Searching versus Browsing in Hypertext

Searching versus Browsing in Hypertext
复制标题

超文本搜索与浏览

DOI:
10.1080/09558543.1992.12031200
复制
发表时间:
1992
期刊:
Hypermedia
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
C. Murphy
C. Murphy
中科院分区:
--
文献类型:
--
作者:
R. Rada;C. Murphy

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

我们的目标是详细说明超文本的任务、用户类型和工具之间的关系。我们建立了一个计算机系统,可以自动将书籍转换为超文本,然后将一本书转换为Emacs-Info, Guide, HyperTies和SuperBook的一个变体,称为MaxiBook。研究了三类用户:专家、新手和培训生。用户执行两个问答任务:一个用于搜索问题,另一个用于浏览问题。搜索问题的答案可以在书的一个部分中找到,而浏览问题的答案则出现在各个部分中。对答案的质量和速度进行了评估。专家们用Guide和MaxiBooks进行了很好的搜索,但用纸质书浏览效果最好。对于新手来说,无论从质量和速度,还是从搜索和浏览来看,纸张都是最好的工具。实习生的经历与新手相似。根据我们的研究结果,通过对比各种工具的模型,我们推断一个好的超文本系统应该模拟纸张的“索引”和“任意跳转”,以及MaxiBook的“动态大纲”和“隐含索引”。虽然我们的超文本的复杂特征,如替代大纲,并没有被证明是有用的,但我们表明,“理解任务”的类别比搜索或浏览任务的类别要大得多,并推测替代大纲支持一些“理解任务”。
Our goal is to elaborate the relationships among tasks, user types, and tools for hypertext. We built a computer system for automatically converting books into hypertext and then converted one book into Emacs-Info, Guide, HyperTies, and a variant of SuperBook, called MaxiBook. Three classes of users were studied: experts, novices, and trainees. Users performed two question-answering tasks: one for a search question and one for a browse question. The answer to a search question could be found in one section of the book, whereas the answer to a browse question occurred across sections. Answers were evaluated for quality and speed. Experts did good searching with Guide and MaxiBooks, but the best browsing with paper. For novices, paper was the best tool on all counts — for quality and speed, for searching and browsing. Trainee experiences were similar to those of novices. Based on our results and by contrasting models of the various tools, we infer that a good hypertext system should simulate the ‘index’ and ‘arbitrary jump’ of paper and the ‘dynamic outline’ and ‘implicit index’ of MaxiBook. While sophisticated features of our hypertext, such as an alternate outline, did not prove helpful, we show that the class of ‘understanding tasks’ is much larger than that of searching or browsing tasks and speculate that alternate outlines support some ‘understanding tasks’.