评估政府元搜索的接口

Paul Thomas, Katherine Noack, Cécile Paris
{"title":"评估政府元搜索的接口","authors":"Paul Thomas, Katherine Noack, Cécile Paris","doi":"10.1145/1840784.1840796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Metasearch tools, which combine search results from any number of independent search engines, could be useful in a range of tasks and especially for integrating information from separate government agencies. However, it is not immediately clear what user interfaces might be appropriate for presenting results from more than one source.\n We evaluated four interface designs with real tasks from Centrelink, Australia's social services agency, and with a working metasearch tool. Test users recorded similar overall effectiveness across these interfaces, but did not like the most familiar options, a single ranked list or a link to broaden search scope. Interfaces which supported identifying, understanding, and selecting between sources were strongly preferred.","PeriodicalId":413481,"journal":{"name":"International Conference on Information Interaction in Context","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating interfaces for government metasearch\",\"authors\":\"Paul Thomas, Katherine Noack, Cécile Paris\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/1840784.1840796\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Metasearch tools, which combine search results from any number of independent search engines, could be useful in a range of tasks and especially for integrating information from separate government agencies. However, it is not immediately clear what user interfaces might be appropriate for presenting results from more than one source.\\n We evaluated four interface designs with real tasks from Centrelink, Australia's social services agency, and with a working metasearch tool. Test users recorded similar overall effectiveness across these interfaces, but did not like the most familiar options, a single ranked list or a link to broaden search scope. Interfaces which supported identifying, understanding, and selecting between sources were strongly preferred.\",\"PeriodicalId\":413481,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Conference on Information Interaction in Context\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Conference on Information Interaction in Context\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/1840784.1840796\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Conference on Information Interaction in Context","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/1840784.1840796","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

元搜索工具可以将任意数量的独立搜索引擎的搜索结果组合在一起,可以在一系列任务中发挥作用,特别是在整合来自不同政府机构的信息时。然而,目前还不清楚什么样的用户界面适合显示来自多个来源的结果。我们用来自澳大利亚社会服务机构Centrelink的真实任务和一个可用的元搜索工具评估了四个界面设计。测试用户在这些界面中记录了相似的总体效果,但不喜欢最熟悉的选项,单一排名列表或扩大搜索范围的链接。支持识别、理解和在源之间选择的接口是强烈首选的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating interfaces for government metasearch
Metasearch tools, which combine search results from any number of independent search engines, could be useful in a range of tasks and especially for integrating information from separate government agencies. However, it is not immediately clear what user interfaces might be appropriate for presenting results from more than one source. We evaluated four interface designs with real tasks from Centrelink, Australia's social services agency, and with a working metasearch tool. Test users recorded similar overall effectiveness across these interfaces, but did not like the most familiar options, a single ranked list or a link to broaden search scope. Interfaces which supported identifying, understanding, and selecting between sources were strongly preferred.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信