學科知識與檢索訓練對檢索效益的影響

The Impact of Domain Knowledge and Search Training on Search Effectiveness

劉英享(Ying-Hsang Liu)

資訊檢索互動 ； 使用者特徵 ； 醫學標題表 ； 檢索評鑑 ； Interactive information retrieval ； User characteristics ； MeSH terms ； Information retrieval evaluation

圖書資訊學研究

5卷1期（2010 / 12 / 01）

51 - 74

繁體中文

本文從資訊檢索互動觀點，以實驗法研究使用者特徵（使用者學科知識及檢索訓練）對檢索效益的影響。本研究將受試者分為搜尋新手、學科專家、搜尋專家及醫學圖書館員等四種類型，以取自對檢索系統難度頗高的文獻檢索會議2004年基因體學檢驗項目文件集之檢索問題，實際搜尋以MEDLINE資料庫近十年書目紀錄所建構的資訊檢索實驗系統，並以文獻檢索會議所提供的相關判斷作為評估檢索效益基準。實驗系統有兩種不同的查詢介面，差別在能否運用醫學標題表搜尋。研究發現學科專家使用醫學標題表所得之檢索結果，比搜尋專家更好，顯示醫學標題表在檢索技術性問題時，對學科專家最有幫助。

To what extent do MeSH terms improve search effectiveness of different kinds of users? We observed four different kinds of information seekers using an experimental information retrieval system: 1. search novices; 2. domain experts; 3. search experts and 4. medical librarians. The information needs were a subset of the relatively difficult topics originally created for the Text REtrieval Conference (TREC). Effectiveness of retrieval was based on the relevance judgments provided by TREC. Participants searched either using a version of the system in which MeSH terms were displayed or another version in which they had to formulate their own terms. The results suggest that MeSH terms are more helpful in terms of precision for domain experts than for search experts. We speculate that this is because of the highly technical nature of the topics; only the domain experts had the knowledge to understand and therefore make use of the MeSH terms. The results advance our understanding of the usefulness of controlled vocabulary in interactive information retrieval systems.

1. 唐牧群、鄧雅文、鄭瑋、謝宜瑾(2008)。佛學數位圖書館詞彙建議介面之評估研究。大學圖書館，12(1)，111-127。
   連結：
2. Text Retrieval Conference. (2005).TREC 2004 genomics track document set [Data file]. Available from NIST TREC 2004 Genomics Track Web site(http://trec.nist.gov/data/t13_genomics.html).
3. Byrd, J., Charbonneau, G., Charbonneau, M., Courtney, A., Johnson, E., Leonard, K., et al. (2006). A white paper on the future of cataloging at Indiana University. Retrieved September 26, 2010, from http://www.iub.edu/~libtserv/pub/Future_of_Cataloging_White_Paper.doc
4. Buckley, C. (1999). Trec_eval IR evaluation package [Computer software].Retrieved November 16, 2007, from ftp://ftp.cs.cornell.edu/pub/smart/
5. (2008).,未出版
6. Fisher, R. A. (1935). The design of experiments. Edinburgh, UK: Oliver and Boyd.
7. MeSH Browser (2003 MeSH). (2004). Retrieved November 16, 2007, from http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/2003/MBrowser.html
8. Greenstone. (2006). Greenstone Digital Library Software (Version 2.70). Hamilton, New Zealand: Department of Computer Science The University of Waikato.
9. Allen, B.(1991).Topic knowledge and online catalog search formulation.Library Quarterly,61,188-213.
10. Aronson, A. R.,Demner, D.,Humphrey, S. M.,Ide, N. C.,Kim, W.,Liu, H.(2004).Knowledge-intensive and statistical approaches to the retrieval and annotation of genomics MEDLINE citations.The thirteenth text retrieval conference proceedings (TREC 2004)
11. Bean, C. A.(ed.),Green, R.(ed.)(2001).Relationships in the organization of knowledge.Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
12. Belkin, N. J.,Kelly, D.(2010).Proceeding of the third symposium on information interaction in context,New York:
13. Belkin, N. J.,Kwasnik, B. H.(1986).Using structural representation of anomalous states of knowledge for choosing document retrieval strategies.Proceedings of the 9th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval,New York:
14. Bellardo, T.(1985).An investigation of online searcher traits and their relationship to search outcome.Journal of the American Society for Information Science,36,241-250.
15. Bibliographic Services Task Force(2005).,未出版
16. Blair, D. C.(2002).The challenge of commercial document retrieval, Part I: Major issues, and a framework based on search exhaustivity, determinacy of representation and document collection size.Information Processing & Management,38,273-291.
17. Borlund, P.,Schneider, J., W.,Lalmas, M.,Tombros, A.,Feather, J.,Kelly, D.(2008).Proceedings of the second international symposium on information interaction in context,New York:
18. Calhoun, K.(2006).,未出版
19. Cooper, H. M.(ed.),Hedges, L. V.(ed.),Valentine, J. C.(ed.)(2009).The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis.New York:Russell Sage Foundation.
20. Fenichel, C. H.(1981).Online searching: Measures that discriminate among users with different types of experiences.Journal of the American Society for Information Science,32,23-32.
21. Fox, J.(1997).Applied regression analysis, linear models, and related methods.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
22. Hersh, W. R.(2008).Information retrieval: A health and biomedical perspective.New York:Springer.
23. Hersh, W. R.,Bhupatiraju, R. T.,Ross, L.,Roberts, P.,Cohen, A. M.,Kraemer, D. F.(2006).Enhancing access to the Bibliome: The TREC 2004 Genomics Track.Journal of Biomedical Discovery and Collaboration
24. Hersh, W. R.,Bhuptiraju, R. T.,Ross, L.,Johnson, P.,Cohen, A. M.,Kraemer, D. F.(2004).TREC 2004 genomics track overview.The Thirteenth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-13)
25. Howard, H.(1982).Measures that discriminate among online searchers with different training and experience.Online Review,6,315-627.
26. Hull, D.(1993).Using statistical testing in the evaluation of retrieval experiments.Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference
27. Humphrey, S. M.,Rogers, W. J.,Kilicoglu, H.,Demner-Fushman, D.,Rindflesch, T. C.(2006).Word sense disambiguation by selecting the best semantic type based on journal descriptor indexing: Preliminary experiment.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,57,96-113.
28. Ingwersen, P.(1996).Cognitive perspectives of information retrieval interaction: Elements of a cognitive IR theory.Journal of Documentation,52(1),3-50.
29. Ingwersen, P.,Jarvelin, K.(2005).The turn: Integration of information seeking and retrieval in context.Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Springer.
30. Jenuwine, E. S.,Floyd, J. A.(2004).Comparison of Medical Subject Headings and text-word searches in MEDLINE to retrieve studies on sleep in healthy individuals.Journal of Medical Library Association,92,349-353.
31. Kirk, R. E.(1995).Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences.Pacific Grove, CA:Brooks/Cole.
32. Lagergren, E.,Over, P.(1998).Comparing interactive information retrieval systems across sites: The TREC-6 interactive track matrix experiment.Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR Conference
33. Lin, S.-J.,Belkin, N.(2005).Validation of a model of information seeking over multiple search sessions.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,56,393-415.
34. Liu, Y.-H.(2009).New Brunswick, NJ,The State University of New Jersey.
35. Liu, Y.-H.,Wacholder, N.(2008).Do human-developed index terms help users? An experimental study of MeSH terms in biomedical searching.Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology Annual Meeting
36. Lu, Z.,Kim, W.,Wilbur, W.(2009).Evaluation of query expansion using MeSH in PubMed.Information Retrieval,12(1),69-80.
37. Mann, T.(2006).,未出版
38. Pao, M. L.,Grefsheim, S. F.,Barclay, M. L.,Woolliscroft, J. O.,McQuillan, M.,Shipman, B. L.(1993).Factors affecting students use of MEDLINE.Computers and Biomedical Research,26,541-555.
39. R Development Core Team(2009).R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 2.9.1).Vienna, Austria:R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
40. Ruthven, I.,Borlund, P.,Ingwersen, P.,Belkin, N. J.,Tombros, A.,Vakkari, P.(2006).Proceedings of the 1st international conference on information interaction in context,New York:
41. Salton, G.(1969).A comparison between manual and automatic indexing methods.American Documentation,20(1),61-71.
42. Salton, G.(1972).A new comparison between conventional indexing (MEDLARS) and automatic text processing (SMART).Journal of the American Society for Information Sciences,23,75-84.
43. Salton, G.(1986).Another look at automatic text-retrieval systems.Communications of the ACM,29,648-656.
44. Saracevic, T.,Kantor, P.(1988).A study of information seeking and retrieving. III. Searchers, searches, and overlap.Journal of the American Society for Information Science,39,197-216.
45. Savoy, J.(2005).Bibliographic database access using free-text and controlled vocabulary: An evaluation.Information Processing & Management,41,873-890.
46. Sparck Jones, K.(1981).Information Retrieval Experiment.London:Butterworths.
47. Srinivasan, P.(1996).Optimal document-indexing vocabulary for MEDLINE.Information Processing & Management,32,503-514.
48. Sutcliffe, A. G.,Ennis, M.,Watkinson, S. J.(2000).Empirical studies of end-user information searching.Journal of the American Society for Information Science,51,1211-1231.
49. Svenonius, E.(2000).The intellectual foundation of information organization.Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press.
50. Svenonius, E.(1986).Unanswered questions in the design of controlled vocabularies.Journal of the American Society for Information Science,37,331-340.
51. Tague-Sutcliffe, J.(1992).The pragmatics of information retrieval experimentation, revisited.Information Processing and Management,28,467-490.
52. Tsay, M. Y.(2004).Literature growth, journal characteristics, and author productivity in subject indexing, 1977 to 2000.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,55,64-73.
53. Vickery, B.(1971).Document description and representation.Annual Review of Information Science and Technology,6,113-140.
54. Voorhees, E. M.(ed.),Harman, D. K.(ed.)(2005).TREC: Experiment and evaluation in information retrieval.Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press.
55. Wacholder, N.,Liu, L.(2008).Assessing term effectiveness in the interactive information access process.Information Processing & Management,44,1022-1031.
56. Wacholder, N.,Liu, L.(2006).User preference: A measure of query-term quality.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,57,1566-1580.
57. Weinberg, B. H.(Ed.)(1989).Indexing: The state of our knowledge and the state of our ignorance.Medford, NJ:Learned Information.
58. Witten, I. H.,Moffat, A.,Bell, T. C.(1999).Managing gigabytes:Compressing and indexing documents and images.San Francisco:Morgan Kaufmann.
59. Zobel, J.(1998).How reliable are the results of large-scale information retrieval experiments?.Proceedings of the 21st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval,New York:
60. 吳美美(2001)。中文資訊檢索系統使用研究。臺北市:學生書局。
61. 吳美美(1998)。「邏輯相關」和「適切相關」―中文資訊檢索系統評鑑量標初探。圖書館學與資訊科學，24(2)，44-64。
62. 吳美美(1993)。言談分析和資訊檢索互動研究。教育資料與圖書館學，30，340-350。
63. 林珊如(1995)。從終端使用者資訊檢索行為談圖書館的資訊服務政策及角色：實證研究之探討。圖書與資訊學刊，13，22-39。
64. 黃慕萱(1997)。檢索系統評估之發展―理論與實務。中國圖書館學會會報，59，109-126。

1. 謝育慈(2016)。醫學博碩士論文關鍵詞與MeSH詞彙之對應研究－以臺北醫學大學為例。淡江大學數位出版與典藏數位學習碩士在職專班學位論文。2016。1-81。