Search results

Financial representation research has gained considerable attention among researchers. The argument is on representation preferences and the effect of graph versus text representation of financial data. The display format for net income (NI) and comprehensive income (CI) has been proven to influence users’ financial decision-making process, depending upon users’ characteristics. It is worth noting that millennials are users whose characteristics and cognitive skills differ from those of preceding generations. This study aims to unravel millennials’ preferences for the earnings information and representation when making financial analysis and judgement, thus providing insight on their decision-making strategy, either perceptual or analytical.

This study used a 2 × 2 full factorial of experimental design, in which the financial representation in the following two ways: the textual disclosure content (NI versus CI) and the graphical display content (NI versus CI) was manipulated. This study conducted an online experiment with a total of 60 final participants.

The results reveal that textual disclosure of CI influences millennials’ financial decisions. This study also discovered that millennials’ financial decisions are unaffected by graphical displays of financial data as they place greater importance on textual financial data, particularly on CI representations, when making financial decisions.

Millennials are financial users who apply different financial analysis and judgement strategy from their predecessor. They value textual disclosure and CI when analysing firms’ performance.

This study contends that millennials are the financial users who will use analytical strategies while making financial decisions.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the significance of the differences between the actual technical principles determining relevance ranking, and how relevance ranking is understood, described and evaluated by the developers of relevance ranking algorithms and librarians.

The discussion uses descriptions by PLWeb Turbo and C2 of their relevance ranking products and a librarian's description on her blog with the responses which it drew, contrasting these with relevancy as it is indicated in studies of the ISI citation record reported by White.

The study finds that product descriptions and librarians consistently use the term “relevance ranking” to mean both the artificial relevance ranking by statistical methods using various surrogates assumed to reliably indicate relevance and the real relevance as determined by the searcher. The paper indicates the misunderstandings arising from this terminological confusion and its consequences in the context of the invalid user models and artificial searches which accompany discussions of “relevance ranking”.

Evaluations of relevance ranking must be based on real users and real searches. Theorising relevance as a judgement about information rather than a property of information clarifies many issues.

The design of search engines and OPACs will benefit from incorporating metadata that contain indications of user‐determined relevance.

The activity of subject analysis and indexing by human beings is presented as an activity identical in kind to the real searcher's determination of relevance, a definite statement of relevancy arising from a real communication situation rather than a statistically indicated probability.

Users' relevance judgements are central to both the systems and user‐oriented approaches to information retrieval (IR). A basic assumption of IR and online searching research has been that users always require the most ‘highly’ relevant items when using an IR system. This paper reports the results from research that sought to examine users conducting their initial online search on a particular information problem. Findings from three separate studies of relevance judgements by 44 initial search users were examined, including two studies of 13 end‐users and a study of 18 users engaged in mediated online searches. Results show that the number of items judged ‘partially’ relevant (on the scale: relevant; partially relevant; not relevant) was found to correlate positively with changes in users': (1) criteria for making relevance judgements; (2) information problem definition; and (3) personal knowledge due to the search interaction; and also (4) search intermediaries' perceptions that a user's question and information problem has changed during the mediated search interaction. Items judged ‘highly’ relevant were not correlated with these factors. Results of the three studies suggest that: (1) a relationship exists between partially relevant items retrieved and changes in the users' information problem or question during an information seeking process; (2) partial relevance judgements play an important role for users in the early stages of seeking information on a particidar information problem; and (3) ‘highly’ relevant items may or may not be the only items useful at the early stages of users' information seeking processes. Implications for the development of IR systems, relevance research and searching practice are also examined.

The absence of clear guidelines as to how materiality should be judged has created problems for accountants and auditors, and resulted in risks to users of financial statements. Results of past research indicate a great lack of consensus within a judgement group (e.g. auditors) and a large degree of diversity between groups (e.g. auditors v. statement preparers), with respect to the appropriate materiality threshold. Based on past research concludes that industry, an important contextual variable in materiality judgements, may be responsible for the inconsistencies in judgements in the past. The close relationship between materiality and audit risk suggests that the type of industry may have a similar impact on risk assessments. Proposes that industry effects on materiality judgements and risk assessments be further investigated. Also suggests the need for industry‐specific guidelines for materiality and audit risk.

Over several decades many ranking techniques have been proposed as aids to journal selection by libraries. We review those closely related to physics and others with novel features. There are three main methods of ranking: citation analysis, use or user judgement, and size or ‘productivity’. Citations offer an ‘unobtrusive’ quantitative measure, but not only is the absolute value of a citation in question, but also there is no consensus on a ‘correct’ way to choose the citing journals, nor of the ranking parameter. Citations can, however, point out anomalies and show the changing status of journals over the years. Use and user judgement also employ several alternative methods. These are in the main of limited applicability outside the specific user group in question. There is greater ‘parochialism’ in ‘use’ ranking than in ‘judged value’ lists, with citation lists the most international. In some cases, the attempted ‘quantification’ of subjective judgement will be misleading. Size and productivity rankings are normally concerned with one or other formulation of the Bradford distribution. Since the distribution is not universally valid, for library use the librarian must satisfy him/herself that the collection conforms to the distribution, or that his users would be well served by one that did. This may require considerable effort, and statistics gained will then render the Bradford distribution redundant.

The purpose of this paper is twofold: first, to investigate the epistemological underpinning of SERVQUAL and its limitations; and second, to propose ways to enhance the utility of SERVQUAL as a library assessment tool.

The study first conceptualises quality judgment as a knowing process and locates the epistemological stance of SERVQUAL within the general framework of epistemology demarcation; it then examines related SERVQUAL assumptions and their implications for library assessment in general and for service quality assessment in particular based on two empirical investigations: a questionnaire survey and an interview survey. The questionnaire survey applies the SERVQUAL instrument to three Chinese university libraries, with a view to examining the SERVQUAL score in light of epistemological considerations; the interview survey interviews 50 faculty users in one of the three universities with a view to illuminating the naturalistic process through which users develop their judgement of the library's service quality and through which the SERVQUAL score is formed.

The study shows that the actual SERVQUAL score is distributed in a very scattered manner in all three libraries, and that it is formed through a very complex process rooted primarily in the user's personal experiences with the library, which are in turn shaped by factors from both the library world and the user's life‐world. Based on these findings, this research questions a number of SERVQUAL assumptions and proposes three concepts which may help to contextualise the SERVQUAL score and enhance its utility in actual library assessment: library planning based variance of user perception, perception‐dependent user expectation and library‐sophistication based user differentiation.

The research presented in the paper questions a number of SERVQUAL assumptions and proposes three concepts that may help to contextualise the SERVQUAL score and enhance its utility in actual library assessment.

This paper aims to propose some suggestions for libraries and other digital reading service institutions to improve the utilization rate of e-books, based on the theoretical and empirical analysis of the perception behaviour characteristics of e-book selection under the allocation of limited cognitive resources.

From the perspective of key perception points, this paper studies the key perception points of selecting e-books through the experimental method and explores the influence of subject factors (users’ characteristics, users’ needs) on users’ e-book perception behaviour.

College students have selective attention in the process of selecting e-books. They will choose some important contents of e-books, such as title, book introduction, author, catalogue, reader comments, others’ recommendations, read leaderboard, to perceive and there is an obvious difference in perception intensity. Different personal traits and reading needs have a great influence on users’ perception points. Libraries and other digital reading service institutions should provide promotion information based on key perception points of e-books, develop personalized e-book service and promotion and optimize the expression of key perception points of e-books.

This paper presents a valuable study attempting to introduce cognitive resource theory into the field of digital reading service, which proves that users also have limited cognitive resource allocation in the process of selecting digital books.

We discuss results from recent relevance research with implications for information professionals. Our studies show that beyond the usual concern with high relevance and non‐relevance judgements, that partially relevant judgements by users are important. We call for the adoption of a more complex view of human relevance judgements in the education and practice of information professionals.

This paper aims to report the results of a study investigating the relevance criteria used by health care professionals when seeking medical images.

Data were collected from 29 participants using a think‐aloud protocol and face‐to‐face interviews and analysed using the Straussian version of grounded theory (GT).

The results show that participants made use of 15 relevance criteria, although they agreed on topicality being the most important. The findings suggest that users apply different criteria in different situations when evaluating the relevancy of medical images.

To the best of the authors' knowledge, there have been few studies that investigate relevance judgments for visually orientated documents. Thus, this study helps to contribute to the understanding of medical image resources and the information needs of health care professionals. A clear understanding of the medical image information needs of health care professionals is also vital to the design process and development of medical image retrieval systems.

The purpose of this paper is to better understand the dynamic nature of the relevance judgment process and the influence of work task on that process.

The empirical study reported here examined the information seeking behavior of a group of undergraduate college students assigned a set of research assignments (work tasks). Subjects recorded their selection of documents used for an assignment and the criteria used to judge those documents relevant. Statistical analysis was used to associate relevance judgments and the criteria used to make those judgments with work tasks.

Findings indicate a strong statistical association between work task and criteria used to judge relevance. Findings also include identification of specific criteria used to judge relevance and the relative importance of those criteria based on frequency of selection of criteria for a work task.

Findings provide additional insights into the dynamic nature of the relevance judgment process. Relevance judgment influences revealed in these findings in the form of criteria used to make relevance judgments further explicate the relevance judgment process and provide suggestions for the improvement of information retrieval systems and information literacy efforts.

Understanding the relevance judgment process is critical to understanding information behavior in general. Few studies have examined relevance criteria selections as part of the relevance judgment process and fewer still have studied these selections in relation to work tasks. A better understanding of this relationship is an essential part of understanding the dynamic nature of the relevance judgment process and its influences.