Journal of Korean Library and Information Science Society (한국도서관정보학회지)

Korean Library and Information Science Society (한국도서관정보학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Mental States in Information Search Process

정보검색과정에서의 정신적 상태

  • 나경식 (건국대학교 문헌정보학과) ;
  • 최원태 (건국대학교 문헌정보학과)
  • Received : 2017.08.20
  • Accepted : 2017.09.21
  • Published : 2017.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study examined the differences in a searcher's mental states of a complex information search and retrieval task during information search process between the two groups: participants who were exposed to mental demand manipulation and those not exposed. Data from the experiments and questionnaires were analyzed. Based on qualitative approach and quantitative analyses, the results indicated that the participants exposed to mental demand required more thoughts; addressed negative emotions more often; reduced a searcher's efforts; and interrupted search performance than those not exposed. These results suggest that mental demand contributed to a searcher's perceived thought, emotion, effort, and performance, although these mental states differed in relative contribution of information search process. Significant differences were found between the two groups with respect to the component of mental demand, performance, and frustration of the NASA-TLX subjective cognitive load. These results have implications for search user interface design and information search systems among others.

본 연구는 두 집단간에 복잡한 정보검색임무를 수행하는 동안 이용자의 정신상태의 차이점을 살펴보고자 하였다. 실험과 질문지를 통해서 데이터를 수집하고 분석하였고, 그 결과 정신적요구를 받은 참여자들이 안받은 참여자들보다 검색 중 생각을 더 많이 한 것으로 보이고, 부정적인 감정표현을 더 자주 한 것으로 보이고, 노력을 덜 한 것으로 보이며, 검색수행능력이 훼방을 받은 것으로 드러났다. NASA-TLX의 검사결과는 정신적요구, 수행능력, 좌절감에서 주요한 차이를 보이는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 연구결과는 인터페이스 디자인이나 정보검색 시스템등의 개발에 도움을 줄 것으로 기대한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Annett, J. 2002. "Subjective rating scales: science or art?" Ergonomics, 45(14): 966-987. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130210166951
  2. Bandura, A. 1982. "Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency." The American Psychologist, 37(2): 122-147. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122
  3. Bates, M. J. 1990. "Where should the person stop and the information search interface start?" Information Processing and Management, 26(5): 575-591. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(90)90103-9
  4. Blumberg, S. J. 2000. "The White Bear Suppression Inventory: Revisiting its factor structure." Personality and Individual Differences, 29: 943-950. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00245-7
  5. Brunken, R., Plass, J. L. and D. Leutner. 2003. "Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning." Educational Psychologist, 38(1): 53-61. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_7
  6. Bystrom, K. 2002. "Information and Information Sources in Tasks of Varying Complexity." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(7): 581-591. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10064
  7. Bystrom, K. 2005. "Conceptual framework for tasks in information studies." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 56(10): 1050-1061. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20197
  8. Chen, I. J. and C. C. Chang. 2009. "Cognitive Load Theory: An Empirical Study of Anxiety and Task Performance in Language Learning." Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 7(2): 729-746.
  9. Clore, G. and J. R. Huntsinger. 2007. "How emotions inform judgment and regulate thought." Trends in Cognitive Science, 11(9): 393-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.08.005
  10. Craik, F. and Lockhart, P. 1972. "Levels of processing: A framework for memory research." Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11: 671-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
  11. Garrison, D. R., Cleveland, M., Kool, M. and J. Kappelman. 2006. "Revisiting methodological issues in the analysis of transcripts: negotiated coding and reliability." Internet High Education, 9(1): 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.11.001
  12. Gimino, A. 2002. "Factors that influence students' investment of mental effort in academic tasks: a validation and exploratory study." Doctoral Dissertation.
  13. Gwizdka, J. 2008. "Cognitive Load on Web Search Tasks." Proceedings of Workshop on Cognition and the Web, 83-86
  14. Gwizdka, J. 2010. "Distribution of cognitive load in web search." Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(11): 2167-2187. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21385
  15. Gwizdka, J. 2013. "Searchers switch tactics under increased mental load." Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 50(1): 1-3.
  16. Howells, F. M., Stein, D. J. and V. A. Russell. 2010. "Perceived mental effort correlates with changes in tonic arousal during attentional tasks." Behavioral and Brain Functions, 6(39): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1744-9081-6-1
  17. Kasl, S. V. 1996. "The influence of the work environment on cardiovascular health: A historical, conceptual, and methodological perspective." Journal of Occupational and Health Psychology, 1: 42-56. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.1.1.42
  18. Kirschner, F., Paas, F. and P. A. Kirschner. 2009. "A cognitive load approach to collaborative learning: United brains for complex tasks." Educational Psychology Review, 21: 31-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9095-2
  19. Kirschner, F., Paas, F. and P. A. Kirschner. 2011. "Superiority of collaborative learning with complex tasks: A research note on an alternative affective explanation." Computers in Human Behavior, 27: 53-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.012
  20. Kirschner, P. A. 2002. "Cognitive load theory: Implications of cognitive load theory on the design of learning." Learning and Instruction, 12(1): 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(01)00014-7
  21. Kuhlthau, C. C. 1991. "Inside the search process: Information seeking from the user's perspective." Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 42(5): 361-371. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199106)42:5<361::AID-ASI6>3.0.CO;2-#
  22. NASA, NASA TLX: Task Load Index. [cited 2017. 8. 28].
  23. Nielsen Norman Group. Usability 101: Introduction to Usability. [cited 2017. 8. 28]
  24. Niculescu,, A., Cao, Y., Vandijk, B. and A. Nijholt. 2010. "Measuring Stress and Cognitive Load Effects on the Perceived quality of a multimodal dialogue system." Proceedings of Measuring Behavior: 453-455.
  25. Oosterwijk S., Lindquist, K. A., Anderson, E., Dautoff, R., Moriguchi, Y. and L. F. Barrett. 2012. "States of mind: Emotions, body feelings, and thoughts share distributed neural networks." Neuroimage, 62(3): 2110-2128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.05.079
  26. Paas, F. and J. Merrienboer. 1993. "The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures." Human Factors, 35: 737-743. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872089303500412
  27. Paas F., Van Gerven P. W. M., and H. K. Tabbers. 2005. The cognitive aging principle in multimedia learning. In Mayer R. E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. 339-354. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  28. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J., Tabbers, H. and P. W. M. Van Gerven. 2003. "Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory." Educational Psychologist, 38: 63-72. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8
  29. Peterson, R. D., Klein, J., Donnelly, R. and K. Renk. 2009. "Predicting psychological symptoms: The role of perceived thought control ability." Cognitive Behavior Therapy, 38(1): 16-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/16506070802561215
  30. Pew Research Cente. Three Technology Revolutions. [cited 2017. 8. 28].
  31. Pu, P. H. and K. Pratyush. 2004. "Evaluating example-based search tools." Proceedings of the 5th ACM conference on Electronic commerce, 208-217.
  32. Salomon, G. 1984. "Television is "easy" and print is "tough": The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions." Journal of Educational Psychology, 76: 658.
  33. Seibert, P. S. and H. C. Ellis. 1991, "Irrelevant thoughts, emotional mood states, and cognitive task performance." Memory Cognition, 19(5): 507-513. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03199574
  34. Sweller, J. 1988. "Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning." Cognitive Science, 12(2): 257-285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
  35. Sweller. J. 2010. "Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load." Educational Psychology Review, 22(2): 123-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5
  36. Trzepacz, P. T. and R. W. Baker. 1993. "Mental status examination." Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. p.202.
  37. Vakkari, P. 1999. "Task complexity, problem structure and information actions: integrating studies on information seeking and retrieval." Information processing & management, 35(6): 819-837. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4573(99)00028-X
  38. Vakkari, P. and P. Pertti. 2001. "Changes in search tactics and relevance judgements when preparing a research proposal: a summary of the findings of a longitudinal study." Information retrieval, 43(4): 295-310.
  39. Wilson, T. D. 2006. "On user studies and information needs." Journal of Documentation, 62(6): 658-670. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220410610714895
  40. Xie, B. and G. Salvendy. 2000."Predition of mental workload in single and multiple task Environments." International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(3): 213-242. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327566IJCE0403_3
  41. Zhang, Y and Gwizdka, J. 2014. "Effects of tasks at similar and different complexity levels." Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 51(1): 1-4.