No abstract

Document relational network has been effective in retrieving and evaluating papers. Despite their effectiveness, relational measures, including co-citation, are far from ideal and need improvements. The assumption underlying the co-citation relation is the content relevance and opinion relatedness of cited and citing papers. This may imply existence of some kind of co-opinionatedness between co-cited papers which may be effective in improving the measure. Therefore, the present study tries to test the existence of this phenomenon and its role in improving information retrieval. To do so, based on CITREC, a medical test collection was developed consisting of 30 queries (seed documents) and 4823 of their co-cited papers. Using NLP techniques, the co-citances of the queries and their co-cited papers were analyzed and their similarities were computed by 4 g similarity measure. Opinion scores were extracted from co-citances using SentiWordnet. Also, nDCG values were calculated and then compared in terms of the citation proximity index (CPI) and co-citedness measures before and after being normalized by the co-opinionatedness measure. The reliability of the test collection was measured by generalizability theory. The findings suggested that a majority of the co-citations exhibited a high level of co-opinionatedness in that they were mostly similar either in their opinion strengths or in their polarities. Although anti-polar co-citations were not trivial in their number, a significantly higher number of the co-citations were co-polar, with a majority being positive. The evaluation of the normalization of the CPI and co-citedness by the co-opinionatedness indicated a generally significant improvement in retrieval effectiveness. While anti-polar similarity reduced the effectiveness of the measure, the co-polar similarity proved to be effective in improving the co-citedness. Consequently, the co-opinionatedness can be presented as a new document relation and used as a normalization factor to improve retrieval performance and research evaluation.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose This study aims to investigate the relationship between the concreteness of searching module icons and their effectiveness in Iranian digital library applications. Design/methodology/approach This study was a correlational survey whose participants consisted of two groups, namely, users and experts. The former consisted of 174 users, all of whom were included because of their scarcity, and the latter included ten experts of knowledge and information science. First, the effective and non-effective icons were identified by users. Then, their concreteness was investigated by the expert participants. Findings The results of the study showed a significant relationship between the concreteness of icons and their effectiveness, meaning that the more concrete, the more effective the icon was, and vice versa. Furthermore, it was shown that the effective icons were representational and semi-abstract, whereas non-effective ones were very abstract. Practical implications The designers, especially digital library practitioners, should use icons that distinguish themselves as effective icons, and avoid using non-effective ones. It is suggested that they apply representational icons more. Social implications The designers of mobile interfaces and public environments, such as social networks, transportation systems and so forth, can use icons in their user interfaces that are more effective when they are perceived with more concreteness. Originality/value The investigation of the relation between the concreteness of icons and their effectiveness may help determine effective and non-effective icons. It can also be of help to designers to satisfy user needs and improve their site’s performance through using effective icons.