FOIOTI: An implementation of the conceptualist approach to Internet Information Retrieval

Weideman, Melius

South African Journal of Library and Information Sciences

Weideman, M. 2005. ‘FOIOTI: An implementation of the conceptualist approach to Internet Information Retrieval’, South African Journal of Libraries and Information Science 71(1), December 2005: 11-25. http://sajlis.journals.ac.za/pub/article/view/640

ABSTRACT.
The objective of this research project was to evaluate searching methodologies used by undergraduate learners in searching for academic information, and to design an aid if required. Literature surveys indicated that the sheer size of the Internet and lack of categorization of the information available makes finding relevant information a daunting task. Other problems include a lack of clear search specification formulation and inefficient usage of time and computing power by loading and using one search engine at a time. It was also clear from the literature that Internet searchers have difficulty in general to locate relevant information. The methodology used included empirical experiments involving a total of 1109 learners in a series of empirical experiments to address this situation. Their failure/success, methodology and a number of other factors were measured, and an instrument was designed to overcome these problems. The main conclusion was that the use of this instrument (called FOIOTI: Finder Of Information On The Internet) increased the chances of success under controlled circumstances dramatically. This was achieved by hiding the operational detail from the user, allowing him/her to concentrate on conceptualizing the topic.
REFERENCES
  1. Alreck, P.L. and Settle, R.B. 1985. The research survey handbook. Homewood, IL: Irwin, 63.
  2. Boulton, R. 2002. An introduction to information retrieval. [Online]. Available: http://www.omsee.com/developer/docs/intro_ir.html
    [Site visited on 10/04/2002].
  3. Brewer, E.A. 200 I. When everything is searchable.Communications of the ACM. 44(3): 54.
  4. Bruce, H. 1998. User satisfaction with information seeking on the Internet. Journal of the American Society for Information
    Science. 49(6): 541-556.
  5. Chun, T.Y. 1999. World wide web robots: an overview. Online & CD-ROM Review. 23(3): 135-142.
  6. Courtois, M.P. and Berry, M.W. 1999. Results ranking in web search engines. Online, 44.
  7. Cronje, J.C and Clarke, P.A 1999. Teaching 'teaching on the Internet' on the Internet. South African Journal of Higher Education.
    13(I): 2/3-226.
  8. De Jager, K. and Sayed, Y. 1998. Aspects of information literacy at five institutions of higher education in the Western Cape.
    South African Journal of Higher Education. 12(2): 197-203.
  9. Edling, R.J. 2000. Information technology in the classroom: experiences and recommendations. Campus-Wide Information
    Systems. 17( I): 10-15. .
  10. Feldman, S. 2000. Web search services in 1998: trends and challenges. [Online]. Available: http://www.infotoday.com/searcher/
    jun98/story2.htm [Site visited on 08/12/2000].
  11. Fidel, R. 1991. Searchers' selection of search keys: III. Searching styles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science.
    42(7): 515, 517, 520, 521.
  12. Fidel, R. et al. 1999. A visit to the information mall: web searching behavior of high school students. Journal of the American
    Society for Information Science. 50( I): 24-37.
  13. Foley, M.J. 1996. Hot new database technologies. Datamation. September: 44-49.
  14. Forcese, D.P. and Richer, S. 1973. Social research methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 121.
  15. Frants, V.1.and Shapiro 0, J. 1991. Algorithm for automatic construction of query formulations in boolean form. Journal of the
    American Society for Information Science. 42( I): 16-26.
  16. Gan, S.L. 1998. An overview of information technology and education in Malaysia. Journal of Global Information Management.
    6(1): 27-32.
  17. Garman, N. 1999. Meta search engines. Online. 23(3): 74-78.
  18. Habib, D.P. and Balliot, R.L. 1999. How to search the world wide web: a tutorial for beginners and non-experts. [Online]. Available:
    http://www.ultranet.com/-egrlib/totur.htm [Site visited on 6/3/1999].
  19. Heinstrom, J. 2002. Fast surfers, Broad scanners and Deep divers - personality and information-seeking behaviour. [Online].
    Available: http://www.abo.fi/-jheinstr/text.pdf [Site visited on 19/ I 1/2003].
  20. Hock, R. 1999. Web search engines - features and commands. Online. May/June: 24-28.
  21. Huwe, T.K. 1999. New search tools for multidisciplinary digital libraries. Online. March/April: 67-74.
  22. Jacso, P. I999a. Database selection tools. Online & CD-ROM Review. 23(4): 227-229.
  23. Jacso, P. 1999b. Savvy searchers do ask for directions. Online & CD-ROM Review. 23(2): 99-102.
  24. Janes, J. 2000. Sampling: you don't have to ask everybody. Library Hi Tech. 18( I): 97-10 I.
  25. Jansen, B.J., and Pooch, U. 200 I. A review of web searching studies and a framework for future research. Journal of the
    American Society for Information Science and Technology. 52(3): 237-239.
  26. Kothari, CR. 1991. Research methodology methods & techniques. New Delhi: Wiley Eastern, 121.
  27. Lancaster, F.W. 1978. Information retrieval systems: characteristics, testing and evaluation. New York, NY: John Wiley, 176,279,
    331.
  28. Large, A, Tedd, L.A and Hartley, R.J. 1999. Information seeking in the online age: principles and practice. London: Bowker-Saur,
    5.
  29. Large, A and Beheshti, J. 2000. The web as a classroom resource: reactions from the users. Journal of the American Society for
    Information Science. 51(12): 1069-1080.
  30. Lynch, CA 200 I. When documents deceive: trust and provenance as new factors for information retrieval in a tangled web.
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 52( I): 12-17.
  31. Marais, P.J.J.G. and Marais, AF. 1999. Science education for the new millennium: an exciting challenge. South African Journal of
    Higher Education. 13(2): 82-89.
  32. Mickey, B. 1999. A web search trifecta. Online. May/June: 79-82.
  33. Mizzaro, S. 1998. How many relevances in information retrieval? Interacting with Computers. 16: 303-320.
  34. Notess, G.R. 1997. Internet search techniques and strategies. Online. July/August: 63-66.
  35. Notess, G.R. I999a. On-the-fly search engine analysis. Online. September/October: 63-66.
  36. Notess, G.R. 1999b. Rising relevance in search engines. Online. May/June: 84-86.
  37. O'Leary, M. 2000. New roles come of age. Online. 24(2): 21-25.
  38. Ross, N.CM. and Wolfram, D. 2000. End user searching on the Internet: an analysis of term pair topics submitted to the Excite
    search engine. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(10): 949-958.
  39. Sapsford, R. and JuPP, V. 1996. Data collection and analysis. London: Sage, 28.
  40. Schwartz, C 1998. Web search engines. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 49( I I): 973-982.
  41. Sherman, C 1999. The future of web search. Online. May/June: 54-61.
  42. Siegfried, S., Bates, M.J. and Wilde, D.N. 1993. A profile of end-user searching behavior by humanities scholars: The Getty
    Online Searching Project Report No. 2. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 44(5): 273.
  43. Singh, P. 2003. Information seeking in Electronic Environments. [Online]. Available: http://drtc.isibang.ac.in/-prachi/coolol.html
    [Site visited on 18/11/2003].
  44. Spink, A 1996. Multiple search sessions model of end-user behavior: an exploratory study. Journal of the American Society for
    Information Science. 47(8): 603-609.
  45. Spink, A, Batesman, J. and Jansen, B.J. 1999. Searching the web: a survey of Excite users. Internet Research: Electronic
    Networking Applications and Policy. 9(2): 117-128.
  46. Spink, A et al. 200 I. Searching the web: the public and their queries. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
    Technology. 52(3): 226-234.
  47. Sullivan, D. 1999. Crawling under the hood. Online. May/June: 30-38.
  48. Sullivan, D. 2002. How Search Engines Work. [Online]. Available: http://searchenginewatch.com/webmasters/work.htm/[Site visited
    on 08/11/2002].
  49. Sullivan, D. 2003. Major Search Engines and Directories. [Online]. Available: http://searchenginewatch.com/links/article.php/
    2156221 [Site visited on 05/ I 1/2003].
  50. Voorbij, H.J. 1999. Searching scientific information on the Internet: a Dutch academic user survey. journal of the American
    Society for Information Science. 50(7): 598-615.
  51. Wallace, R.M., Kupperman, J. and Krajcik, J. 2000. Science on the web: students online in a sixth-grade classroom. The journal of
    the Learning Sciences. 9( I): 75-104.
  52. Weideman, M. 200 I. Internet searching as a study aid for information technology and information systems learners at a tertiary level.
    PhD thesis, p J 97. University of Cape Town.
  53. Weideman, M. 2002a. FOIOT! FAQ Page. [Online]. Available: www.mwe.co.za/home/seafaqtips.htm [Site visited on 20/11/2002].
  54. Weideman, M. 2002b. Search Engine URL Page. [Online]' Available: www.mwe.co.za/home/seaenginesurl.htm [Site visited on 20/
    11/2002].
  55. Williams, J. 1996. Bots and other internet beasties. Indianapolis, IN: Sams, 246.
  56. Wolfram, D. and Dimitroff, A. 1997. Preliminary findings on searcher performance and perceptions of performance in a
    hypertext bibliographic retrieval system. journal of the American Society for Information Science. 48(12): 1142-1145.
  57. Wong, P. 1998. Leapfrogging across the millenium: information technology in Singapore schools. journal of Global Information
    Management. 6( I): 5-13.

Full text of Journal Article No 0060: FOIOTI: An implementation of the conceptualist approach to Internet Information Retrieval

Digital Library with full-text of academic publications on website visibility, usability, search engines, information retrieval

Back to Abstracts page