面向任务难度感知的检索行为研究

doi:10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2022.03.010

图书情报工作 ›› 2022, Vol. 66 ›› Issue (3): 83-92.DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2022.03.010

面向任务难度感知的检索行为研究

黄崑¹, 陈佳琦¹, 刘畅²

1. 北京师范大学政府管理学院北京 100875;
2. 北京大学信息管理系北京 100871

收稿日期:2021-07-20 修回日期:2021-10-08 出版日期:2022-02-05 发布日期:2022-02-16
作者简介:黄崑,教授,博士,E-mail:huangkun@bnu.edu.cn;陈佳琦,硕士研究生;刘畅,副教授,博士。
基金资助:
本文系国家自然科学基金项目“探索式检索过程中用户的情感体验及其影响机理研究”（项目编号：71974015）研究成果之一。

Research on the Search Behaviors Oriented to Task Difficulty Perception

Huang Kun¹, Chen Jiaqi¹, Liu Chang²

1. School of Government, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875;
2. Department of Information Management, Peking University, Beijing 100871

Received:2021-07-20 Revised:2021-10-08 Online:2022-02-05 Published:2022-02-16

摘要/Abstract

摘要： [目的/意义] 以学习型搜索为背景，探索对于反映用户感知任务难度具有稳定、显著影响的交互行为指标。[方法/过程] 依托课堂教学开展行为实验，以《信息技术应用》课程学生为研究对象，布置5项搜索任务，运用Morae软件进行过程录制，共收集39名学生的170条有效检索行为数据。根据录屏数据和任务难度感知评价数据，对不同难度下呈现显著差异的行为指标进行分析。结合课题组在2016年、2017年开展的两项实验数据，以及已有相关研究发现进行横向比较，归纳不同任务难度下行为指标呈现显著差异的稳定性。[结果/结论] 最终获得具有26项行为指标的稳定行为指标体系，从探索式搜索过程及行为类型角度对用户在困难任务下的行为特点进行描述，并指出未来进一步研究的方向。

关键词: 任务难度, 检索行为, 交互式信息检索, 实验研究

Abstract: [Purpose/significance] This study uses learning-related search as the background to explore interactive behavior indicators that have a stable and significant impact on users' perception of the task difficulty. [Method/process] This research relied on course teaching to carry out behavior experiments. It took Information Technology Application course students as the research objects, used Morae to record search behavior experiments remotely. A total of 170 valid search behavior records from 39 students have been collected. According to the screen recording data and the task difficulty perception evaluation data, this study analyzed the behavior indicators which show significant differences under different difficulty levels. In addition, this study also combined two experimental data that carried out by the research team in 2016 and 2017 and the findings of existing related research, horizontal comparison was made, so as to summarize the stability of significant differences of behavior indicators under different task difficulty levels. [Result/conclusion] Finally, a stable behavior indicator system with 26 behavior indicators is obtained. The research also describes users' behavior characteristics in difficult tasks from the perspective of exploratory search process and behavior types, and points out the future research directions.

Key words: task difficulty, search behavior, interactive information retrieval, experiment study

中图分类号:

G252.7

黄崑, 陈佳琦, 刘畅. 面向任务难度感知的检索行为研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2022, 66(3): 83-92.

Huang Kun, Chen Jiaqi, Liu Chang. Research on the Search Behaviors Oriented to Task Difficulty Perception[J]. Library and Information Service, 2022, 66(3): 83-92.

参考文献

[1] LIU J Q. Deconstructing search tasks in interactive information retrieval:a systematic review of task dimensions and predictors[EB/OL].[2021-10-29].https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102522.
[2] LI Y L, BELKIN N J. A facted approach to conceptualizing tasks in information seeking[J]. Information process and management, 2008,44(6):1822-1837.
[3] KIM S, SOERGEL D. Selecting and measuring task characteristics as independent variables[EB/OL].[2021-10-29].https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.14504201111.
[4] CRESCENZI A, CAPRA R, ARGUELLO J. Time pressure, user satisfaction and task difficulty[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2014, 50(1):1-4.
[5] 刘畅,宋筱璇,杨子傲.用户信息搜索中的学习行为及过程探究[J].大学图书馆学报,2019,37(4):36-45.
[6] 竺培梁. 心理测量——理论与应用[M]. 合肥:中国科学技术大学出版社, 2008.
[7] LIU J J, LI Y, HASTINGS S K. Simplified scheme of search task difficulty reasons[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2019,70(5):526-529.
[8] BELL D J, RUTHVEN I. Searcher's assessments of task complexity for Web searching[C]//Proceedings of the 26th European conference on information retrieval (ECIR 2004). Berlin:Springer, 2004:57-71.
[9] ARGUELLO J. Predicting search task difficulty[C]//Proceedings of European conference on information retrieval. Cham:Springer, 2014:88-99.
[10] LIU J J, GWIZDKA J, LIU C, et al. Predicting task difficulty for different task types[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2010, 47(1):1-10.
[11] LIU J J, LIU C, COLE M, et al. Exploring and predicting search task difficulty[C]//Proceedings of the 21st ACM international conference on information and knowledge management. Maui:ACM, 2012:1313-1322.
[12] LIU C, LIU J J, BELKIN N J. Predicting search task difficulty at different search stages[C]//Proceedings of the 23rd ACM international conference on conference on information and knowledge management. Shanghai:ACM, 2014:569-578.
[13] 黄崑, 陈佳琦, 郑明煊, 等. 信息搜索任务难度研究述评[J]. 信息资源管理学报, 2020, 10(4):88-98.
[14] WILDEMUTH B M, KELLY D, BOETTCHER E, et al. Examining the impact of domain and cognitive complexity on query formulation and reformulation[J]. Information processing & management, 2018, 54(3):433-450.
[15] GWIZDKA J, SPENCE I. What can searching behavior tell us about the difficulty of information tasks? a study of Web navigation[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2006, 43(1):1-22.
[16] KIM J. Task difficulty as a predictor and indicator of Web searching interaction[C]//Proceedings of CHI'06 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems. Montréal:ACM, 2006:959-964.
[17] FIDEL R. Moves in online searching[J]. Online review. 1985, 9(1):61-74.
[18] ANDERSON L W, KRATHWOHL D R, AIRASIAN P W, et al. Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing:a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives[J]. European legacy, 2001, 114(458):1013-1014.
[19] KELLY D, ARGUELLO J, EDWARDS A, et al. Development and evaluation of search tasks for IIR experiments using a cognitive complexity framework[C]//Proceedings of the 2015 international conference on the theory of information retrieval. Northampton:ACM, 2015:101-110.
[20] BARZI F, WOODWARD M. Imputations of missing values in practice:results from imputations of serum cholesterol in 28 cohort studies[J]. American journal of epidemiology. 2004,160(1):34-45.
[21] 庞新生.缺失数据处理方法的比较[J].统计与决策,2010(24):152-155.
[22] DEMPSTER A P, LAIRD N M, RUBIN D B. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, series B(Methodological), 1977, 39(1):1-38.
[23] 张路路,黄崑.基于认知风格的数字图书馆用户信息检索行为研究[J]. 情报学报,2018,37(11):1164-1174.
[24] BYSTRÖM K, JÄRVELIN K. Task complexity affects information seeking and use[J]. Information processing & management, 1995, 31(2):191-213.
[25] 王凯飞,黄崑.数字图书馆用户检索失败的影响因素研究[J].图书情报工作,2019,63(11):25-34.
[26] WHITE R W, ROTH R A. Exploratory search:beyond the query-response paradigm[J]. Synthesis lectures on information concepts, retrieval, and services, 2009, 1(1):1-98.
[27] AULA A, KHAN R M, GUAN Z. How does search behavior change as search becomes more difficult?[C]//Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. Atlanta:ACM, 2010:35-44.
[28] INTHIRAN A, ALHASHMI S M, AHMED P K. A user study on the information search behaviour of medical students[J]. Malaysian journal of library & information science,2015,20(1):61-77.
[29] DAN O, DAVISON B D. Measuring and predicting search engine users' satisfaction[J]. ACM computing surveys, 2016, 49(1):1-35.
[30] FRASER L, LOCATIS C. Effects of link annotations on search performance in layered and unlayered hierarchically organized information spaces[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2001, 52(14):1255-1261.
[31] HU X, KANDO N. Task complexity and difficulty in music information retrieval[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2017, 68(7):1711-1723.
[32] HIENERT D, MITSUI M, MAYR P, et al. The role of the task topic in Web search of different task types[C]//Proceedings of 3rd ACM SIGIR conference on human information interaction and retrieval (CHIIR). New Brunswick:ACM, 2018:72-81.
[33] KUHLTHAU C C. Seeking meaning:a process approach to library and information services[M]. New York:Libraries Unltd Inc, 2004.
[34] DERVIN B. Sense-making theory and practice:an overview of user interests in knowledge seeking and use[J]. Journal of knowledge management, 1998, 2(2):36-46.
[35] NIU X, KELLY D. The use of query suggestions during information search[J]. Information processing & management, 2014, 50(1):218-234.

面向任务难度感知的检索行为研究

Research on the Search Behaviors Oriented to Task Difficulty Perception

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 14

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	方舟, 洪采菲, 秦姝言, 刘畅. 自我调节学习情境下任务类型和学习认知策略对视频类搜索行为的影响[J]. 图书情报工作, 2021, 65(21): 84-96.
[2]	王文韬, 张行萍, 罗琴凤, 张震, 杨敏, 谢阳群. 在线健康信息检索行为实验研究内容梳理及启示[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020, 64(3): 119-129.
[3]	吴桐, 张自然, 付婷, 董思怡, 吴艾蔓. 协同信息检索行为实验研究综述[J]. 图书情报工作, 2016, 60(5): 125-132.
[4]	吴丹, 董晶. 移动图书馆用户查询式构造行为分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2016, 60(18): 6-13.
[5]	吴丹, 孙浩东. 移动图书馆WAP和APP用户检索行为比较分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2016, 60(18): 14-20,34.
[6]	吴丹, 毕仁敏. 移动图书馆与非移动图书馆用户检索点比较分析[J]. 图书情报工作, 2016, 60(18): 21-26.
[7]	刘小凤, 张亮亮. 社会行动理论视角下的阅读引导策略研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(15): 35-41.
[8]	黄崑, 张路路, 郭建峰. 基于公共与非公共检索计算机的OPAC检索行为比较研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(14): 103-110,142.
[9]	吴丹, 李一喆. 老年人网络健康信息检索行为实验研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2014, 58(12): 102-108.
[10]	徐文哲, 郑建明, 毕建新. 国外儿童图书馆研究述评[J]. 图书情报工作, 2013, 57(18): 138-145.
[11]	魏群义, 何希, 霍然, 侯桂楠. 读者检索行为研究综述[J]. 图书情报工作, 2012, 56(15): 131-134,125.
[12]	甘利人,钱敏,高路. 电子商务网站的用户隐喻认知初探[J]. 图书情报工作, 2009, 53(18): 132-136.
[13]	潘幼乔邓小昭 . 基于Zelen设计的网络用户信息检索行为实验方案与评估[J]. 图书情报工作, 2007, 0(03): 76-79.
[14]	董小英, 张本波, 陶锦, 冯安命. 中国学术界用户对互联网信息的利用及其评价[J]. 图书情报工作, 2002, 46(10): 29-40.