From Translation to Navigation of Different Discourses: A Model of Search Term Selection during the Pre-Online Stage of the Search Process

Iivonen, M. and Sonnenwald, D. H. From Translation to Navigation of Different Discourses: A Model of Search Term Selection during the Pre-Online Stage of the Search Process. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1998, vol. 49, n. 4, pp. 312-326. [Journal article (Print/Paginated)]

[img]
Preview
PDF
jasist-1998-iivonen-sonnenwald.pdf

Download (136Kb) | Preview

English abstract

We propose a model of search term selection process based on our empirical study of professional searchers during the pre-online stage of the search process. The model characterizes the selection of search terms as the navigation of different discourses. Discourse refers to the way of talking and thinking about a certain topic; there often exists multiple, diverse discourses on the same topic. When selecting search terms, searchers appear to navigate a variety of discourses, i.e., they view the topic of a client's search request from the perspective of multiple discourse communities, and evaluate and synthesize differences and similarities among those discourses when selecting search terms. Six discourses emerged as sources of search terms in our study. These discourses are controlled vocabularies, documents and domains, the practice of indexing, clients' search requests, databases and the searchers' own search experience. Data further suggest that searchers navigate these discourses dynamically and have preferences for certain discourses. Conceptualizing the selection of search terms as a meeting place of different discourses provides new insights into the complex nature of the search term selection process. It emphasizes the multiplicity and complexity of the sources of search terms, the dynamic nature of the search term selection process, and the complex analysis and synthesis of differences and similarities among sources of search terms. It suggests that searchers may need to understand fundamental aspects of multiple discourses in order to select search terms.

Item type: Journal article (Print/Paginated)
Keywords: qualitative research, reference services, info seeking behavior
Subjects: I. Information treatment for information services > IJ. Reference work.
A. Theoretical and general aspects of libraries and information. > AZ. None of these, but in this section.
H. Information sources, supports, channels. > HZ. None of these, but in this section.
Depositing user: Diane Sonnenwald
Date deposited: 18 Aug 2006
Last modified: 02 Oct 2014 12:04
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/7996

References

"SEEK" links will first look for possible matches inside E-LIS and query Google Scholar if no results are found.

Abercrombie, N., Hill, S., & Turner, B. S. (1994). The Penguin dictionary of sociology (3rd ed.). London: Penguin Books.

Barry, C. (1994). User-defined relevance criteria: An exploratory study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45, 149-159.

Bates, M. J. (1990). Where should the person stop and the information search interface start? Information Processing and Management, 26(5), 575-591.

Bates, M. J., Wilde, D. N., & Siegfried, S. (1993). An analysis of search terminology used by humanities scholars: The Getty online searching project report number 1. Library Quarterly, 63, 1-39.

Berg, B. L. (1989). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Bloom, E. (Ed.) (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: David Mckay.

Borland, R. J. (1987). ‘‘The in-formation of information systems’’ in R. J. Borland & R. A. Hirschheim (Eds.), Critical issues in information systems research (pp. 363-380). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Fidel, R. (1986). Towards expert systems for selection of search keys. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 37, 37-44.

Fidel, R. (1991a). Searchers’ selection of search keys: I. The selection routine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42, 490-500.

Fidel, R. (1991b). Searchers’ selection of search keys: II. Controlled vocabulary or free-text searching. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42, 501-514.

Fidel, R. (1991c). Searchers’ selection of search keys: III. Searching styles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42, 515-527.

Hjerppe, R. (1996). Go with the flow, or abide by the side, or watch the waves? Challenges of change for knowledge organization. In R. Green (Ed.), Knowledge organization and change (pp. 10-25). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Iivonen, M. (1990). Interindexer consistency and the indexing environment. International Forum on Information and Documentation, 15(2), 16-21.

Iivonen, M. (1994). Challenges and opportunities of libraries as online search environments. Libri, 44(1), 28-46.

Iivonen, M. (1995). Consistency in the selection of search concepts and search terms. Information Processing & Management, 31(2), 173-190.

International Organization for Standardization. (1985). Documentation—Methods for examining documents, determining their subjects, and selecting indexing terms (ISO 5963). Geneva, Switzerland: Author.

Lancaster, F. W. (1972). Vocabulary control for information retrieval. Washington, DC: Information Resources Press.

Leonard, L. E. (1977). Inter-indexer consistency studies, 1954-1075: A review of the literature and summary of study results. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.

Markey, K. (1984). Interindexer consistency tests: A literature review and report of a test of consistency in indexing visual materials. Library and Information Science Research, 6, 155-167.

Rasmussen, J., Pejtersen, A. M., & Goodstein, L. P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering. New York: Wiley.

Saracevic, T., Mokros, H., Su, L. T., & Spink, A. (1991). Interaction between users and intermediaries in on-line searching. In M. E. Williams (Ed.), Proceedings of the 12th National On-Line Meeting-1991 (pp. 329-341). Medford, NJ: Learned Information.

Schamber, L., & Bateman, J. (1996). User criteria in relevance evalution: Toward development of a measurement scale. In S. Hardin (Ed.), Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science (pp. 218-225), Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc.

Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

Shute, S. J., & Smith, P. J. (1993). Knowledge-based search tactics. Information Processing and Management, 29(10), 29-45.

Simon, H. A. (1981). The sciences of the artificial. Boston: MIT Press.

Sonnenwald, D. H. (1993). Communication in design. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.

Sonnenwald, D. H., & Pejtersen, A. M. (1994). Towards a framework to support information needs in design: A concurrent engineering example. In H. Albrechtsen & S. Oernager (Eds.), Advances in knowl edge organization: Vol. 4 (pp. 161-172). Frankfurt/Main: Indeks Verlag.

Spink, A., & Saracevic, T. (1997). Interaction in information retrieval: Selection and effectiveness of search terms. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48, 741.

Su, L. T. (1991). An investigation to find appropriate measures for evaluating interactive information retrieval. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.

Su, L. T. (1996). Value of search results as a whole as a measure of information retrieval performance. Proceedings of the 59th ASIS Annual Meeting, 33, 226-237.


Actions (login required)

View Item View Item