–15 June, Grenoble, France (pp. 135–145).
Bloom, B. S., Englehard, E., Furst, W., Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: McKay.
Borlund, P., Ingwersen, P. (1997). The development of a method for the evaluation of interactive information retrieval systems. Journal of Documentation,
53(5), 225–250.
Budhu, M., Coleman, A. (2002). The design and evaluation of interactivities in a digital library. D-Lib Magazine, 8(11). http://dlist.sir.arizona.edu/179/101/
111coleman.html.
Budzik, J., Hammond, K. J. (2000). User interactions with everyday applications as context for just-in-time information access. In D. Riecken, D. Benyon,
H. Lieberman (Eds.), Paper presented at the 5th international conference on intelligent user interfaces, 09–12 January, New Orleans, Louisiana (pp. 44–51).
Byström, K., Järvelin, K. (1995). Task complexity affects information seeking and use. Information Processing and Management, 31(2), 191–213.
Carter, C., Bishop, J., Kravits, S. L. (1998). Keys to success: How to achieve your goals (2nd ed.). NJ: Prentice Hall.
Case, D. O. (2002). Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behavior. London: Academic Press.
Case, D. O. (2007). Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behavior (2nd ed.). Amsterdam Elsevier/Academic Press.
Choo, C., Detlor, B., Turnbull, D. (1998). A behavioral model of information seeking on the Web: Preliminary results of a study of how managers and IT
specialists use the Web. In C. Preston (Ed.), Paper presented at the 61st annual meeting of the American society for information science, 25–29 October,
Pittsburgh, PA. Information Today, Inc. (pp. 290–302).
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 661
20. Claypool, M., Le, P., Waseda, M., Brown, D. (2001). Implicit interest indicators. In C. Sidner J. Moore (Eds.), Paper presented at the 6th international
conference on intelligent user interfaces, 14–17 January, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA (pp. 33–40).
Croft, W. B., Thompson, R. H. (1987). I3: A new approach to the design of document retrieval systems. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science, 38(6), 389–404.
Davis, S. F., Palladino, J. J. (1995). Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Dervin, B. (1992). From the mind’s eye of the user: The sense-making qualitative–quantitative methodology. In J. Glazier R. Powell (Eds.), Qualitative
research in information management (pp. 61–84). Englewood, Colorado: Libraries Unlimited.
Detlor, B. (2003). Internet-based information systems use in organizations: An information studies perspective. Information Systems Journal, 13(2), 113–132.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York Macmillan. URL: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/
852.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston: D.C. Heath.
Donohew, L., Tipton, L. (1973). A conceptual model of information seek, avoiding, and processing. In P. Clarke (Ed.), New models for mass communication
research (pp. 243–269). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Felder, R. M., Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78(7), 674–681.
Ferguson, C. (2002). Using the revised taxonomy to plan and deliver team-taught, integrated, thematic units. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 238–243.
Ford, N., Miller, D., Moss, N. (2001). The role of individual differences in Internet searching: An empirical study. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, 52(12), 1049–1066.
Ford, N., Miller, D., Moss, N. (2003). Web search strategies and approaches to studying. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 54(6), 473–489.
Ford, N., Wood, F., Walsh, C. (1994). Cognitive styles and searching. Online and CD-ROM Review, 18(2), 79–86.
Forehand, M. (2005). Bloom’s taxonomy. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology.
Furst, E. J. (1981). Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives for the cognitive domain: Philosophical and educational issues. Review of Educational
Research, 51(4), 441–453.
Gentner, D. (1982). Why nouns are learned before verbs: Linguistic relativity versus natural partitioning. In S. Kuczaj (Ed.), Language Development: Language,
cognition, and Culture (pp. 301–334). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Goecks, J., Shivalik, J. (2000). Learning users’ interests by unobtrusively observing their normal behavior. In D. Riecken, D. Benyon, H. Lieberman (Eds.),
Paper presented at the 5th international conference on intelligent user interfaces, 09–12 January, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States (pp. 129–132).
Halttunen, K. (2003). Students’ conceptions of information retrieval implications for the design of learning environments. Library and Information Science
Research, 25(2), 307–332.
Hargittai, E. (2002). Beyond logs and surveys: In-depth measures of people’s web use skills. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 53(14), 1239–1244.
Hargittai, E. (2004). Classifying and coding online actions. Social Science Computer Review, 22(2), 210–227.
Hill, J. R., Hannafin, M. J. (1997). Cognitive strategies and learning from the World Wide Web Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(4), 37–64.
Hölscher, C., Strube, G. (2000). Web search behavior of internet experts and Newbies. International Journal of Computer and Telecommunications
Networking, 33(1–6), 337–346.
Howard, R. A., Carver, C. A., Lane, W. D. (1996). Felder’s learning styles, Bloom’s taxonomy, and the Kolb learning cycle: Tying it all together in the CS2
course. In J. Impagliazzo, E. Adams, K. J. Klee (Eds.), Twenty-seventh SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania: ACM (pp. 227–231).
Hsieh-Yee, I. (1993). Effects of search experience and subject knowledge on the search tactics of novice and experienced searchers. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 44(3), 161–174.
Hull, D. (1993). Using statistical testing in the evaluation of retrieval experiments. In Paper presented at the 16th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on
research and development in information retrieval, 27 June-01 July 01, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (pp. 329–338).
Hupfer, M. E., Detlor, B. (2006). Gender and Web information seeking: A self-concept orientation model. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, 57(8), 105–1115.
Ingwersen, P. (1996). Cognitive perspectives of information retrieval interaction: Elements of a cognitive IR theory. Journal of Documentation, 52(1),
3–50.
Jansen, B. J., Booth, D., Spink, A. (2008). Determining the informational, navigational, and transactional intent of Web queries. Information Processing and
Management, 44(3), 1251–1266.
Jansen, B. J., Spink, A., Pfaff, A. (2000). Linguistic aspects of Web queries. In Annual meeting of the American society of information science, Chicago, IL (pp.
169–176).
Jansen, B. J., Ramadoss, R., Zhang, M., Zang, N. (2006). Wrapper: An application for evaluating exploratory searching outside of the lab, SIGIR 2006
workshop on evaluating exploratory search systems. In The 29th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development on information
retrieval (SIGIR2006), Seattle, Washington, USA.
Jansen, B. J., Smith, B., Booth, D. (2007a). In Learning as a paradigm for understanding exploratory search, conference on human factors in computing systems
(SIGCHI), workshop on exploratory search interfaces, San Jose, California.
Jansen, B. J., Smith, B., Booth, D. (2007b). Understanding Web search via a learning paradigm. In P. Patel-Schneider, P. Shenoy (Eds.), Paper presented at
the international world wide Web conference (WWW2007), 8–12 May, Banff, Alberta, Canada (pp. 1207–1208).
Jansen, B. J., Smith, B., Booth, D. (2007c). Viewing online search within a learning paradigm. In C.L.A. Clarke, N. Fuhr, N. Kando (Eds.), Paper presented at
the 30th annual international ACM special interest group on information retrieval, conference (SIGIR), 23–27 July, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jansen, B. J., McNeese, M. D. (2005). Evaluating the effectiveness of and patterns of interactions with automated searching assistance. Journal of the
American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(14), 1480–1503.
Jansen, B. J., Taksa, I., Spink, A. (2008). Research and methodological foundations of transaction log analysis. In B. J. Jansen, A. Spink, I. Taksa (Eds.),
Handbook of Research on Web Log Analysis (pp. 1–17). Hershey, PA: IGI.
Kellar, M., Watters, C., Shepherd, M. (2007). A field study characterizing Web-based information seeking tasks. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, 58(7), 999–1018.
Kelly, G. A. (1963). Theory of personality: The psychology of personal constructs. New York: W.W. Norton.
Kelly, D., Belkin, N. J. (2001). In reading time, scrolling and interaction: exploring implicit sources of user preferences for relevance feedback. In Paper
presented at the 24th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
(pp. 408–409).
Kelly, D., Belkin, N. J. (2004). Display time as implicit feedback: Understanding task effects. In K. Järvelin, J. Allan, P. Bruza (Eds.), Paper presented at the
27th annual international conference on research and development in information retrieval, 25–29 July, Sheffield, United Kingdom (pp. 377–384).
Kolb, D. (1985). Learning style inventory. Boston, MA: McBer and Company.
Kraft, D. H. (1973). A decision theory view of the information retrieval situation: An operations research approach. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science, 24(5), 368–376.
Kuhlthau, C. (1993). A principle of uncertainty for information seeking. Journal of Documentation, 49, 339–355.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago, US: University of Chicago Press.
Large, A., Beheshti, J., Rahman, T. (2002). Gender differences in collaborative Web searching behavior: Elementary school study. Information Processing and
Management, 38(3), 427–443.
Lehmann, D. (1999). Introduction: Consumer behavior and Y2K. Journal of Marketing, 63, 14–18.
662 B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663
21. Lopatovska, I. (2007). Decision making framework for thinking about information seeking behavior. In D. Chiang, P. Solomon (Eds.), Paper presented at the
2007 annual meeting of the American society for information science and technology, 18–25 October, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Lord, T., Baviskar, S. (2007). Moving students from information recitation to information understanding: Exploiting Bloom’s taxonomy in creating science
questions. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 40–46.
MacMullin, S. D., Taylor, R. S. (1984). Problem dimensions and information traits. The Information Society, 3, 91–111.
March, J. (1994). A primer on decision making: How decisions happen. New York: Free Press.
Marchionini, G. (1995). Information seeking in electronic environments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Marchionini, G. (2006). Exploratory search: From finding to understanding. Communication of the ACM, 49(4), 41–47.
McCarthy, B. (1980). The 4 MAT system: Teaching to learning styles with right/left brain mode techniques. Illinois: Excel.
Meadow, C. T. (1982). A computer intermediary for interactive database searching II: Evaluation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 33,
357–364.
Miwa, M. (2001). User situations and multiple levels of users goals in information problem solving processes of AskERIC users. In Paper presented at the 2001
annual meeting of the American society for information sciences and technology, 2–4 February, San Francisco, CA, USA, ASIS (Vol. 38, pp. 355–371).
Oliver, R., Oliver, H. (1997). Using context to promote learning from information-seeking tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,
48(6), 519–526.
Park, S., Bae, H., Lee, J. (2005). End user searching: A Web log analysis of NAVER, a Korean Web search engine. Library and Information Science Research,
27(2), 203–221.
Riding, R., Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive styles – An overview and integration. Educational Psychology, 11(3–4), 193–215.
Riding, R., Rayner, S. (1998). Cognitive styles and learning strategies. London: David Fulton Publishers.
Robertson, S. (1977). Theories and models in information retrieval. Journal of Documentation, 33, 126–148.
Rose, D. E., Levinson, D. (2004). Understanding user goals in Web search. In M. Najork, C.W. Worcester (Eds.), Paper presented at the world wide Web
conference (WWW 2004), 17–22 May, New York, NY, USA (pp. 13–19).
Roy, M., Chi, M. T. H. (2003). Gender differences in patterns of searching the Web. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 29(3), 335–348.
Roy, M., Taylor, R., Chi, M. T. H. (2003). Searching for information online and off-line: Gender differences among middle school students. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 29(2), 229–252.
Sack, W. (1995). Representing and recognizing point of view, the American association of artificial intelligence fall symposium on artificial intelligence applications
in knowledge navigation and retrieval. Cambridge, MA: AAAI Press.
Saracevic, T. (1991). In Individual differences in organizing, searching and retrieving information, American society for information science annual meeting (Vol.
28, pp. 82–86).
Saracevic, T. (1996). Modeling interaction in information retrieval (IR): A review and proposal. In Paper presented at the 59th American society for information
science annual meeting, 19–24 October, Baltimore, MD (Vol. 33, pp. 3–9).
Schmeck, R. R. (1988). Learning strategies and learning styles (perspectives on individual differences). New York: Plenum Press.
Seddon, G. M. (1978). The properties of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives for the cognitive domain. Review of Educational Research, 48(2),
303–323.
Seo, Y. -W., Zhang, B. -T. (2000). Learning user’s preferences by analyzing Web-browsing behaviors. In C. Sierra, M. Gini, J.S. Rosenschein (Eds.), Paper
presented at the fourth international conference on autonomous agents, 03–07 June, Barcelona, Spain (pp. 381–387).
Shen, X., Tan, B., Zhai, C. (2005). Context-sensitive information retrieval using implicit feedback. In G. Marchionini, A. Moffat, J. Tait (Eds.), Paper
presented at the 28th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, 15–19 August, Salvador, Brazil (pp.
43–50).
Shoshani, Y., Hazi, R. B. (2007). The use of the internet environment for enhancing creativity. Educational Media International, 44(1), 17–32.
Silverstein, C., Henzinger, M., Marais, H., Moricz, M. (1999). Analysis of a very large Web search engine query log. SIGIR Forum, 33(1), 6–12.
Sperber, D., Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Spink, A. (2004). Everyday life multitasking information behavior: An exploratory study. Journal of Documentation, 60(3), 336–345.
Su, L. T. (2003). A comprehensive and systematic model of user evaluation of Web search engines: II. An evaluation by undergraduates. Journal of the
American Society of Information Science and Technology, 54(13), 1193–1223.
Tang, R. (2002). In an integrated framework for web searching research: Learning, problem solving, and search tasks. In Paper presented at the 4th
international conference on conceptions of library and information science (CoLIS4), 21–25 July, Seattle, WA (pp. 49–67).
Taylor, R. S. (1991). Information use environments. In B. Dervin M. J. Voight (Eds.). Progress in communication sciences (Vol. 10). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Toms, E. G., Dufour, C., Hesemeier, S. (2004). Evaluation: Measuring the user’s experience with digital libraries. In E. -P. Lim, M. Christel (Eds.), Paper
presented at the 4th ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on digital libraries, Tuscon, AZ, USA (pp. 51–52).
Tsai, M.-J., Tsai, C.-C. (2003). Information searching strategies in web-based science learning: The role of internet self-efficacy. Innovations in Education and
Teaching International, 40(1), 43–50.
van Rijsbergen, C. J. (1975). Information retrieval (2nd ed.). London: Butterworths.
Waller, M. J. (Ed.). (1997). Keeping the pins in the air: How work groups juggle multiple tasks (Vol. 4).
Wang, P., Berry, M., Yang, Y. (2003). Mining longitudinal Web queries: Trends and patterns. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 54(8), 743–758.
Wang, P., Hawk, W. B., Tenopir, C. (2000). Users’ interaction with world wide Web resources: An exploratory study using a holistic approach. Information
Processing and Management, 36(2), 229–251.
Webber, S., Johnston, B. (2000). Conceptions of information literacy: New perspectives and implications. Journal of Information Science, 26(6), 381–397.
Wilson, T. D. (1981). On user studies and information needs. Journal of Documentation, 37(1), 3–15.
Wilson, T. D. (1999). Models in information behaviour research. Journal of Documentation, 55(3), 249–270.
Wilson, T. D. (2000). Human information behavior. Informing Science, 3(2), 49–55.
Wittrock, M. (1974). Learning as a generative activity. Educational Psychologist, 11, 87–95.
Wolfram, D. (1999). Term co-occurrence in internet search engine queries: An analysis of the excite data set. Canadian Journal of Information and Library
Science, 24(2/3), 12–33.
Wood, F., Ford, N., Miller, D., Sobczyk, G., Duffin, R. (1996). Information skills, searching behaviour and cognitive styles for student centred learning: A
computer-assisted learning approach. Journal of Information Science, 22(2), 79–92.
Yankelovich, N., Meyrowitz, N., van Dam, A. (1985). Reading and writing the electronic book. IEEE Computer, 18(10), 15–30.
Zhang, M., Jansen, B. J., Spink, A. (2006). In Information searching tactics of Web searchers, Annual meeting of society for information science and technology,
Austin, Texas.
B.J. Jansen et al. / Information Processing and Management 45 (2009) 643–663 663