Users' relevance criteria in image retrieval in American history

A large number of digital images are available and accessible due to recent advances in technology. Since image retrieval systems are designed to meet user information needs, it seems apparent that image retrieval system design and implementation should take into account user-based aspects such as information use patterns and relevance judgments. However, little is known about what criteria users employ when making relevance judgments and which textual representations of the image help them make relevance judgments in their situational context.Thus, this study attempted to investigate the criteria which image users apply when making judgments about the relevance of an image. This research was built on prior work by Barry, Schamber and others which examined relevance criteria for textual and non-textual documents, exploring the extent to which these criteria apply to visual documents and the extent to which new and different criteria apply. Data were collected from unstructured interviews and questionnaires. Quantitative statistical methods were employed to analyze the importance of relevance criteria to see how much each criterion affected the user's judgments. The study involved 38 faculty and graduate students of American history in 1999 in a local setting, using the Library of Congress American memory photo archives.The study found that the user's perception of topicality was still the most important factor across the information-seeking stages. However, the users decided on retrieved items according to a variety of criteria other than topicality. Image quality and clarity was important. Users also searched for relevant images on the basis of title, date, subject descriptors, and notes provided. The conclusions of this study will be useful in image database design to assist users in conducting image searches. This study can be helpful to future relevance studies in information system design and evaluation.

[1]  Edie M. Rasmussen,et al.  Searching for images: The analysis of users' queries for image retrieval in American history , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[2]  Paul B. Kantor,et al.  A Study of Information Seeking and Retrieving. III. Searchers, Searches, and Overlap* , 1988 .

[3]  Paul B. Kantor,et al.  A study of information seeking and retrieving. I. background and methodology , 1988 .

[4]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  Information Retrieval Interaction , 1992 .

[5]  Samantha Kelly Hastings,et al.  Query Categories in a Study of Intellectual Access to Digitized Art Images. , 1995 .

[6]  Peiling Wang,et al.  A cognitive model of document use during a research project. Study I. document selection , 1998 .

[7]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  Dimensions of relevance , 2000, Inf. Process. Manag..

[8]  Carol L. Barry,et al.  Order Effects: A Study of the Possible Influence of Presentation Order on User Judgments of Document Relevance. , 1988 .

[9]  Linda Schamber,et al.  Relevance Criteria Uses and Importance: Progress in Development of a Measurement Scale. , 1999 .

[10]  Abby Goodrum,et al.  Multidimensional scaling of video surrogates , 2001, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[11]  Michael B. Eisenberg,et al.  A re-examination of relevance: toward a dynamic, situational definition , 1990, Inf. Process. Manag..

[12]  john maccoll,et al.  ACM / IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries , 2001 .

[13]  Susanne Ornager Image Retrieval: Theoretical Analysis and Empirical User Studies on Accessing Information in Images. , 1997 .

[14]  S. P. Harter Psychological relevance and information science , 1992 .

[15]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  Information filtering and information retrieval: two sides of the same coin? , 1992, CACM.

[16]  Peiling Wang,et al.  A Cognitive Model of Document Use During a Research Project. Study II. Decisions at the Reading and Citing Stages , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[17]  Paul B. Kantor,et al.  A study of information seeking and retrieving. II. Users, questions, and effectiveness , 1988 .

[18]  Joseph W. Janes,et al.  Relevance judgments and the incremental presentation of document representations , 1991, Inf. Process. Manag..

[19]  Judith Ann Bateman Modeling Changes in End-user Relevance Criteria : An Information Seeking Study , 1998 .

[20]  S. Hirsh Children's Relevance Criteria and Information Seeking on Electronic Resources , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[21]  Peter G. B. Enser,et al.  Progress in Documentation Pictorial Information Retrieval , 1995, J. Documentation.

[22]  Caroline Arms Getting the Picture: Observations from the Library of Congress on Providing Online Access to Pictorial Images. , 1999 .

[23]  Carol L. Barry,et al.  Users' Criteria for Relevance Evaluation: A Cross-situational Comparison , 1998, Inf. Process. Manag..

[24]  Caroline R. Arms Historical Collections for the National Digital Library: Lessons andChallenges at the Library of Congress (the first of a two-part story) , 1996 .

[25]  B. Dervin,et al.  Information needs and uses. , 1986 .

[26]  Harry Bruce A cognitive view of the situational dynamism of user-centered relevance estimation , 1994 .

[27]  Alan Trachtenberg,et al.  Deconstructing American Photographs@@@Symbols of Ideal Life: Social Documentary Photography in America, 1890-1950@@@Reading American Photographs: Images as History, Mathew Brady to Walker Evans , 1990 .

[28]  Caroline Arms,et al.  Historical Collections for the National Digital Library: Lessons and Challenges at the Library of Congress [Part II] , 1996, D-Lib Magazine.

[29]  D. Case,et al.  The Collection and Use of Information by Some American Historians: A Study of Motives and Methods , 1991, The Library Quarterly.

[30]  Thomas J. Froehlich,et al.  Relevance reconsidered—towards an agenda for the 21st century: introduction to special topic issue on relevance research , 1994 .

[31]  Raya Fidel,et al.  Challenges in Indexing Electronic Text and Images , 1994 .

[32]  Raya Fidel,et al.  The image retrieval task: implications for the design and evaluation of image databases , 1997, New Rev. Hypermedia Multim..

[33]  Carol L. Barry User-defined relevance criteria: an exploratory study , 1994 .

[34]  Tefko Saracevic,et al.  RELEVANCE: A review of and a framework for the thinking on the notion in information science , 1997, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[35]  Susanne Ornager The newspaper image database: empirical supported analysis of users' typology and word association clusters , 1995, SIGIR '95.

[36]  Judy Bateman Modeling the Importance of End-User Relevance Criteria. , 1999 .

[37]  John J. Regazzi Performance measures for information retrieval systems ― an experimental approach , 1988 .

[38]  Sandra G. Hirsh Relevance Determinations in Children's Use of Electronic Resources: A Case Study. , 1998 .

[39]  Samantha Kelly Hastings An exploratory study of intellectual access to digitized art images , 1994 .

[40]  Amanda Spink,et al.  Image searching on the Excite Web search engine , 2001, Inf. Process. Manag..

[41]  Peter G. B. Enser Pictorial information retrieval , 1995 .

[42]  Paul Solomon,et al.  Toward an Understanding of the Dynamics of Relevance Judgment: An Analysis of One Person's Search Behavior , 1998, Inf. Process. Manag..

[43]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  Characteristics of Texts Affecting Relevance Judgments , 1993 .

[44]  Stefano Mizzaro Relevance: the whole history , 1997 .

[45]  Susan Siegfried,et al.  An Analysis of Search Terminology Used by Humanities Scholars: The Getty Online Searching Project Report Number 1 , 1993, The Library Quarterly.

[46]  Carol L. Barry Document representations and clues to document relevance , 1998 .

[47]  Peiling Wang A cognitive model of document selection of real users of information retrieval systems , 1994 .

[48]  Peter G. B. Enser,et al.  Analysis of user need in image archives , 1997, J. Inf. Sci..

[49]  Amanda Spink,et al.  From Highly Relevant to Not Relevant: Examining Different Regions of Relevance , 1998, Inf. Process. Manag..

[50]  Linda Schamber,et al.  User Criteria in Relevance Evaluation: Toward Development of a Measurement Scale. , 1996 .

[51]  Linda Schamber Relevance and Information Behavior. , 1994 .

[52]  Bert R. Boyce,et al.  Beyond topicality : A two stage view of relevance and the retrieval process , 1982, Inf. Process. Manag..

[53]  Sara Shatford Layne Some issues in the indexing of images , 1994 .

[54]  T. Park The Nature of Relevance in Information Retrieval: An Empirical Study , 1993, The Library Quarterly.