Contextual relevance feedback

Abstract

We present results of a preliminary study of a pile-based information retrieval interface that supports contextual relevance feedback. We designed two interfaces based on the pile metaphor, one which supported contextual relevance feedback and the other which did not, and conducted a within-subjects laboratory evaluation with 24 subjects. Results demonstrate support for the pile-based approach generally, with users indicating that it assisted them in structuring and managing their search results. There were significant differences between usability assessments of each interface and in the interactions in which subjects engaged while they were seeking information. Although we found no significant differences in performance between interfaces, subjects showed a strong preference for the contextual relevance feedback interface over the other, and believed that they did better with that interface.

Context effect on query formulation and subjective relevance in health searches

“…We believe context is dynamic and might change each time a new search is made, a new set of results is reviewed or a new document is viewed [10].…”

A human-centric integrated approach to web information search and sharing

“…As a matter of fact, it is often of no difference from many other approaches based on user profiles. Thus, in [46]'s approach contextual relevance feedback is a feedback to a search result list to filter it based on user-collected document piles. Another example is contextual relevance feedback architecture by Limbu et al [47] which, in addition to profiles, utilizes ontologies and lexical databases.…”

Interactive information retrieval

“…However, approaches that allow searchers to manipulate and organize information while they are searching can also be useful. Interfaces such as the pile metaphor suggested by Harper and Kelly (2006)-searchers develop piles of documents as they search-help searchers by visualizing what aspects of a search they have covered and how much material they have collected. Buchanan, Blandford, Thimbleby, and Jones (2004) also find spatial displays and metaphors useful when searchers can organize their own search activities and outputs.…”