Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2012.29.2.113

Users' Relevance Criteria in Universal Search in Korea : An Exploratory Study  

Park, Jung-Ah (다음커뮤니케이션)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Society for information Management / v.29, no.2, 2012 , pp. 113-133 More about this Journal
Abstract
This study is an exploratory research on the user relevance criteria in Korean search service environments that provide integrated search results. Data were collected from 10 participants using a semi-structured interview technique. The participants conducted a web search using integrated search services, such as Naver or Daum on a self-selected topic. They were asked to judge the relevance of retrieved documents and to report their relevance criteria. As a result, the research indicated 8 user-defined relevance and non-relevance criteria. The research shows that specificity and richness are the two most important criteria yet, the user's relevance criteria have not changed much despite the change in search environment.
Keywords
information retrieval; relevance; user-oriented relevance; relevance criteria; user study; user relevance;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Schamber, L., & Bateman, J. (1996). User criteria in relevance evaluation: Toward development of a measurement scale. Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 33, 218-225. Medford, NJ: InformationToday.
2 Schamber, L., Eisenberg, M. B., & Nilan, M. S. (1990). A re-examination of relevance: Toward a dynamic, situational definition. Information Processing & Management, 26, 755-775.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Taylor, A. R., Cool, C., Belkin, N. J., & Amadio, W. J. (2007). Relationships between categories of relevance criteria and stage in task completion. Information Processing & Management, 43, 1071-1084.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Wang, P., & Soergel, D. (1998). A cognitive model of document use during a research project: Study I. Document selection. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49, 115-133.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Wang, P., & White, M. D. (1999). A cognitive model of document use during a research project: Study II. Decisions at the reading and citing stages. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50, 98-144.   DOI
6 Xu, Y., & Chen, Z. (2006). Relevance judgmen t- What do information consumers consider beyond topicality? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57, 961-973.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Yang, M., & Marchionini, G. (2004). Exploring users' video relevance criteria - A pilot study. Proceedings of the 67th annual meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (ASIST '04), 229-238. Medford, NJ: Information Today.
8 Park, T. K. (1994). Toward a theory of user-based relevance: A call for a new paradigm of inquiry. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45, 135-141.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Park, H. (1997). Relevance of science information: Origins and dimensions of relevance and their implications to information retrieval. Information Processing & Management, 33, 339-352.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Rees, A. M., & Schultz, D. G. (1967). A field experiment approach to the study of relevance assessments in relation to document searching, 2. Cleveland, OH: Center for Documentation and Communication Research, School of Library Science, Case Western Reserve University.
11 Saracevic, T. (1975). Relevance: A review of and a framework for the thinking on the notion in information science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 26, 321-343.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Saracevic, T. (2007). Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for thinking on the notion in information science. Part III: Behavior and effects of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58, 2126-2144.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Savolainen, R., & Kari, J. (2006). User-defined relevance criteria in web searching. Journal of Documentation, 62, 685-707.   DOI
14 Schamber, L. (1991). Users' criteria for evaluation in a multimedia environment. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science, Washington, DC, 126-133. Medford, NJ: Learned Information, Inc.
15 Schamber, L. (1994). Relevance and information behavior. In M.E. Williams (Ed.), Annual review of information science and technology (ARIST), 3-48. Medford, NJ: Learned Information, Inc.
16 Froehlich, T. J. (1994). Relevance reconsidered: Towards an agenda for the 21st century: Introduction to special topic issue on relevance research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45, 124-134.   DOI
17 Greisdorf, H. (2003). Relevance thresholds: A multi-stage predictive model of how users evaluate information. Information Processing & Management, 39, 403-423.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Krippendorf, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
19 Hirsh, S. G. (1999). Children's relevance criteria and information seeking on electronic resources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50, 1265-1283.   DOI
20 Hjørland, B., & Christensen, F. S. (2002). Work tasks and socio-cognitive relevance: A specific example.
21 Maglaughlin, K. L., & Sonnewald, H. (2002). User perspective on relevance criteria: A comparison among relevant, partially relevant, and not-relevant. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53, 327-342.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Mizzaro, S. (1997). Relevance: The whole history. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48, 810-832.   DOI
23 Moon, I., & Woyke, E. (2006, January 30). NHN: The little search engine that could. Businessweek.
24 Park, T. K. (1993). The nature of relevance in information retrieval: An empirical study. Library Quarterly, 63, 318-351.   DOI
25 Bilal, D. (2000). Children's use of the Yahooligans! web search engine: I. Cognitive, physical and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51, 646-65.   DOI
26 Borlund, P. (2003). The concept of relevance in IR. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54, 913-925.   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Choi, Y., & Rasmussen, E. M. (2002). Users' relevance criteria in image retrieval in American history. Information Processing & Management, 38, 695-726.   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Cuadra, C. A., & Katter, R.V. (1967a). Experimental studies of relevance judgments: Final report. Volume 1: Project summary (TM-3520/001/00). Santa Monica, CA: System Development Corp.
29 Cooper, W. S. (1971). A definition of relevance for information retrieval. Information Storage and Retrieval, 7, 19-37.   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Cosijn, E., & Ingwersen, P. (2000). Dimensions of relevance. Information Processing & Management, 36, 533-550.   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Cuadra, C. A., & Katter, R.V. (1967b). Opening the black box of "relevance". Journal of Documentation, 23, 291-303.   DOI
32 Fitzgerald, M. A., & Galloway, C. (2001). Relevance judging, evaluation, and decision making in virtual library: A descriptive study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52, 989-1010.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Freund, L. (2008). Exploiting task-document relations in support of information retrieval in the workplace. PhD thesis, University of Toronto.
34 Bateman, J. (1998). Changes in relevance criteria: A longitudinal study. In: ASIS Proceedings. 1998, 23-32.
35 박소연, 이준호 (2008). 주요 검색 포탈들의 통합 검색 서비스 비교 평가. 한국도서관․정보학회지, 39, 265-278.(Park, Soyeon, & Lee, Joon-Ho. (2008). Comparative Evaluation of the Unified Search Services Provided by Major Korean Search Portals. Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society, 39, 265-278.)   과학기술학회마을
36 Barry, C. L. (1994). User-defined relevance criteria: An exploratory study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45, 149-159.   DOI   ScienceOn
37 Barry, C. L., & Schamber, L. (1998). Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: A cross-situational comparison. Information Processing & Management, 34, 219-236.   DOI   ScienceOn