INFORMATION RESEARCH

Analysis on Characteristics of Cognitive Transitions in the Process of Exploratory Search

  • Chen Yijin ,
  • Lin Yuting
Expand
  • School of Economics and Management, South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006

Received date: 2024-02-04

  Revised date: 2024-06-19

  Online published: 2024-11-25

Supported by

This work is supported by the National Social Science Fund of China titled “Research on the Knowledge Evolution in ‘Search as Learning’ for Health Information Users”(Grant No.20BTQ075)

Abstract

[Purpose/Significance] This study explores the cognitive transition characteristics of users in the exploratory search process and analyzes the users’ cognitive changes under different task types and search intentions. It contributes to a further understanding of the learning mechanism in the exploratory search process. [Method/Process] An experiment was used to record the participants’ search process on the video screen. The think-aloud method was used to collect the participants’ descriptions of the search process. The questionnaire gathered data on the participants’ personal information, task perception, and task answers before and after the search. Through coding of the video and textual data, the article analyzed the length and probability of users’ cognitive transiting paths across different task types, and the characteristics of these paths with different search intents. [Result/Conclusion] This study finds that the cognitive transition path is the shortest when searchers take procedural tasks. Searchers mostly initiate their cognitive transitions from a state of “understanding”, and application is the demarcation point between ascending and descending cognitive states. Analysis of user cognitive transition paths reveals significant variations across different search intents. Paths associated with information collection and information assessment exhibits the highest degree of complexity.

Cite this article

Chen Yijin , Lin Yuting . Analysis on Characteristics of Cognitive Transitions in the Process of Exploratory Search[J]. Library and Information Service, 2024 , 68(22) : 105 -114 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2024.22.010

References

[1] CNNIC.第53次中国互联网络发展状况统计报告[R].中国互联网络信息中心, 2024.(CNNIC.The report of the 53th China Internet development statistics[R].Beijing: Information Center of the China Internet Network, 2024.)
[2] 姜婷婷, 高慧琴.探寻式搜索研究述评[J].中国图书馆学报, 2013, 39(4): 36-47.(JIANG T T, GAO H Q.A review of research studies on exploratory search [J].Journal of library science in China, 2013, 39(4): 36-47.)
[3] MARCHIONINI G.Exploratory search: from finding to understanding[J].Communications of the ACM, 2006, 49(4): 41-46.
[4] URGO K, ARGUELLO J.Understanding the “pathway” towards a searcher’s learning objective[J].ACM transactions on information systems, 2022, 40(4): 1-43.
[5] 陈忆金, 蔡亚芳, 牛庆萱.不同认知能力对用户信息搜索行为与认知路径的影响研究[J].图书情报工作, 2024, 68(5): 97-109.(CHEN Y J, CAI Y F, NIU Q X.Research on the influence of different cognitive abilities on user information search behavior and cognitive paths[J].Library and information service, 2024, 68(5): 97-109.).
[6] 孙海春, 李欣.基于交互感知的探索式搜索中资源的推荐方法[J].计算机科学, 2017, 44(S2): 400-402, 436.(SUN H C, LI X.Resource recommendation method based on interactive perception in exploratory search[J].Computer science, 2017, 44(S2): 400-402, 436.)
[7] WHITE R W, ROTH R A.Exploratory search: beyond the query-response paradigm[M].Williston: Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2009.
[8] XIE H.Patterns between interactive intentions and information-seeking strategies[J].Information processing and management, 2002, 38(1): 55-77.
[9] JANSEN B J, BOOTH D L, SPINK A.Determining the informational, navigational, and transactional intent of web queries[J].Information processing & management, 2008, 44(3): 1251-1266.
[10] 赵一鸣, 程宗, 陈忆金.探寻式搜索路径与搜索意图转换路径的协同分析[J].情报资料工作, 2021, 42(6): 82-90.(ZHAO Y M, CHENG Z, CHEN Y J.Collaborative analysis of exploratory search path and search intention conversion path[J].Information and documentation services, 2021, 42(6): 82-90.)
[11] INGWERSEN P.Cognitive perspectives of information retrieval interaction: elements of a cognitive IR theory[J].Journal of documentation, 1996, 52(1): 3-50.
[12] BRAND-GRUWEL S, WOPEREIS I, VERMETTEN Y.Information problem solving by experts and novices: analysis of a complex cognitive skill[J].Computers in human behavior, 2005, 21(3): 487-508.
[13] ANDERSON L W, KRATHWOHL D R.A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives: complete edition[M].Toronto: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc., 2001.
[14] KUHLTHAU C C.Inside the search process: information seeking from the user's perspective [J].Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 1991, 42(5): 361-371.
[15] 杨倩.探索式搜索行为的先验知识分析与信息服务策略研究[J].图书情报知识, 2021(2): 144-153.(YANG Q.Research on priori knowledge analysis and information service strategy of exploratory search behavior[J].Documentation, information & knowledge, 2021(2): 144-153.)
[16] JANSEN B J, BOOTH D, SMITH B.Using the taxonomy of cognitive learning to model online searching[J].Information processing & management, 2009, 45(6): 643-663.
[17] WU W C, KELLY D, EDWARDS A, et al.Grannies, tanning beds, tattoos and NAS-CAR: evaluation of search tasks with varying levels of cognitive complexity[C]// Proceedings of the 4th information interaction in context symposium.New York: ACM, 2012: 254-257.
[18] QIU S, GADIRAJU U, BOZZON A.Towards memorable information retrieval[C]// Proceedings of the 2020 ACM SIGIR on international conference on theory of information retrieval.New York: ACM, 2020: 69-76.
[19] SYED R, COLLINS-THOMPSON K, BENNETT P N, et al.Improving learning outcomes with gaze tracking and automatic question generation[C]// Proceedings of the Web conference.New York: ACM, 2020: 1693-1703.
[20] LI Y, LIU C, HANSEN P.Incubation and verification processes in information seeking: a case study in the context of autonomous learning[C]//Proceedings of the 2023 conference on human information interaction and retrieval.New York: ACM, 2023: 153-160.
[21] 张云秋, 安文秀, 于双成.探索式搜索中用户认知的实验研究[J].情报理论与实践, 2013, 36(6): 73-77.(ZHANG Y Q, AN W X, YU S C.Experimental study of users' cognition during exploratory search [J].Information studies: theory & application, 2013, 36(6): 73-77.)
[22] 邢玉艳, 刘萍.探索式搜索前后用户认知结构变化研究[J].图书情报工作, 2021, 65(22): 74-84.(XING Y Y, LIU P.Research on users’ cognitive structure changes before and after exploratory search[J].Library and information service, 2021, 65(22): 74-84.)
[23] BRODER A.A taxonomy of web search[C]//ACM Sigir forum.New York: ACM, 2002, 36(2): 3-10.
[24] KELLAR M, WATTERS C, SHEPHERD M.A field study characterizing Web-based information-seeking tasks[J].Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2007, 58(7): 999-1018.
[25] RHA E Y, MITSUI M, BELKIN N J, et al.Exploring the relationships between search intentions and query reformulations[J].Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2016, 53(1): 1-9.
[26] ZHU M, XU R, SUN M, et al.Identifying behavioural intents in a complex search process management system[J].Journal of physics: conference series, 2019, 1302(2): 022076.
[27] UMEMOTO K, YAMAMOTO T, NAKAMURA S, et al.Search intent estimation from user’s eye movements for supporting information seeking[C]//Proceedings of the international working conference on advanced visual interfaces.New York: ACM, 2012: 349-356.
[28] JANG Y M, MALLIPEDDI R, LEE M.Identification of human implicit visual search intention based on eye movement and pupillary analysis[J].User modeling and user-adapted interaction, 2014, 24: 315-344.
[29] RUOTSALO T, PELTONEN J, EUGSTER M, et al.Directing exploratory search with interactive intent modeling[C]//Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on information & knowledge management.New York: ACM, 2013: 1759-1764.
[30] SULTANA T, MANDAL A K, SAHA H, et al.Intent identification by semantically analyzing the search query[J].Modelling, 2024, 5(1): 292-314.
[31] 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.New York: ACM, 2015: 101-110.
[32] URGO K, ARGUELLO J, CAPRA R.Anderson and Krathwohl’s two-dimensional taxonomy applied to task creation and learning assessment[C]//Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGIR international conference on theory of information retrieval.New York: ACM, 2019: 117-124.
[33] VAKKARI P.Searching as learning: a systematization based on literature[J].Journal of information science, 2016, 42(1): 7-18.
[34] KRATHWOHL D R.A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: an overview[J].Theory into practice, 2002, 41(4): 212-218.
Outlines

/