不同探索任务的信息搜索行为比较:来自在线知识社区实验的证据

IF 7.4 1区 管理学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS Information Processing & Management Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ipm.2024.103794
Yaxi Liu, Chunxiu Qin, Xubu Ma, Fan Li, Yulong Wang
{"title":"不同探索任务的信息搜索行为比较:来自在线知识社区实验的证据","authors":"Yaxi Liu,&nbsp;Chunxiu Qin,&nbsp;Xubu Ma,&nbsp;Fan Li,&nbsp;Yulong Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.ipm.2024.103794","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Users rely on exploratory search to find useful and serendipitous information in online knowledge communities. Although there are multiple types of exploratory tasks, we know little about the differences in search behaviors for distinct exploratory tasks. Consequently, communities cannot provide adaptive support for users performing distinct exploratory tasks. Against this backdrop, a lab experiment was conducted to reveal the behavioral differences among different exploratory tasks through querying, clicking, scrolling and eye-tracking data. By operationalizing search motivation and cognitive complexity, exploratory tasks were categorized into four types: borderline learning, core learning, borderline investigation, and core investigation. 37 participants with good search ability completed the experiment, and the final dataset contains 124 observations from 31 participants. ANOVA tests showed that users performing investigation tasks generated longer queries, more satisfied clicks, less scrolling, more fixations within result areas, more interactions with social tags, and more frequent browsing of reviews than users performing learning tasks. Compared to core tasks, users had more queries when performing borderline tasks. Moreover, machine learning was conducted to validate whether different exploratory tasks can be distinguished through these behaviors. Gradient Boosting Machine allowed the correct classification of four exploratory tasks with 84.75 % accuracy. The three most important indicators were <em>UniQueryNum, MaxScrollDepth,</em> and <em>TagClickNum</em>. By revealing differences in user behaviors for different exploratory tasks, this study advances the understanding of exploratory search behavior in knowledge communities at a finer granularity, and helps develop adaptive communities that support distinct exploratory tasks.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50365,"journal":{"name":"Information Processing & Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of information search behavior for different exploratory tasks: Evidence from experiments in online knowledge communities\",\"authors\":\"Yaxi Liu,&nbsp;Chunxiu Qin,&nbsp;Xubu Ma,&nbsp;Fan Li,&nbsp;Yulong Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ipm.2024.103794\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Users rely on exploratory search to find useful and serendipitous information in online knowledge communities. Although there are multiple types of exploratory tasks, we know little about the differences in search behaviors for distinct exploratory tasks. Consequently, communities cannot provide adaptive support for users performing distinct exploratory tasks. Against this backdrop, a lab experiment was conducted to reveal the behavioral differences among different exploratory tasks through querying, clicking, scrolling and eye-tracking data. By operationalizing search motivation and cognitive complexity, exploratory tasks were categorized into four types: borderline learning, core learning, borderline investigation, and core investigation. 37 participants with good search ability completed the experiment, and the final dataset contains 124 observations from 31 participants. ANOVA tests showed that users performing investigation tasks generated longer queries, more satisfied clicks, less scrolling, more fixations within result areas, more interactions with social tags, and more frequent browsing of reviews than users performing learning tasks. Compared to core tasks, users had more queries when performing borderline tasks. Moreover, machine learning was conducted to validate whether different exploratory tasks can be distinguished through these behaviors. Gradient Boosting Machine allowed the correct classification of four exploratory tasks with 84.75 % accuracy. The three most important indicators were <em>UniQueryNum, MaxScrollDepth,</em> and <em>TagClickNum</em>. By revealing differences in user behaviors for different exploratory tasks, this study advances the understanding of exploratory search behavior in knowledge communities at a finer granularity, and helps develop adaptive communities that support distinct exploratory tasks.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information Processing & Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information Processing & Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306457324001547\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information Processing & Management","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306457324001547","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

用户依靠探索式搜索在在线知识社区中寻找有用的偶然信息。虽然探索任务有多种类型,但我们对不同探索任务的搜索行为差异知之甚少。因此,社区无法为执行不同探索任务的用户提供自适应支持。在此背景下,我们进行了一项实验室实验,通过查询、点击、滚动和眼动跟踪数据来揭示不同探索任务之间的行为差异。通过对搜索动机和认知复杂性的操作,探索任务被分为四种类型:边缘学习、核心学习、边缘调查和核心调查。37 名具有良好搜索能力的参与者完成了实验,最终数据集包含了来自 31 名参与者的 124 个观察结果。方差分析测试表明,与执行学习任务的用户相比,执行调查任务的用户查询时间更长,点击次数更多,滚动次数更少,在结果区域内的固定次数更多,与社交标签的互动更多,浏览评论的频率更高。与核心任务相比,用户在执行边缘任务时的查询次数更多。此外,我们还进行了机器学习,以验证能否通过这些行为区分不同的探索性任务。梯度提升机器对四种探索任务进行了正确分类,准确率为 84.75%。通过揭示不同探索任务下用户行为的差异,本研究推进了对知识社区中探索性搜索行为的细粒度理解,并有助于开发支持不同探索任务的自适应社区。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of information search behavior for different exploratory tasks: Evidence from experiments in online knowledge communities

Users rely on exploratory search to find useful and serendipitous information in online knowledge communities. Although there are multiple types of exploratory tasks, we know little about the differences in search behaviors for distinct exploratory tasks. Consequently, communities cannot provide adaptive support for users performing distinct exploratory tasks. Against this backdrop, a lab experiment was conducted to reveal the behavioral differences among different exploratory tasks through querying, clicking, scrolling and eye-tracking data. By operationalizing search motivation and cognitive complexity, exploratory tasks were categorized into four types: borderline learning, core learning, borderline investigation, and core investigation. 37 participants with good search ability completed the experiment, and the final dataset contains 124 observations from 31 participants. ANOVA tests showed that users performing investigation tasks generated longer queries, more satisfied clicks, less scrolling, more fixations within result areas, more interactions with social tags, and more frequent browsing of reviews than users performing learning tasks. Compared to core tasks, users had more queries when performing borderline tasks. Moreover, machine learning was conducted to validate whether different exploratory tasks can be distinguished through these behaviors. Gradient Boosting Machine allowed the correct classification of four exploratory tasks with 84.75 % accuracy. The three most important indicators were UniQueryNum, MaxScrollDepth, and TagClickNum. By revealing differences in user behaviors for different exploratory tasks, this study advances the understanding of exploratory search behavior in knowledge communities at a finer granularity, and helps develop adaptive communities that support distinct exploratory tasks.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Information Processing & Management
Information Processing & Management 工程技术-计算机:信息系统
CiteScore
17.00
自引率
11.60%
发文量
276
审稿时长
39 days
期刊介绍: Information Processing and Management is dedicated to publishing cutting-edge original research at the convergence of computing and information science. Our scope encompasses theory, methods, and applications across various domains, including advertising, business, health, information science, information technology marketing, and social computing. We aim to cater to the interests of both primary researchers and practitioners by offering an effective platform for the timely dissemination of advanced and topical issues in this interdisciplinary field. The journal places particular emphasis on original research articles, research survey articles, research method articles, and articles addressing critical applications of research. Join us in advancing knowledge and innovation at the intersection of computing and information science.
期刊最新文献
Fusing temporal and semantic dependencies for session-based recommendation A Universal Adaptive Algorithm for Graph Anomaly Detection A context-aware attention and graph neural network-based multimodal framework for misogyny detection Multi-granularity contrastive zero-shot learning model based on attribute decomposition Asymmetric augmented paradigm-based graph neural architecture search
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1