User reactions as access mechanism: An exploration based on captions for images

O'Connor, Brian C.; O'Connor, Mary K.; Abbas, June

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(1999)50:8<681::aid-asi6>3.0.co;2-j

Cited by 37 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evidence from previous research shows that, though images are visual information sources with little or no associated text, image users mainly use text to formulate their queries (O'Connor, O'Connor, & Abbas, 1999;Roberts, 2001;Tjondronegoro, Spink, & Jansen, 2009), which is a result of the lack of systems that offer other options. The vast majority of Web search engines that allow image searches provide search interfaces that accept only text queries.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative study of Flickr tags and index terms in a general image collection

Rorissa

2010

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Web 2.0 and social/collaborative tagging have altered the traditional roles of indexer and user. Traditional indexing tools and systems assume the top-down approach to indexing in which a trained professional is responsible for assigning index terms to information sources with a potential user in mind. However, in today's Web, end users create, organize, index, and search for images and other information sources through social tagging and other collaborative activities. One of the impediments to user-centered indexing had been the cost of soliciting user-generated index terms or tags. Social tagging of images such as those on Flickr, an online photo management and sharing application, presents an opportunity that can be seized by designers of indexing tools and systems to bridge the semantic gap between indexer terms and user vocabularies. Empirical research on the differences and similarities between user-generated tags and index terms based on controlled vocabularies has the potential to inform future design of image indexing tools and systems.Toward this end, a random sample of Flickr images and the tags assigned to them were content analyzed and compared with another sample of index terms from a general image collection using established frameworks for image attributes and contents. The results show that there is a fundamental difference between the types of tags and types of index terms used. In light of this, implications for research into and design of user-centered image indexing tools and systems are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative study of Flickr tags and index terms in a general image collection

Rorissa

2010

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to these issues and potential pitfalls in the human process, the transfer from visual to textural is inherently problematic. An image is not a word, a word not an image (O'Connor, 1984;O'Connor, O'Connor & Abbas, 1999). It strikes at once, or nearly at once, while a text rolls out gradually in a narrative stream (Barthes, 1981).…”

Section: Photograph By Brian C O'connor 2014mentioning

confidence: 99%

Transmedial Documentation for Non-Visual Image Access

McCotter

2014

Proc Doc Acad

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In my doctoral studies on information accessibility for the individual who is blind or visually impaired, I’ve been exploring the ways we can make image documents more accessible. This requires using an alternative sensory modality, and translating the document into a different format. The questions that arise when we consider this process are many, but among them are: Is it the same document once we’ve converted it to an audio narrative about the work, or a 3D topographic map of an artwork, or a musical interpretation? If it is not the same document, how truthful can the “trans-medial” translation be to the original work? Are such efforts valid and useful? I hope to work with users who have low vision to determine if these image re-documentations are indeed useful and what means of representation are preferred. We now convert textbooks to audio books or electronic texts readable by special equipment, but how do we treat the images in these documents? The images are part of a whole (the textbook), but are also documents in and of themselves. They may have a history apart from the work within which they’re found. They may be reproduced with permission from copyright holders. What is the best practice for describing an image when reading a text to someone who cannot see? These issues of documentation are part the exploration now under way. I will present several examples of approaches to addressing the problem as provocation for discussion.

show abstract

“…This approach is referred to as the high-level or concept-based approach (e.g. Rasmussen 1997, O'Connor, O'Connor, andAbbas 1999).…”

Section: Background and Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%