科学数据相关性标准使用特征

doi:10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2020.10.007

图书情报工作 ›› 2020, Vol. 64 ›› Issue (10): 56-65.DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2020.10.007

科学数据相关性标准使用特征

张贵兰¹, 周国民², 潘尧², 刘建平², 王健²

1 中国科学技术信息研究所, 北京, 100038;
2 中国农业科学院农业信息研究所, 北京, 100081

收稿日期:2019-11-06 修回日期:2020-02-07 出版日期:2020-05-20 发布日期:2020-05-20
作者简介:张贵兰(ORCID:0000-0002-9153-3579),助理研究员,博士;周国民(ORCID:0000-0001-9906-8061),研究员,博士;潘尧(ORCID:0000-0003-2317-7442),硕士研究生;刘建平(ORCID:0000-0002-1817-5373),博士研究生;王健(ORCID:0000-0003-4958-7669),研究员,博士,通讯作者,E-mail:wangjian01@caas.cn。
基金资助:
本文系中国农业科学院农业信息研究所基本科研业务费重点项目"科学数据出版能力建设研究"（项目编号：JBYW-AII-2020-35）和国家社会科学基金项目"基于信息熵的学术期刊传播规律和评价方法研究"（项目编号：15BTQ059）研究成果之一。

Usage Characteristics of Scientific Data Relevance Criteria

Zhang Guilan¹, Zhou Guomin², Pan Yao², Liu Jianping², Wang Jian²

1 Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China, Beijing 100038;
2 Agricultural Information Institute of CAAS, Beijing 100081

Received:2019-11-06 Revised:2020-02-07 Online:2020-05-20 Published:2020-05-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： [目的/意义] 研究以科学数据为信息载体，探究用户在进行数据检索时，影响其进行相关性判断的标准的使用特征，从而进一步探究科学数据用户的信息行为，为完善数据检索平台和加强数据共享与服务提供理论支持。[方法/过程] 通过调查问卷、访谈与层次分析法相结合的方法开展研究，用户为高校和科研单位在读研究生。[结果/结论] 分析结果显示相关性标准呈现4个特征：①相关性标准的使用情况符合著名的长尾定律；②主题性在相关性判断过程中具有锚定功能；③相关性标准在相关性判断中具有双向性；④相关性标准使用权重相对稳定。研究准确把握了科学数据用户的检索策略，明晰了其检索行为，为改进科学数据共享系统提供了具有可操作性的建议。

关键词: 科学数据, 相关性标准, 相关性标准使用特征, 用户行为

Abstract: [Purpose/significance] This paper explored the use characteristics of relevance criteria that affect the users’ relevance judgment when they retrieved data, so as to further explore the information behavior of scientific users and provide theoretical support for improving the data retrieval platform. [Method/process] The research was carried out by combining questionnaire, interview and AHP. The subjects were graduate students in universities and research institutes. [Result/conclusion] The analysis results showed that the relevance criteria presented 4 characteristics: the use of relevance criteria conformed to the famous long tail law; topicality had anchoring function in the process of relevance judgment; relevance criteria were bidirectional; the weights of relevance criteria were relative stability. The research accurately grasped the retrieval strategy of scientific data users and clarified their retrieval behavior, thus providing operable suggestions for improving the scientific data sharing system.

Key words: scientific data, relevance criteria, use characteristics of relevance criteria, user behavior

中图分类号:

G251

张贵兰, 周国民, 潘尧, 刘建平, 王健. 科学数据相关性标准使用特征[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020, 64(10): 56-65.

Zhang Guilan, Zhou Guomin, Pan Yao, Liu Jianping, Wang Jian. Usage Characteristics of Scientific Data Relevance Criteria[J]. LIS, 2020, 64(10): 56-65.

参考文献

[1] CUADRA C A, KATTER R V. Opening the black box of relevance[J]. Journal of documentation, 1967,23(2):291-303.
[2] REE A M, SCHULTZ D. G. A field experimental approach to the study of relevance assessments in relation to document searching[R].Cleveland:Case Western Reserve University,1967.
[3] BARRY C, SCHAMBER L. Users' criteria for relevance evaluation:a cross-situational comparison[J]. Information processing & management,1998,34(2/3):219-236.
[4] TAYLOR A R, COOL C, BELKIN N J, et al. Relationships between categories of relevance criteria and stage in task completion[J]. Information processing & management, 2007, 43(4):1071-1084.
[5] XU Y, CHEN Z. Relevance judgment:what do information users consider beyond topicality?[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 2010, 57(7):961-973.
[6] BARRY C. User-defined relevance criteria:an exploratory study[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1994, 45(3):149-159.
[7] SCHAMBER L, EISENBERG M B, NILAN M S. A re-examination of relevance:toward a dynamic, situational definition[J]. Information processing & management,1990,26(6):755-776.
[8] COOL C, BELKIN N, FRIEDER O, et al. Characteristics of text affecting relevance judgments[C]//WILLIAMS M E. Proceedings of the 14th National Online Meeting, New York:Learned Information Inc., 1993:77-81.
[9] WANG P, SOERGEL D. A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study I. Document selection[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1998, 49(2):115-133.
[10] WANG P, WHITE M D. A cognitive model of document use during a research project. study II. decisions at the reading and citing stages[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology. 1999,50(2):98-114.
[11] ALONSO O, MIZZARO S. Relevance criteria for e-commerce:a crowdsourcing-based experimental analysis[C]//Proceedings of the 32nd international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval. Boston:ACM, 2009:760-761.
[12] SABBATA D S. Criteria of geographic relevance[C]//WEIBEL R. Fabrikant S. GIScience 2010-6th International conference on geographic information science. Zurich:Springer, 2010:1-4.
[13] SABBATA D S, REICHENBACHER T. Criteria of geographic relevance:an experimental study[J]. International journal of geographical information science, 2012, 26(8):1495-1520.
[14] REICHENBACHER T, SABBATA D S, PURVES R S, et al. Assessing geographic relevance for mobile search:a computational model and its validation via crowdsourcing[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2016, 67(11):2620-2634.
[15] WANG X, HONG Z, XU Y C, et al. Relevance judgments of mobile commercial information[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2014, 65(7):1335-1348.
[16] 高飞. 科学数据用户相关性线索、标准及相互关系研究[D].北京:中国农业科学院,2017.
[17] 张贵兰, 王健, 刘建平,等. 相关性判据与目标信息类型的关系分析[J]. 情报杂志, 2018,37(6):171-179.
[18] BATEMAN J. Changes in relevance criteria:a longitudinal study[C]//Proceedings of the ASIS annual meeting. Pittsburgh:ERIC, 1998:23-32.
[19] BATEMAN J. Modeling the importance of end-user relevance criteria[C]//Proceedings of the ASIS annual meeting. Washington:ERIC, 1999:396-406.
[20] VAKKARI P, HAKALA N. Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in task performance[J]. Journal of documentation, 2000, 56(5):540-562.
[21] MAGLAUGHLIN K L, SONNENWALD D H. User perspectives on relevance criteria:a comparison among relevant, partially relevant, and not-relevant judgments[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2002, 53(5):327-342.
[22] TAYLOR A, ZHANG X, AMADIO W J. Examination of relevance criteria choices and the information search process[J]. Journal of documentation, 2009, 65(5):719-744.
[23] TAYLOR A. User relevance criteria choices and the information search process[J]. Information processing & management, 2012,48(1):136-153.
[24] 成颖. 面向性别差异与任务复杂性的相关性判据研究[J]. 图书情报工作,2011,55(18):29-35.
[25] HAMID R A, THOM J A. Criteria that have an effect on users while making image relevance judgements[C]//Fifteenth Australasian document computing symposium, Melbourne:RMIT University, 2010:1-8.
[26] HAMID R A, THOM J A, ISKANDAR D N F A. Effects of relevance criteria and subjective factors on Web image searching behaviour[J]. Journal of information science, 2017, 43(6):786-800.
[27] CHANG Y S, GWIZDKA J. Relevance criteria dynamics:a study of online news selection on SERPs[J]. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2018, 55(1):768-769.
[28] 张贵兰,王健,周国民,等.科学数据用户相关性标准研究[J].图书情报工作,2019,63(4):112-121.
[29] ZHANG G L, WANG J, ZHOU G M, et al. Scientific data relevance criteria classification and usage[C]//Proceedings of 2nd international conference on computer science and application engineering, Huhhot:ACM,2018:1-7.
[30] 蒋文能. 群组决策中专家权重确定的思路和方法[J]. 统计与决策, 2013 (2):24-28.
[31] 张贵兰. 科学数据用户相关性标准研究[D].北京:中国农业科学院,2019.
[32] WATSON C. An exploratory study of secondary students' judgments of the relevance and reliability of information[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2014, 65(7):1385-1408.
[33] CHEN Z, XU Y. User-oriented relevance judgment:a conceptual model[C]//Proceedings of the 38th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences. Big Island:IEEE, 2005:1-11.
[34] 韦草原, 王健, 张贵兰,等. 基于扎根理论的科学数据用户感知价值概念模型研究[J]. 情报杂志, 2018, 37(5):186-192.
[35] BALATSOUKAS P, RUTHVEN I. An eye-tracking approach to the analysis of relevance judgments on the Web:the case of Google search engine[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2012, 63(9):1728-1746.
[36] KIM Y W, PARK S J. User-based relevance and irrelevance criteria during the task pursuing of middle school students[J]. Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 2014, 48(3):55-70.
[37] RIEH S Y. Judgment of information quality and cognitive authority in the Web[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2002, 53(2):145-161.

科学数据相关性标准使用特征

Usage Characteristics of Scientific Data Relevance Criteria

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	叶兰. 高校图书馆科学数据管理服务能力成熟度模型构建与应用研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(6): 3-14.
[2]	李春秋, 杜博雅, 耿骞, 宋宁远, 李子璇, 原顺梅. 医学科学数据开放平台FAIR原则的应用评估与调查分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(3): 72-82.
[3]	陆丽娜, 尹居峰, 于啸, 尹丽红. 基于联盟链的农业科学数据共享模型构建研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(17): 60-68.
[4]	邱玉红, 焦红, 杨波. 多元数据出版模式下生物医学领域科研人员数据引用行为研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(16): 92-104.
[5]	叶莎莎, 杜婉鹏, 杜杏叶. 信息茧房视域下移动知识服务使用影响因素研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(16): 117-124.
[6]	于会萍, 宛玲. 科学数据存储库的发展态势与推进策略[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(15): 107-115.
[7]	杨宁, 张志强. 科学数据集知识扩散特征探析——以基因表达数据集为例[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(12): 82-91.
[8]	杨宁, 张志强. 结合计量分析和内容分析的科学数据集使用特征研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(10): 122-130.
[9]	刘越男, 何思源. 科学数据与科研档案的管理协同：调查与思考[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(1): 96-105.
[10]	王宁, 刘越男. 档案学视角下的科学数据管理——基于国际组织相关成果的研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(5): 88-97.
[11]	陈越, 都平平, 周琼. 美国高校科学数据使用协议应用情况调查与启示[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(24): 135-142.
[12]	盛小平, 秦颢洋. 公众科学视角下的科学数据开放共享合作行为分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(23): 4-12.
[13]	盛小平, 孙倩倩. 国内科学数据开放共享主题的作者合作关系与合作研究内容分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(23): 13-21.
[14]	张慧, 程雨琦, 王传清. 科学数据开放共享合作关系实证研究——以北京大学开放研究数据平台为例[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(23): 22-30.
[15]	黄永文, 孙坦, 赵瑞雪, 鲜国建, 李娇, 罗婷婷. 科学数据与学术文献关联服务的研究与实现[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(23): 116-125.