2014
DOI: 10.1080/13614576.2014.955209
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On Interactive Interfaces for Semi-Structured Academic Document Seeking and Relevance Decision Making

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In total 137 search activities on the stratagem level (cf . Table 1) were performed of which keywords (50), references (27), citations (26), and author information (25) were most frequently used. A rather low usage was found for the journal run (4) and classifications (5).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In total 137 search activities on the stratagem level (cf . Table 1) were performed of which keywords (50), references (27), citations (26), and author information (25) were most frequently used. A rather low usage was found for the journal run (4) and classifications (5).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their results showed that users' reading behaviour changes with the relevance of a text or document: Though the fixation duration does not differ when the relevance of a document increases, the number of saccades decreases. Loizides et al [26] investigated the reading behaviour during the search process in DLs and collected information on how users read information about documents and how their attention can be guided, resulting in design implications for custom interfaces in DLs.…”
Section: Eye Tracking Studies and Search Behaviourmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…User interfaces designed to support user access to segments of full-text documents have been discussed in the research literature as part of the book selection process (Wacholder and Liu, 2008;Wacholder et al, 2006), within-document retrieval (Harper et al, 2004), focused retrieval (Arvola et al, 2012) or document triage (Buchanan and Loizides, 2007;Loizides et al, 2014). For example, Harper et al (2004) proposed a user interface called ProfileSkim that provides an interactive bar graph for retrieving relevant segments of a document.…”
Section: Within-document Retrievalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A usability study of the proposed interface suggests that there are significant differences in search times for the different visualizations. Loizides et al (2014) indicate that the search tool of matched query term highlights was rarely used in the process of making relevance judgments for documents. Overall, these studies suggest that interfaces with visualizations of term distributions in a long document can efficiently support user access to portions of the document.…”
Section: Within-document Retrievalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Query term matching has also been used in SmartFind, another hybrid Ctrl/Cmd-F type tool which uses Term Frequency × Inverse Document Frequency (TFIDF) algorithms within a document to provide potentially significant document areas to the information seeker [46]. TriDoc is a bespoke document triage tool which combines the high level results list view of document results with within-document scanning and information searching [49]. Currently, there are two interfaces supported by TriDoc.…”
Section: Software Toolsmentioning
confidence: 99%