1Saracevic T.Information Science.Journal of the American Society for Information Science[J].1999(12):1051-1063.
2Schambor L,Eisenberg M B,Nilan M S.A Re-Examination of Relevance:Toward a Dynamic,Situatlonal Definition[J].Information Processing & Management,1990,26(6):755-776.
10Saracevic T.Relevance reconsldered[C].In P Ingwersen and N O Pors.Information Science:Integration in Perspective.Copenhngen:Royal School of Library and Information Science,1996:14-17.
4Saracevic,T. Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for the thinking on the notion in informa- tion science[J]. Journal of the American Society for In- formation Science, 1975,26(6): 321-343.
5Saracevic,T. Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for thinking on the notion in information science. Part III: Behavior and Effects of Relevance [J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 2007,58 (13):2126-2144.
6Borlund, P. The concept of relevance in IR[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science,2003, 54(10):913-925.
7Mizzaro, S. Relevance: the whole history[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1997,48 (9): 810-832.
8Mizzaro, S. How many relevances in information re- trieval?[J]. Interacting with Computers, 1998, (10): 303-320.
9Schamber, L.,et.al. A reexamination of relevance: to- ward a dynamic, situational definition[J]. Information Processing & management, 1990,26(6):755-775.
10Schamber, L. Relevance and information behavior[J]. Annual Review of information science and Technolo-gy, 1994,(29):3-48.
