Evaluating the synergic effect of collaboration in information seeking

It is typically expected that when people work together, they can often accomplish goals that are difficult or even impossible for individuals. We consider this notion of the group achieving more than the sum of all individuals' achievements to be the synergic effect in collaboration. Similar expectation exists for people working in collaboration for information seeking tasks. We, however, lack a methodology and appropriate evaluation metrics for studying and measuring the synergic effect. In this paper we demonstrate how to evaluate this effect and discuss what it means to various collaborative information seeking (CIS) situations. We present a user study with four different conditions: single user, pair of users at the same computer, pair of users at different computers and co-located, and pair of users remotely located. Each of these individuals or pairs was given the same task of information seeking and usage for the same amount of time. We then combined the outputs of single independent users to form artificial pairs, and compared against the real pairs. Not surprisingly, participants using different computers (co-located or remotely located) were able to cover more information sources than those using a single computer (single user or a pair). But more interestingly, we found that real pairs with their own computers (co-located or remotely located) were able to cover more unique and useful information than that of the artificially created pairs. This indicates that those working in collaboration achieved something greater and better than what could be achieved by adding independent users, thus, demonstrating the synergic effect. Remotely located real teams were also able to formulate a wider range of queries than those pairs that were co-located or artificially created. This shows that the collaborators working remotely were able to achieve synergy while still being able to think and work independently. Through the experiments and measurements presented here, we have also contributed a unique methodology and an evaluation metric for CIS.

[1]  David M. Nichols,et al.  Browsing is a collaborative process , 1997, Inf. Process. Manag..

[2]  Chirag Shah,et al.  Lessons and Challenges for Collaborative Information Seeking (CIS) Systems Developers , 2009 .

[3]  Carol Collier Kuhlthau Inside the Search Process: Information Seeking from the User's Perspective. , 1991 .

[4]  Ryen W. White,et al.  Assessing the scenic route: measuring the value of search trails in web logs , 2010, SIGIR.

[5]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[6]  Steve Fox,et al.  Evaluating implicit measures to improve web search , 2005, TOIS.

[7]  R. Fuller,et al.  Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking , 1975 .

[8]  Meredith Ringel Morris,et al.  Enhancing collaborative web search with personalization: groupization, smart splitting, and group hit-highlighting , 2008, CSCW.

[9]  Jette Hyldegård,et al.  Collaborative information behaviour--exploring Kuhlthau's Information Search Process model in a group-based educational setting , 2006, Inf. Process. Manag..

[10]  Chirag Shah,et al.  Role-based results redistribution for collaborative information retrieval , 2010, Inf. Process. Manag..

[11]  Chirag Shah,et al.  Working in Collaboration - What, Why, and How? , 2010 .

[12]  Meredith Ringel Morris,et al.  A survey of collaborative web search practices , 2008, CHI.

[13]  Peter J. Denning,et al.  Communications of the acm , 1989 .

[14]  Eric Horvitz,et al.  SearchTogether: an interface for collaborative web search , 2007, UIST.

[15]  Chirag Shah,et al.  Algorithmic mediation for collaborative exploratory search , 2008, SIGIR '08.

[16]  Roberto I. González-Ibáñez,et al.  A Proposal for Studying Users ’ Behaviors in Collaborative Information Seeking through a Convergence Map , 2010 .

[17]  D. Nichols,et al.  Collaborative browsing and visualization of the search process , 1996 .

[18]  Peter A. Corning,et al.  Synergy and self-organization in the evolution of complex systems , 2007 .

[19]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Collaborative information retrieval (CIR) , 2000, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[20]  Susan T. Dumais,et al.  Collaborative information retrieval (CIR). The New Review of Information Behaviour Research: Studies of Information Seeking in Context, . , 2000 .

[21]  Maribeth Back,et al.  A Taxonomy of Collaboration in Online Information Seeking , 2009, ArXiv.

[22]  Joemon M. Jose,et al.  Comparing collaborative and independent search in a recall-oriented task , 2008, IIiX.

[23]  Roberto I. González-Ibáñez,et al.  Exploring information seeking processes in collaborative search tasks , 2010, ASIST.

[24]  Jette Hyldegård,et al.  Beyond the search process - Exploring group members' information behavior in context , 2009, Inf. Process. Manag..

[25]  Peter J. Denning,et al.  Getting to "we" , 2008, CACM.

[26]  James Surowiecki The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies, and nations Doubleday Books. , 2004 .

[27]  Alan F. Smeaton,et al.  Division of labour and sharing of knowledge for synchronous collaborative information retrieval , 2010, Inf. Process. Manag..

[28]  Raya Fidel,et al.  A multidimensional approach to the study of human-information interaction: A case study of collaborative information retrieval , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[29]  Darren Gergle,et al.  Emotion rating from short blog texts , 2008, CHI.