What Can Searching Behavior Tell Us About the Difficulty of Information Tasks? A Study of Web Navigation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Task has been recognized as an influential factor in information seeking behavior. An increasing number of studies are concentrating on the specific characteristics of the task as independent variables to explain associated information‐seeking activities. This paper examines the relationships between operational measures of information search behavior, subjectively perceived post‐task difficulty and objective task complexity in the context of factual information‐seeking tasks on the web. A question‐driven, web‐based information‐finding study was conducted in a controlled experimental setting. The study participants performed nine search tasks of varying complexity. Subjective task difficulty was found to be correlated with many measures that characterize the searcher's activities. Four of those measures, the number of the unique web pages visited, the time spent on each page, the degree of deviation from the optimal path and the degree of the navigation path's linearity, were found to be good predictors of subjective task difficulty. Objective task complexity was found to affect the relative importance of those predictors and to affect subjective assessment of task difficulty.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it