|
|
|
| Comparison of Process-Oriented Information Interaction Models and Its Enlightenment |
| Wang Zhihong1,2, Cao Shujin3, Liu Yiqun1,2 |
1.Department of Computer Science and Technology, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084
2.Beijing National Research Center for Information Science and Technology, Beijing 100084
3.School of Information Management, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510006 |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Several existing process-oriented information interaction models have been proposed in the last few decades. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no research on systematically comparing and combing these models. Therefore, in this study, by reviewing researches on the explanations of the process approach and methodologies in the fields of philosophy and other social sciences, the components of the general process model are identified. Secondly, a collection of studies on the information interaction model is systematically constructed by combining citation analysis, database retrieval and other methods. Amongst them, the process-oriented models are selected according to the characteristics of the process approach. These models are further classified into four categories, including dynamic evolution model, cognitive process model, behavior process model and work task-based process model in prior to be reviewed. Finally, these models are compared and analyzed from the perspective of the constituent elements of the general process model, including the number of stages, the relationships among the stages, the input and output factors, etc. The corresponding enlightenment is provided from the aspects of the information interaction process and system evaluation metrics and so on.
|
|
Received: 08 July 2021
|
|
|
|
1 Savage-Knepshield P A, Belkin N J. Interaction in information retrieval: trends over time[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1999, 50(12): 1067-1082.
2 Wilson T D. Human information behavior[J]. Informing Science: the International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 2000, 3: 49-56.
3 Wilson T D. Models in information behaviour research[J]. Journal of Documentation, 1999, 55(3): 249-270.
4 姜婷婷, 杨佳琪, 李倩. 信息行为领域概念空间构建与研究进展述评[J]. 图书情报知识, 2019(1): 99-108.
5 Spink A, Cole C. Human information behavior: integrating diverse approaches and information use[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2006, 57(1): 25-35.
6 White R W. Interactions with search systems[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016: 105-109.
7 Beaulieu M. Interaction in information searching and retrieval[J]. Journal of Documentation, 2000, 56(4): 431-439.
8 Toms E G. Information interaction: providing a framework for information architecture[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2002, 53(10): 855-862.
9 Savolainen R. Information-seeking processes as temporal developments: comparison of stage-based and cyclic approaches[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2018, 69(6): 787-797.
10 Burton-Jones A, McLean E R, Monod E. Theoretical perspectives in IS research: from variance and process to conceptual latitude and conceptual fit[J]. European Journal of Information Systems, 2015, 24(6): 664-679.
11 Morris D R. Causal inference in the social sciences: variance theory, process theory, and system dynamics[C/OL]// Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Boston, USA, 2005. https://proceedings.systemdynamics.org/2005/proceed/papers/MORRI261.pdf.
12 Chiles T H. Process theorizing: too important to ignore in a kaleidic world[J]. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2003, 2(3): 288-291.
13 Sminia H. Process research in strategy formation: theory, methodology and relevance[J]. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2009, 11(1): 97-125.
14 Greenberg L S. Change process research[J]. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1986, 54(1): 4-9.
15 Bizzi L, Langley A. Studying processes in and around networks[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2012, 41(2): 224-234.
16 Ann L. Strategies for theorizing from process data[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1999, 24(4): 691-710.
17 Kuhlthau C C. Inside the search process: information seeking from the user's perspective[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1991, 42(5): 361-371.
18 Marchionini G. Information-seeking perspective and framework[M]// Information Seeking in Electronic Environments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995: 27-60.
19 恩格斯. 费尔巴哈和德国古典哲学的终结[M/OL]. 1888. (2021-06-06). https://www.marxists.org/chinese/engels/marxist.org-chinese-engels-1888.htm.
20 怀特海. 过程与实在——宇宙论研究[M]. 李步楼, 译. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2012: 38-39, 326-334.
21 杨富斌. 怀特海过程哲学思想述评[J]. 国外社会科学, 2003(4): 75-82.
22 Stanford Encuclopedia of Philosophy. Process philosophy[EB/OL]. (2017-10-26) [2022-05-25]. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/process-philosophy/#ThreTaskProcPhil.
23 赵笙, 张欣毅. 图书馆是一个生长着的有机体——图书馆学新老五定律引发的思考[J]. 图书馆理论与实践, 1999(4): 29-32.
24 Zhang D S. Web services composition for process management in e-business[J]. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 2005, 45(2): 83-91.
25 International Organization for Standardization. The process approach in ISO 9001:2015[EB/OL]. [2022-05-25]. https://www.iso.org/files/live/sites/isoorg/files/archive/pdf/en/iso9001-2015-process-appr.pdf.
26 Pavlovi? A. ISO 9001:2015 explained: what is the process approach?[EB/OL]. (2016-09-29) [2022-05-25]. https://quality.eqms.co.uk/blog/what-is-a-process-approach.
27 Ewy R, Gmitro H A. Process management in education: how to design, measure, deploy, and improve educational processes[M]. Milwaukee: ASQ Quality Press, 2009: 1.
28 Gregory M J. Technology management: a process approach[J]. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 1995, 209(5): 347-356.
29 Newman M, Sabherwal R. A process model for the control of information system development projects[C]// Proceedings of the tenth international conference on Information Systems. New York: ACM Press, 1989: 185-197.
30 Stanford Encuclopedia of Philosophy. Pragmatism[EB/OL]. (2021-04-06) [2022-05-25]. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatism/.
31 D?rnyei Z, Ottó I. Motivation in action: a process model of L2 motivation[R]. Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, Thames Valley University, London, 1998, 4: 43-69.
32 Trkman P, Indihar ?temberger M, Jakli? J, et al. Process approach to supply chain integration[J]. Supply Chain Management, 2007, 12(2): 116-128.
33 Newman M, Robey D. A social process model of user-analyst relationships[J]. MIS Quarterly, 1992, 16(2): 249.
34 Hearst M A. Models of the information seeking process[M/OL]// Search User Interfaces. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009. https://searchuserinterfaces.com/book/sui_ch3_models_of_ information_seeking.html.
35 Case D O. Looking for information: a survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behavior[M]. 2nd ed. London: Academic Press, 2007: 119-140.
36 Robson A, Robinson L. Building on models of information behaviour: linking information seeking and communication[J]. Journal of Documentation, 2013, 69(2): 169-193.
37 Kundu D K. Models of information seeking behaviour: a comparative study[J]. International Journal of Library and Information Studies, 2017, 7(4): 393-405.
38 Dinet J, Chevalier A, Tricot A. Information search activity: an overview[J]. European Review of Applied Psychology, 2012, 62(2): 49-62.
39 Knight S A, Spink A. Toward a web search information behavior model[M]// Web Search. Heidelberg: Springer, 2008: 209-234.
40 Kallehauge J. Stage-driven information seeking process: value and uncertainty of work tasks from initiation to resolution[J]. Journal of Information Science, 2010, 36(2): 242-262.
41 Taylor A. User relevance criteria choices and the information search process[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2012, 48(1): 136-153.
42 甘利人, 李恒. 科技用户信息搜寻过程中的问题解决机制解释[J]. 情报学报, 2006, 25(4): 441-450.
43 Rouet J F, Britt M A. Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension[M]// Text Relevance and Learning from Text. Information Age Publishing, 2011: 19-52.
44 J?rvelin K. Salton award keynote: information interaction in context[J]. ACM SIGIR Forum, 2019, 52(2): 52-63.
45 Bystr?m K, Hansen P. Conceptual framework for tasks in information studies[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2005, 56(10): 1050-1061.
46 Bates M J. The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface[J]. Online Review, 1989, 13(5): 407-424.
47 Pirolli P, Card S. Information foraging in information access environments[C]// Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: ACM Press, 1995: 51-58.
48 Pirolli P, Card S. Information foraging[J]. Psychological Review, 1999, 106(4): 643-675.
49 Pirolli P, Card S. The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis[C]// Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligence Analysis, California, USA, 2005, 5: 2-4.
50 Saracevic T. Relevance reconsidered[C]// Proceedings of the Second Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science: Integration in Perspective, Copenhagen, Denmark, 1996: 201-218.
51 Marchionini G. Information-seeking strategies of novices using a full-text electronic encyclopedia[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1989, 40(1): 54-66.
52 Marchionini G, White R. Find what you need, understand what you find[J]. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 2007, 23(3): 205-237.
53 Sutcliffe A, Ennis M. Towards a cognitive theory of information retrieval[J]. Interacting with Computers, 1998, 10(3): 321-351.
54 Zhang P Y, Soergel D, Klavans J L, et al. Extending sense-making models with ideas from cognition and learning theories[J]. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2008, 45(1): 23.
55 Zhang P Y, Soergel D. Towards a comprehensive model of the cognitive process and mechanisms of individual sensemaking[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2014, 65(9): 1733-1756.
56 Thomas J B, Clark S M, Gioia D A. Strategic sensemaking and organizational performance: linkages among scanning, interpretation, action, and outcomes[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 1993, 36(2): 239-270.
57 Seligman L. Sensemaking throughout adoption and the innovation-decision process[J]. European Journal of Innovation Management, 2006, 9(1): 108-120.
58 Qu Y, Furnas G W. Model-driven formative evaluation of exploratory search: a study under a sensemaking framework[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2008, 44(2): 534-555.
59 Cole C. Information as process: the difference between corroborating evidence and “information” in humanistic research domains[J]. Information Processing & Management, 1997, 33(1): 55-67.
60 Dervin B. An overview of sense-making research: concepts, methods, and results to date[C/OL]// Proceedings of the International Communication Association Annual Meeting, Dallas, Texas, USA, 1983. http://faculty.washington.edu/wpratt/MEBI598/Methods/An%20Overview%20of%20Sense-Making%20Research%201983a.htm.
61 Cheuk Wai‐yi B. An information seeking and using process model in the workplace: a constructivist approach[J]. Asian Libraries, 1998, 7(12): 375-390.
62 Vakkari P. Searching as learning: a systematization based on literature[J]. Journal of Information Science, 2016, 42(1): 7-18.
63 石颖, 邓小昭. 以布鲁克斯方程阐释知识结构[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2007, 30(1): 11-13.
64 Kuhlthau C C, Maniotes L K, Caspari A K. Guided inquiry design: a framework for inquiry in your school[M]. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2012: 1-6.
65 Eisenberg M B, Berkowitz R E. Information problem-solving: the big six skills approach[J]. School Library Media Activities Monthly, 1992, 8(5): 27-29.
66 Brand-Gruwel S, Wopereis I, Vermetten Y. Information problem solving by experts and novices: analysis of a complex cognitive skill[J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2005, 21(3): 487-508.
67 Brand-Gruwel S, Wopereis I, Walraven A. A descriptive model of information problem solving while using internet[J]. Computers & Education, 2009, 53(4): 1207-1217.
68 Rieh S Y, Collins-Thompson K, Hansen P, et al. Towards searching as a learning process: a review of current perspectives and future directions[J]. Journal of Information Science, 2016, 42(1): 19-34.
69 Neuman D. Constructing knowledge in the twenty-first century: I-LEARN and using information as a tool for learning[J]. School Library Media Research, 2011, 14: 97-114.
70 Vakkari P. A theory of the task-based information retrieval process: a summary and generalisation of a longitudinal study[J]. Journal of Documentation, 2001, 57(1): 44-60.
71 Kennedy L, Cole C, Carter S. The false focus in online searching: the particular case of undergraduates seeking information for course assignments in the humanities and social sciences[J]. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 1999, 38(3): 267-273.
72 MacMullin S E, Taylor R S. Problem dimensions and information traits[J]. The Information Society, 1984, 3(1): 91-111.
73 Harter S P. Psychological relevance and information science[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1992, 43(9): 602-615.
74 Xie I. Dimensions of tasks: influences on information-seeking and retrieving process[J]. Journal of Documentation, 2009, 65(3): 339-366.
75 Norman D A. The design of everyday things: revised and expanded edition[M]. New York: Basic Books, 2013: 40-44.
76 Norman D A. Stages and levels in human-machine interaction[J]. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 1984, 21(4): 365-375.
77 Simon H A. The new science of management decision[M]. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960: 3.
78 Wilson T D. Information behaviour: an interdisciplinary perspective[J]. Information Processing & Management, 1997, 33(4): 551-572.
79 Ellis D. A behavioural approach to information retrieval system design[J]. Journal of Documentation, 1989, 45(3): 171-212.
80 Ellis D. Modeling the information-seeking patterns of academic researchers: a grounded theory approach[J]. The Library Quarterly, 1993, 63(4): 469-486.
81 Ellis D, Haugan M. Modelling the information seeking patterns of engineers and research scientists in an industrial environment[J]. Journal of Documentation, 1997, 53(4): 384-403.
82 Ellis D, Cox D, Hall K. A comparison of the information seeking patterns of researchers in the physical and social sciences[J]. Journal of Documentation, 1993, 49(4): 356-369.
83 Makri S, Blandford A, Cox A L. Investigating the information-seeking behaviour of academic lawyers: from Ellis’s model to design[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2008, 44(2): 613-634.
84 Meho L I, Tibbo H R. Modeling the information-seeking behavior of social scientists: Ellis's study revisited[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2003, 54(6): 570-587.
85 Guthrie J T, Mosenthal P. Literacy as multidimensional: locating information and reading comprehension[J]. Educational Psychologist, 1987, 22(3/4): 279-297.
86 Guthrie J T. Locating information in documents: examination of a cognitive model[J]. Reading Research Quarterly, 1988, 23(2): 178-199.
87 Guthrie J T, Weber S, Kimmerly N. Searching documents: cognitive processes and deficits in understanding graphs, tables, and illustrations[J]. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1993, 18(2): 186-221.
88 Armbruster B B, Armstrong J O. Locating information in text: a focus on children in the elementary grades[J]. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1993, 18(2): 139-161.
89 Tanni M, Sormunen E. A critical review of research on information behavior in assigned learning tasks[J]. Journal of Documentation, 2008, 64(6): 893-914.
90 J?rvelin K, Vakkari P, Arvola P, et al. Task-based information interaction evaluation: the viewpoint of program theory[J]. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 2015, 33(1): Article No.3.
91 Song X X, Liu C, Liu H R. Characterizing and exploring users’ task completion process at different stages in learning related tasks[J]. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2018, 55(1): 460-469.
92 Savolainen R. Information behavior and information practice: reviewing the “umbrella concepts” of information-seeking studies[J]. The Library Quarterly, 2007, 77(2): 109-132.
93 Unsworth J. Scholarly primitives: what methods do humanities researchers have in common, and how might our tools reflect this?[C/OL]// Proceedings of the Symposium on Humanities Computing: Formal Methods, Experimental Practice. King’s College, 2000. https://johnunsworth.name/Kings.5-00/primitives.html.
94 Palmer C L, Teffeau L C, Pirmann C M. Scholarly information practices in the online environment: Themes from the literature and implications for library service development[R/OL]. Dublin: OCLC Research, 2009. [2022-05-25]. https://www.oclc.org/programs/publications/reports/2009-02.pdf.
95 Palmer C L, Neumann L J. The information work of interdisciplinary humanities scholars: exploration and translation[J]. The Library Quarterly, 2002, 72(1): 85-117.
96 Melgar L, Koolen M, Huurdeman H, et al. A process model of scholarly media annotation[C]// Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval. New York: ACM Press, 2017: 305-308.
97 Duff W M, Johnson C A. Accidentally found on purpose: information-seeking behavior of historians in archives[J]. The Library Quarterly, 2002, 72(4): 472-496.
98 Trace C B, Karadkar U P. Information management in the humanities: scholarly processes, tools, and the construction of personal collections[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2017, 68(2): 491-507.
99 Kavli S M L, Mikki S. Enabling the student to write a good thesis: combining information retrieval with the writing process[J]. InfoTrend, 2006, 61(4): 112-120.
100 Xu Y J. The dynamics of interactive information retrieval behavior, part I: an activity theory perspective[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2007, 58(7): 958-970.
101 Sonnenwald D H, Iivonen M. An integrated human information behavior research framework for information studies[J]. Library & Information Science Research, 1999, 21(4): 429-457.
102 Spink A, Wilson T D, Ford N, et al. Information-seeking and mediated searching. Part 1. Theoretical framework and research design[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2002, 53(9): 695-703.
103 Niu X, Kelly D. The use of query suggestions during information search[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2014, 50(1): 218-234.
104 Spink A, Greisdorf H, Bateman J. From highly relevant to not relevant: examining different regions of relevance[J]. Information Processing & Management, 1998, 34(5): 599-621.
105 Cox R R. Schutz’s theory of relevance: a phenomenological critique[M]. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1978: 127-133.
106 Moffat A, Scholer F, Thomas P. Models and metrics: IR evaluation as a user process[C]// Proceedings of the Seventeenth Australasian Document Computing Symposium. New York: ACM Press, 2012: 47-54.
107 Vakkari P, V?lske M, Potthast M, et al. Modeling the usefulness of search results as measured by information use[J]. Information Processing & Management, 2019, 56(3): 879-894.
108 Savolainen R. Time as a context of information seeking[J]. Library & Information Science Research, 2006, 28(1): 110-127. |
|
|
|
