期刊文献+
任意字段
题名或关键词
题名
关键词
文摘
作者
第一作者
机构
刊名
分类号
参考文献
作者简介
基金资助
栏目信息

相关性判据研究综述(2000-2010) 被引量：5

Review on Relevance Criteria (2000-2010)
下载PDF
导出
摘要 作者综述了2000-2010年间的近20项相关性判据实证研究。从研究内容来看,这些研究主要涉及web信息源、多媒体信息源、特定人群、特定视角的相关性判据研究以及相关性判据的动态性研究。通过对研究的归纳以及比较分析发现:现有研究已经形成了一套行之有效的相关性判据研究范式;研究基于真实的信息需求;研究主题多元化;相关性判据的跨语境特征;相关性判据的动态性特征。 Nearly 20 empirical studies to relevance criteria published between 2000 and 2010 are reviewed in this paper.The content of these studies mainly relates to relevance criteria of web information sources,multimedia,specific populations,and particular perspective and dynamic nature of relevance criteria.Results show that： the existing research has formed an effective relevance criteria research paradigm;researches are based on real information need;researches cover various topics;different contexts have similar relevance criteria;the dynamic nature of relevance criteria.
作者 成颖
机构地区 南京大学信息管理系
出处 《情报杂志》 CSSCI 北大核心 2011年第9期79-84,106,共7页 Journal of Intelligence
基金 国家社会科学基金项目"中文学术信息检索系统相关性集成研究"(编号:10CTQ027) 教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目"面向用户的相关性标准及其应用研究"(编号:07JA870006) 中国科学技术信息研究所合作研究项目 南京大学中流文教学术奖助金"基于面向对象模型的相关性标准研究"资助
关键词 相关性 判据 综述 relevance criteria review
分类号 G354 [文化科学—情报学]
  • 相关文献

参考文献41

  • 1Mizzaro S. Relevance: The Whole History[J]. Journal of the A-merican Society for Information Science, 1997,48 (9) :810-832.
  • 2Saracevic T. Relevance: A Review of the Literature and a Framework for Thinking on the Notion in Information Scieixce. Part Ⅱ : Nature and Manifestations of Relevance [ J ]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2007,58(3 ) :1915-1933.
  • 3Saracevic T. Relevance: A Review of the Literature and a Frame- work for Thinking on the Notion in Information Science. Part Ⅲ: Behavior and Effects of Relevance[ J]. Journal of the Amer- ican Society for Information Science and Technology, 2007,58 (13) :2126-2144.
  • 4Cuadra C A. , Katter R V. Experimental Studies of Relevance Judgments Final Report[ R], 1967.
  • 5Rees A M, Schulz D G. A Field Experimental Approach to the Study of Relevance Assessments in Relation to Document Search- ing (2 vols., NSF Contract No. C-423) [R]. Center for Doc- umentation and Communication Research, School of Library Sci- ence, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH,1967.
  • 6Cooper W S. A Definition of Relevance for Information Retriev- al[J]. Information Storage and Retrieval, 1971,7(1 ) :19 - 37.
  • 7Cooper W S. On Selecting a Measure of Retrieval Effectiveness, part 1: The " Subjective" Philosophy of Evaluation[ J], Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1973 ( 24 ) : 87 - 100.
  • 8Cooper W S. On Selecting a Measure of Retrieval Effectiveness, part 2 : Implementation of the Philosophy ~ J ]. Journal of the A- merican Society for Information Science, 1973 (24) :413 - 424.
  • 9Taylor R S. Value- added Processes in Information Systems [M]. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing, 1986.
  • 10Halpem D,Nilan M S. A Step Toward Shifting the Research Em- phasis in Information Science from the System to the User: An Empirical Investigation of Source-evaluation Behaviour in Infor- mation Seeking and Use[ C]. Proceedings of the American Soci- ety for Information Science ( pp. 169 - 176 ). Medford, NJ: Learned Information, 1988.

二级参考文献18

  • 1Spink, A., Greisdorf, H., Bateman, J. (1998).Examining different regions of relevance: From highly relevant to not relevant. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science, Columbus, OH, 3 - 12. Medford,NJ : Learned Information, Inc.
  • 2Su, L.T. (1993). Is relevance an adequate criterion for retrieval system evaluation: An empirical inquiry into user's evaluation. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science, 93 - 103. Medford, NJ: Learned Information, Inc.
  • 3Tang, R., & Solomon, P. (1998). Toward an understanding of the dynamics of relevance judgment: An analysis of one person's search behavior. Information Processing & Management, 34(2/3 ) : 237 -256.
  • 4Wang, P, White, M.D. ( 1999 ). A Cognitive Model of Document Use during a Research Project. Study Ⅱ.Decisions at the Reading and Citing Stages. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50 (2).
  • 5Zhang X.M. (2002). Collaborative Relevance Judgment :A Group Consensus Method for Evaluating User Search Performance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53 ( 3 ).
  • 6Schamber, L. , & Bateman, J. (1996.) User criteria in relevance evaluation; Toward development of a measurement scale. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science, Baltimore, MD 218-225. Medford, NJ: Learned Information, Inc.
  • 7Huang, M. H. (2004). The influence of document presentation order and number of documents judged on users' judgements of relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55( 11 ) : 970-979.
  • 8Janes, J. W. (1994). Other people's judgments: A comparison of user's and other's judgments of document relevance, topicality, and utility. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 45 (3).
  • 9Maglaughlin K. , Sonnenwald D. (2002). User Perspectives on Relevance Criteria: A Comparison among Relevant,Partially Relevant, and Not-Relevant Judgments. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Teehnology. 53 ( 5 ).
  • 10Nilan, M.S., Peek, R.P., Snyder, H.W. (1988). A methodology for tapping user evaluation behaviors: An exploration of users' strategy, source and information evaluating. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science, 152-159. Medford, NJ: Learned Information.

共引文献6

同被引文献68

引证文献5

二级引证文献5

情报杂志
2011年 第9期

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部