MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313009587 · doi:10.47989/irisic2202

What's interrupting your search?

2022· article· en· W4313009587 on OpenAlexaff
Mengjia Lu, Morgan Harvey, Orland Hoeber

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Research an international electronic journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPersonal Information Management and User Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCoding (social sciences)Mobile WebMobile deviceMobile computingMobile technologyWorld Wide WebContext (archaeology)Human–computer interactionInformation retrievalGeographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Web search is a common activity in a mobile context. However, the nature of performing tasks in a mobile environment means there is the risk interruption. While the effects of interruptions on mobile search have been studied in recent years, the nature of such interruptions occurring in real-world mobile settings have not. Using a diary study approach, we collected data from 20 participants on the everyday interruptions they faced conducting mobile web searches over a 10-day period. We used inductive open coding to categorise the nature of the interruptions assigning each interruption to a category/sub-category combination. We then used a deductive coding approach to classify each interruption as being either internally or externally-induced; and mobile or non mobile-specific. We found a broad range of interruptions, which we have organised into an extensive taxonomy. Further, a substantial proportion of the interruptions are externally-induced and more than half are unique to mobile contexts. The empirical evidence of the nature of mobile search interruptions in our findings provide insight into the complex environment of mobile search, information upon which to base future mobile search studies (e.g., surveys, controlled laboratory studies), and motivation for the study of search interface designs that can help mitigate the effects of such interruptions.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.450
GPT teacher head0.560
Teacher spread0.109 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation Research an international electronic journalSame topicPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorFrench-language works237,207