skip to main content
10.1145/3295750.3298926acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesirConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Measuring Learning During Search: Differences in Interactions, Eye-Gaze, and Semantic Similarity to Expert Knowledge

Published: 08 March 2019 Publication History

Abstract

We investigate the relationship between search behavior, eye -tracking measures, and learning. We conducted a user study where 30 participants performed searches on the web. We measured their verbal knowledge before and after each task in a content-independent manner, by assessing the semantic similarity of their entries to expert vocabulary. We hypothesize that differences in verbal knowledge-change of participants are reflected in their search behaviors and eye-gaze measures related to acquiring information and reading. Our results show that participants with higher change in verbal knowledge differ by reading significantly less, and entering more sophisticated queries, compared to those with lower change in knowledge. However, we do not find significant differences in other search interactions like page visits, and number of queries.

References

[1]
Lorin W. Anderson, David R. Krathwohl, and Benjamin Samuel Bloom. 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman. 08901.
[2]
P. Borlund. 2003. The IIR Evaluation Model: A Framework for Evaluation of Interactive Information Retrieval Systems. Information Research, Vol. 8, 3 (2003), paper no. 152.
[3]
Daniel Cer, Yinfei Yang, Sheng-yi Kong, Nan Hua, Nicole Limtiaco, Rhomni St John, Noah Constant, Mario Guajardo-Cespedes, Steve Yuan, Chris Tar, and others. 2018. Universal Sentence Encoder. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.11175 (2018).
[4]
Michael J. Cole, Jacek Gwizdka, Chang Liu, Nicholas J. Belkin, and Xiangmin Zhang. 2013. Inferring User Knowledge Level from Eye Movement Patterns. Information Processing & Management, Vol. 49, 5 (Sept. 2013), 1075--1091.
[5]
Michael J. Cole, Jacek Gwizdka, Chang Liu, Ralf Bierig, Nicholas J. Belkin, and Xiangmin Zhang. 2011. Task and User Effects on Reading Patterns in Information Search., Vol. 23, 4 (2011), 346--362. 0016.
[6]
Kevyn Collins-Thompson, Soo Young Rieh, Carl C Haynes, and Rohail Syed. 2016. Assessing learning outcomes in web search: A comparison of tasks and query strategies. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM on Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval. ACM, 163--172.
[7]
Carsten Eickhoff, Jaime Teevan, Ryen White, and Susan Dumais. 2014. Lessons from the journey: a query log analysis of within-session learning. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM international conference on Web search and data mining. ACM, 223--232.
[8]
Greg Francis, Ian Neath, and Daniel R. VanHorn. 2008. CogLab on a CD. Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. 00019.
[9]
Alex Franz and Thorsten Brants. 2006. All Our N-Gram Are Belong to You. Google Machine Translation Team, Vol. 20 (2006).
[10]
Luanne Freund, Rick Kopak, and Heather O'Brien. 2016. The Effects of Textual Environment on Reading Comprehension: Implications for Searching as Learning. Journal of Information Science, Vol. 42, 1 (Feb. 2016), 79--93. 00001.
[11]
Ujwal Gadiraju, Ran Yu, Stefan Dietze, and Peter Holtz. 2018. Analyzing Knowledge Gain of Users in Informational Search Sessions on the Web. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Human Information Interaction &Retrieval (CHIIR '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2--11.
[12]
Souvick Ghosh, Manasa Rath, and Chirag Shah. 2018. Searching As Learning: Exploring Search Behavior and Learning Outcomes in Learning-Related Tasks. In Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Human Information Interaction &Retrieval (CHIIR '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 22--31.
[13]
Jacek Gwizdka. 2010. Distribution of Cognitive Load in Web Search. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 61, 11 (2010), 2167--2187. 0019
[14]
Sébastien Harispe, Sylvie Ranwez, Stefan Janaqi, and Jacky Montmain. 2015. Semantic similarity from natural language and ontology analysis. Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies, Vol. 8, 1 (2015), 1--254.
[15]
Sandra G Hart and Lowell E Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Advances in psychology. Vol. 52. Elsevier, 139--183.
[16]
Bernard J. Jansen, Danielle Booth, and Brian Smith. 2009. Using the Taxonomy of Cognitive Learning to Model Online Searching. Information Processing & Management, Vol. 45, 6 (Nov. 2009), 643--663.
[17]
Kurt Kraiger, J. Kevin Ford, and Eduardo Salas. 1993. Application of Cognitive, Skill-Based, and Affective Theories of Learning Outcomes to New Methods of Training Evaluation. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, 2 (1993), 311--328.
[18]
Chang Liu, Jacek Gwizdka, Jingjing Liu, Tao Xu, and Nicholas J. Belkin. 2010. Analysis and Evaluation of Query Reformulations in Different Task Types. In Proceedings of the 73rd ASIS &T Annual Meeting on Navigating Streams in an Information Ecosystem - Volume 47 (ASIS&T '10). American Society for Information Science, Silver Springs, MD, USA, 17:1--17:10.
[19]
Gary Marchionini. 1997. Information Seeking in Electronic Environments. Cambridge University Press. Cited by 1717.
[20]
Gary Marchionini. 2006. Exploratory Search: From Finding to Understanding. Commun. ACM, Vol. 49, 4 (April 2006), 41--46.
[21]
Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg S Corrado, and Jeff Dean. 2013. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. In Advances in neural information processing systems. 3111--3119.
[22]
Delia. Neuman. 2011. Learning in Information-Rich Environments: I -LEARN and the Construction of Knowledge in the 21st Century.Springer, New York. 00011.
[23]
Cameron D Norman and Harvey A Skinner. 2006. eHEALS: the eHealth literacy scale. Journal of medical Internet research, Vol. 8, 4 (2006).
[24]
F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 12 (2011), 2825--2830.
[25]
Jeffrey Pennington, Richard Socher, and Christopher Manning. 2014. Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP). 1532--1543.
[26]
Peter Pirolli, Patricia Schank, Marti Hearst, and Christine Diehl. 1996. Scatter/Gather Browsing Communicates the Topic Structure of a Very Large Text Collection. 213--220.
[27]
Karthik Raman, Paul N. Bennett, and Kevyn Collins-Thompson. 2013. Toward Whole-Session Relevance: Exploring Intrinsic Diversity in Web Search. In Proceedings of the 36th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 463--472. Cited by 0000.
[28]
Pertti Vakkari. 2016. Searching as learning: A systematization based on literature. Journal of Information Science, Vol. 42, 1 (2016), 7--18.
[29]
Ryen W. White, Susan T. Dumais, and Jaime Teevan. 2009. Characterizing the Influence of Domain Expertise on Web Search Behavior. In Proceedings of the Second ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining - WSDM '09. ACM Press, Barcelona, Spain, 132.
[30]
Barbara M. Wildemuth. 2004. The Effects of Domain Knowledge on Search Tactic Formulation. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 55, 3 (Feb. 2004), 246--258.
[31]
Ran Yu, Ujwal Gadiraju, and Stefan Dietze. 2018a. Detecting, Understanding and Supporting Everyday Learning in Web Search. arXiv:1806.11046 {cs} (June 2018). arxiv: cs/1806.11046
[32]
Ran Yu, Ujwal Gadiraju, Peter Holtz, Markus Rokicki, Philipp Kemkes, and Stefan Dietze. 2018b. Predicting User Knowledge Gain in Informational Search Sessions. In The 41st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research & Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 75--84.
[33]
Xiangmin Zhang, Michael Cole, and Nicholas Belkin. 2011. Predicting users' domain knowledge from search behaviors. In Proceedings of the 34th international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in Information Retrieval. ACM, 1225--1226.

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. Measuring Learning During Search: Differences in Interactions, Eye-Gaze, and Semantic Similarity to Expert Knowledge

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHIIR '19: Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval
      March 2019
      463 pages
      ISBN:9781450360258
      DOI:10.1145/3295750
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 08 March 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. eye-tracking
      2. human information behavior
      3. measuring knowledge change
      4. search as learning

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Funding Sources

      Conference

      CHIIR '19
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 55 of 163 submissions, 34%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)33
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
      Reflects downloads up to 31 Jan 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Figures

      Tables

      Media

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media