<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="N06-3010">
  <Title>Supporting Multiple Information-Seeking Strategies in a Single System Framework</Title>
  <Section position="4" start_page="247" end_page="247" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
2 Research Problems
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> We aim to investigate the following research  problems: (1) Implementing and evaluating several systems which are tailored to scanning or searching. (2) Developing a structure for guiding and controlling sequences of different support techniques.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> (3) Constructing and evaluating a single system which supports scanning and searching  through integration of different support techniques within a single system framework.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="5" start_page="247" end_page="247" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
3 Methodology
3.1 Research Problem 1
SYSTEMS
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> Using the Lemur toolkit (LEMUR), we implemented and evaluated several different prototype IR systems designed to support scanning (situation 1) or searching (situation 2). Table 1 describes the tasks, as well as features and support techniques for each system.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="6" start_page="247" end_page="247" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
HYPOTHESES
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> database is more effective in supporting scanning tasks than the baseline system which provides a ranked list of documents with descriptions about which databases these documents are in.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> (E1.1/B1.1, situation1-task1) Hypothesis 2: The system providing table of contents navigation is more effective in supporting scanning tasks than the baseline system which lists ranked paragraphs. (E1.2/B1.2, situation1-</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> retrieval results is more effective in supporting searching tasks than the baseline system which presents a ranked list of retrieval results.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> queries is more effective in supporting searching tasks than the baseline system which provides a generic query search. (E2.2/B2.2, situation2-</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"/>
  </Section>
  <Section position="7" start_page="247" end_page="247" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> Participants conducted four searches on four different topics that are suitable for scanning or searching. This is a within-subjects design. Each subject searched half of the topics in one system, then half of the topics in the other system. Within the topic block, the topic order was randomly assigned. No two subjects used the same order of topics and the same order of systems. The experiments were replicated by exchanging the order of the systems.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="8" start_page="247" end_page="247" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
TEXT COLLECTIONS
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> There are two text collections: one is TREC HARD 2004 collection (HARD) which is suitable for situation1-task1 and situation2-task1, the other is a book database which is good for situation1task2 and situation2-task2. This database is composed of books downloaded from Project Gutenberg (Gutenberg).</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="9" start_page="247" end_page="248" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
TASKS
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> In this study, we used the simulated work task situation model (Borlund, 1997) to make subjects' behavior as true-to-life as possible, hoping this will  make our results robust. Here is an example for situation1-task1.</Paragraph>
    <Section position="1" start_page="248" end_page="248" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
3.2 Research Problem 2 (Future Work)
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> In order to guide the presentation of specific support techniques during the information seeking process, we need to specify an interaction structure. This interaction structure is equivalent to a dialogue manager, and can be used to control the interactions between the system and the user.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="1"> We will employ the idea of interaction structure developed in the MERIT system (Belkin, 1995).</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="2"> This structure models human-computer interaction as dialogues and particular dialogue structures are associated with different ISSs. This structure will be incorporated into the system at the user interface level and act as the dialogue manager.</Paragraph>
    </Section>
    <Section position="2" start_page="248" end_page="248" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
3.3 Research Problem 3 (Future Work)
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"/>
    </Section>
  </Section>
  <Section position="10" start_page="248" end_page="248" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
SYSTEM
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> The integrated system will allow the user to use a variety of ISSs and to seamlessly switch from one ISS to another in the information-seeking process.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> The user will be able to choose which ISS to use at any time. ISSs will be classified according to the goal of the interaction, the topic or task, and the information-seeking stage, etc. The system should be able to suggest to the user appropriate ISSs at the appropriate times, given the current state of the information- seeking process.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="11" start_page="248" end_page="248" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
HYPOTHESIS
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> Hypothesis 5: The integrated system purposely designed for supporting both scanning and searching is more effective in supporting tasks requiring scanning and searching than the generic baseline system.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>