Advertisement

A Study About Searching Behavior of Scientific Data User Based on Educational Background and Retrieval Capability

  • Guilan Zhang
  • Jian WangEmail author
  • Guomin Zhou
  • Jianping Liu
  • Fei Gao
  • Caoyuan Wei
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 545)

Abstract

As a new information carrier, the scientific data carries a lot of information. People who work in scientific research are more or less likely to search scientific data for work. We investigate the retrieval behavior of researchers in the process of searching data through questionnaires. The survey included the selection of searching data channels, using the clues and criterion in the process of retrieving data and some difficulties in the retrieval process. The results show that the retrieval behavior of scientific data users is influenced by educational background and retrieval ability. The education determines the breadth and depth of the data requirements, and the retrieval ability determines the access to data and the amount of data to use. So, in the process of designing data retrieval system, it is necessary to meet the needs of users in different cognitive contexts.

Keywords

Scientific data Retrieval behavior Educational background Retrieval capability 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a grant from the Social science fund- Scientific Data User Relevance Criteria and Use Model Empirical Study (14BTQ056), National High-tech R&D Program of China (863 Program No. 2013AA102405) and Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Project of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences(Project No. CAAS-ASTIP-2016-AII).

References

  1. 1.
    Yanfei, W., Meihua, C., Keran, Z.: Information analysis on scientific data sharing. J. Intell. 01, 29–34 (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Peng, X., Wang, F., Zhou, G.: Investigation and analysis of agricultural scientific data sharing in Liao Ning province. Agric. Econ. 01, 59–61 (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huan, Q.: Information Behavior. Beijing Normal University Press, Beijing (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mcquail, D., Windahl, S.: Communication Models for the Study of Mass Communications, pp. 345–367. Shanghai Translation Publishing House, Shanghai (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wilson, T.D.: Models in information behaviour research. J. Documentation 55(3), 249–270 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Changping, H.: Information Service and User Study. Wuhan University Press, Wuhan (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tang, R., Solomon, P.: Use of relevance criteria across stages of document evaluation: on the complementarity of experimental and naturalistic studies. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 52(8), 676–685 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yunfa, L.: Research on Internet user information retrieval behavior. J. Libr. Sci. Chin. 29(2), 64–67 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jing, W., Shanshan, L.: Information retrieval behavior of university library users under digital environment. J. Architectural Educ. Institutions High. Learn. 22(3), 139–141 (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Min, Z., Rui, N., Meifen, L.: Analysis on the characteristics of network health information retrieval based on demand type and gender difference. Inf. Documentation Serv. 2 (2017)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thatcher, A.: Web search strategies: The influence of Web experience and task type. Inf. Process. Manag. 44(3), 1308–1329 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen, Y., Sun, J., Zheng, Y.: On information behavior of academic novice. Documentation Inf. Knowl. 4, 63–70 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yuchao, D., Dehua, H.: Characteristics and differences of information searching behaviors in scientific researchers engaged in different scientific projects. Chin. J. Med. Libr. Inf. Sci. 23(7), 37–41 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, J., Wang, J.: Study on journal database retrieve behavior of university users based on log mining. Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Pekinensis 48(1), 29–36 (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schamber, L.: Users’ criteria for evaluation in a multimedia environment. Proc. ASIS Ann. Meet. 28, 126–133 (1991)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Aibo, S., Kongfa, H., Yisheng, D.: Research on Weblog mining. J. Southeast Univ. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 32(1), 15–18 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang, R., Li, P.: A study on health infornation search behavior based on log mining. Libr. Inf. Serv. 11, 111–118 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Isenberg, D.J.: Thinking and managing: a verbal protocol analysis of managerial problem solving. Acad. Manag. J. 29(4), 775–788 (1986)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Savolainen, R., Kari, J.: User-defined relevance criteria in web searching. J. Documentation 62(6), 685–707 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Taylor, A.: User relevance criteria choices and the information search process. Inf. Process. Manag. 48(1), 136–153 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Crystal, A., Greenberg, J.: Relevance criteria identified by health information users during Web searches. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 57(10), 1368–1382 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Agricultural Information Institute of Chinese Academy of Agricultural SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations