User Activity Patterns During Information Search

Personalization of support for information seeking depends crucially on the information retrieval system's knowledge of the task that led the person to engage in information seeking. Users work during information search sessions to satisfy their task goals, and their activity is not random. To what degree are there patterns in the user activity during information search sessions? Do activity patterns reflect the user's situation as the user moves through the search task under the influence of his or her task goal? Do these patterns reflect aspects of different types of information-seeking tasks? Could such activity patterns identify contexts within which information seeking takes place? To investigate these questions, we model sequences of user behaviors in two independent user studies of information search sessions (N = 32 users, 128 sessions, and N = 40 users, 160 sessions). Two representations of user activity patterns are used. One is based on the sequences of page use; the other is based on a cognitive representation of information acquisition derived from eye movement patterns in service of the reading process. One of the user studies considered journalism work tasks; the other concerned background research in genomics using search tasks taken from the TREC Genomics Track. The search tasks differed in basic dimensions of complexity, specificity, and the type of information product (intellectual or factual) needed to achieve the overall task goal. The results show that similar patterns of user activity are observed at both the cognitive and page use levels. The activity patterns at both representation layers are able to distinguish between task types in similar ways and, to some degree, between tasks of different levels of difficulty. We explore relationships between the results and task difficulty and discuss the use of activity patterns to explore events within a search session. User activity patterns can be at least partially observed in server-side search logs. A focus on patterns of user activity sequences may contribute to the development of information systems that better personalize the user's search experience.

[1]  William R. Hersh,et al.  Tasks, topics and relevance judging for the TREC Genomics Track: five years of experience evaluating biomedical text information retrieval systems , 2009, Information Retrieval.

[2]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  A User-Centered Experiment and Logging Framework for Interactive Information Retrieval , 2009, UIIR@SIGIR.

[3]  Chein-I Chang,et al.  A complete sufficient statistic for finite-state Markov processes with application to source coding , 1993, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[4]  Frank Bickenbach,et al.  Markov or not Markov - this should be a question , 2001 .

[5]  ShahChirag,et al.  User Activity Patterns During Information Search , 2015 .

[6]  Raya Fidel,et al.  Fully mobile wirelessly connected technology applications: Organizational communication, social, and information challenges , 2008, ASIST.

[7]  Shuguang Han,et al.  Automatic Detection of Search Tactic in Individual Information Seeking: A Hidden Markov Model Approach , 2013, ArXiv.

[8]  P. Subramanian.  Active Vision: The Psychology of Looking and Seeing , 2006 .

[9]  D. Balota,et al.  Inferences about eye movement control from the perceptual span in reading , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[10]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Inferring user knowledge level from eye movement patterns , 2013, Inf. Process. Manag..

[11]  Arjen P. de Vries,et al.  CWI at TREC 2012, KBA Track and Session Track , 2012, TREC.

[12]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  What Can Searching Behavior Tell Us About the Difficulty of Information Tasks? A Study of Web Navigation , 2007, ASIST.

[13]  Grace Hui Yang,et al.  Win-win search: dual-agent stochastic game in session search , 2014, SIGIR.

[14]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  Some(what) grand challenges for information retrieval , 2008, SIGF.

[15]  K. Rayner.  Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. , 1998, Psychological bulletin.

[16]  Nina Wacholder,et al.  Do human-developed index terms help users? An experimental study of MeSH terms in biomedical searching , 2008, ASIST.

[17]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Revisiting search task difficulty: Behavioral and individual difference measures , 2008, ASIST.

[18]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  Information search tactics , 1979, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[19]  H. Bekkering,et al.  Visual Search Is Modulated by Action Intentions , 2002, Psychological science.

[20]  K. Rayner,et al.  Eye Movements as Reflections of Comprehension Processes in Reading , 2006 .

[21]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Predicting task difficulty for different task types , 2010, ASIST.

[22]  Barbara M. Wildemuth,et al.  The effects of domain knowledge on search tactic formulation , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[23]  K. Rayner,et al.  Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity , 1986, Memory & cognition.

[24]  Michael Gertz,et al.  On the value of temporal information in information retrieval , 2007, SIGF.

[25]  Yue Gao,et al.  Learning more powerful test statistics for click-based retrieval evaluation , 2010, SIGIR.

[26]  David Ellis,et al.  A Comparison of the Information seeking Patterns of researchers in the Physical and Social Sciences , 1993, J. Documentation.

[27]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Using dwell time as an implicit measure of usefulness in different task types , 2011, ASIST.

[28]  J. Findlay,et al.  Eye guidance and visual search , 1998 .

[29]  Yuelin Li,et al.  Relationships among work tasks, search tasks, and interactive information searching behavior , 2008 .

[30]  Carolin Strobl,et al.  Unbiased split selection for classification trees based on the Gini Index , 2007, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[31]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  Identifying and improving retrieval for procedural questions , 2007, Inf. Process. Manag..

[32]  David Ellis,et al.  Modelling the information seeking patterns of engineers and research scientists in an industrial environment , 1997, J. Documentation.

[33]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Search behaviors in different task types , 2010, JCDL '10.

[34]  C. A. Weaver,et al.  Psychology of Reading , 2012 .

[35]  Norbert Fuhr,et al.  A probability ranking principle for interactive information retrieval , 2008, Information Retrieval.

[36]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface , 1989 .

[37]  Ryen W. White,et al.  A study on the effects of personalization and task information on implicit feedback performance , 2006, CIKM '06.

[38]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Cognitive Load on Web Search Tasks , 2008 .

[39]  Jeonghyun Kim,et al.  Task as a predictable indicator for information seeking behavior on the Web , 2007 .

[40]  Pia Borlund,et al.  The IIR evaluation model: a framework for evaluation of interactive information retrieval systems , 2003, Inf. Res..

[41]  Chirag Shah,et al.  Segmental Analysis and Evaluation of User Focused Search Process , 2013, 2013 12th International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications.

[42]  Marti A. Hearst,et al.  TREC 2007 Genomics Track Overview , 2007, TREC.

[43]  Daqing He,et al.  Searching, browsing, and clicking in a search session: changes in user behavior by task and over time , 2014, SIGIR.

[44]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  Rutgers at the TREC 2012 Session Track , 2012, TREC.

[45]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Task and user effects on reading patterns in information search , 2011, Interact. Comput..

[46]  Gary Marchionini,et al.  The roles of digital libraries in teaching and learning , 1995, CACM.

[47]  Yuelin Li,et al.  Exploring the relationships between work task and search task in information search , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[48]  Johanna K. Kaakinen,et al.  Individual Differences in Reading to Summarize Expository Text: Evidence From Eye Fixation Patterns , 2002 .

[49]  A. Inhoff,et al.  The perceptual span and oculomotor activity during the reading of Chinese sentences. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[50]  K. Rayner,et al.  Examining the Word Identification Stages Hypothesized by the E-Z Reader Model , 2006, Psychological science.

[51]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  The TREC Interactive Tracks: Putting the User into Search , 2005 .

[52]  R. E. Morrison,et al.  Manipulation of stimulus onset delay in reading: evidence for parallel programming of saccades. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[53]  Bryce Allen,et al.  Cognitive and task influences on Web searching behavior , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[54]  Erik D. Reichle,et al.  The E-Z Reader model of eye-movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models , 2003, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[55]  D. Ballard,et al.  What you see is what you need. , 2003, Journal of vision.

[56]  Gary Marchionini,et al.  Information-seeking strategies of novices using a full-text electronic encyclopedia , 1989, JASIS.

[57]  Jacek Gwizdka,et al.  Dynamic assessment of information acquisition effort during interactive search , 2011, ASIST.

[58]  Soohyung Joo,et al.  Exploring Search Tactic Patterns in Searching Digital Libraries , 2012, ICADL.

[59]  Dario D. Salvucci.  Inferring intent in eye-based interfaces: tracing eye movements with process models , 1999, CHI '99.

[60]  Alexander Pollatsek,et al.  E–Z Reader: A cognitive-control, serial-attention model of eye-movement behavior during reading , 2006, Cognitive Systems Research.

[61]  S. Robertson.  The probability ranking principle in IR , 1997 .

[62]  Michael A. Shepherd,et al.  A Field Study Characterizing Web-based Information Seeking Tasks , 2022 .

[63]  Shuguang Han,et al.  Search tactics as means of examining search processes in collaborative exploratory web search , 2012, PIKM '12.

[64]  Marcia J. Bates,et al.  Idea tactics , 1980, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[65]  T. W. Anderson,et al.  Statistical Inference about Markov Chains , 1957 .

[66]  O. Mimura.  [Eye movements]. , 1992, Nippon Ganka Gakkai zasshi.

[67]  Eugene Agichtein,et al.  Find it if you can: a game for modeling different types of web search success using interaction data , 2011, SIGIR.

[68]  Ben Carterette,et al.  Overview of the TREC 2012 Session Track , 2012, TREC.

[69]  Kalervo Järvelin,et al.  Task Complexity Affects Information Seeking and Use , 1995, Inf. Process. Manag..

[70]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[71]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  An exploration of the relationships between work task and interactive information search behavior , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[72]  Andreas Dengel,et al.  Query expansion using gaze-based feedback on the subdocument level , 2008, SIGIR '08.

[73]  Liwen Qiu.  Markov Models of Search State Patterns in a Hypertext Information Retrieval System , 1993, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[74]  Katriina Byström,et al.  Information and information sources in tasks of varying complexity , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[75]  JärvelinKalervo,et al.  Task complexity affects information seeking and use , 1995 .

[76]  Soo Young Rieh,et al.  Dual-task performance as a measure of mental effort in searching a library system and the Web , 2006, ASIST.

[77]  M. Pickering,et al.  Eye guidance in reading and scene perception , 1998 .

[78]  Ryen W. White,et al.  Predicting short-term interests using activity-based search context , 2010, CIKM.

[79]  Anne Aula,et al.  How does search behavior change as search becomes more difficult? , 2010, CHI.