卜小蝶、陳思穎(民96)。網路自動分群引擎之使用者評估研究。圖書
資訊學研究, 2(1): 55-80。
么新英(民92)。傳統資訊檢索與視覺化資訊檢索之比較。科技情報開
發與經濟,13(3),1-2。
毛恆祥(民95)。分類架構與呈現之應用研究-以農委會農業知識管理
加值系統農業產業知識樹為例。未出版之碩士論文,私立世新大學
資訊傳播學系研究所,台北市。
官欣螢(民97)。Wiki資訊架構之可用性評估:以台灣棒球維基百科為
例。未出版之碩士論文,私立淡江大學資訊與圖書館學系研究所,
台北市。
許銀雄、何祖鳳、詹榮昌(民92)。網路人機介面可用性評估方法之比
較。銘傳學刊,13, 25-42。
吳美美,林珊如,黃慕萱(1999)。數位圖書館/博物館評鑑指標建構
探討。圖書資訊學學刊 ,14, 49-70。
陳向明(民91)。社會科學質的研究。台北市:五南。
陳思穎(民96)。自動分群搜尋引擎使用者評估研究。未出版之碩士論文,國立師範大學圖書資訊研究所,台北市。
唐納.諾曼。(民94)。情感設計:我們為何喜歡(或討厭)日常用品。
台北市 : 田園城市文化。
蔡景祥(民94)。網路搜尋結果自動組織之研究。未出版之碩士論文,國立台灣大學資訊管理學研究所,台北市。
蔡維君(民95)。大學圖書館好用性評估-以台大圖書館為例。未出版
之碩士論文,國立台灣大學圖書資訊學系研究所,台北市。
鍾雪珍(民97)。新版EBSCOhost 2.0資訊視覺化檢索介紹。國家圖
書館館訊,97:3,19-23。
Allan, J., Leuski, A. , Swan, R., & Byrd, D. (2001).
Evaluating combination of ranked lists and visualization
of inter-document similarity. Information Processing and
Management , 37, 435–458.
Amento,B., Terveen, L. & Hill,W. (2000). Does “Authority”
Mean Quality? Predicting Expert Quality Ratings of Web
Documents. Paper presented at the Annual ACM Conference
on Research and Development.
Ashby, F.G., Isen, A.M., & Turken, A.U. (1999). A
neuropsychologicaltheory of positive effect and its
influence on cognition. Psychological Review, 106, 529–
550.
Barnum, C.M. (2002).Usability testing and research.
Barkhuus, L. & Rode, J. A. (2007). From Mice to Men: 24
Years.of Evaluation at CHI. Alt.Chi.
Jansen, B. J., & Spink, A. (2005). How are we searching the
World Wide Web? A comparison of nine large search engine
transaction logs. Information Processing and Management,
42(1), 248-263.
Belkin, N. J., Brooks, H. M. & Daniels, P. J. (1987).
Knowledge elicitation using discourse analysis.
International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 27, 127-144.
Bevan, N. (1995). Measuring usability as quality of use.
Journal of Software Quality, 4, 115-130 .o
Borlund, P., & Ingwersen, P. (1997). The development of a
method for the evaluation of interactive information
retrieval systems. Journal of Documentation, 53, 225–
250.
Card, S., Mackinlay, J. D., & Shneiderman, B. (1999).
Readings in information
visualization: Using vision to think .San Francisco: Morgan.
Catherine, Plaisant. (2004). The challenge of information visualization. Proceedings of the working conference on
Advanced visual interfaces, 109 – 116.
Chang, S.-H. (1999). The current state of web search
engines. OCLC Systems and Services, 15, 148–149.
Chen, C. & Czerwinski, M. (2000). Empirical studies of
information visualization: a meta-analysis. Journal of
Human–Computer Studies, 53(5), 851–866.
Chen, C. & Yu, Y. (2000) Empirical studies of information
visualization: a meta-analysis. International Journal of
Human-Computer Studies, 53, 851-866.
Chen, H. C., Houston, A. L., Sewell, R. R., & Schatz, B. R.
(1998). Internet browsing and searching: Use revaluations
of category map and concept space techniques. Journal of
the American Society for Information Science, 49(7), 582-
603.
Chung, W., Chen, H., & Nunamaker, J.F. Jr. (2005). A visual
framework for knowledge discovery on the Web: an
empirical study of business intelligence exploration.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(4), 57–84.
Cole, J. I., Suman, M., Schramm, P., Lunn, R., & Aquino, J.
S. (2003).The internet report survey the digital future t
hree years. Retrieved October 8, 2009, from
http://www.ccp.ucla.edu/pdf/ucla-internet-report-year-
three.pdf.
Conati, C., & Maclaren, H. (2008). Exploring the role of
individual differences information visualization. To
appear in Proceeding of AVI 2008, International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, ACM Press.
Delphi Group(2002). Taxonomy and Content Classification.
Retrieved October 2 , 2009,from
http://www.delphigroup.com/research/whitepaper_request_download.htm
Denning, S., Hoiem, D., Simpson, M., & Sullivan, K. (1990).
The value hinking-aloud protocols in Industry: a case
study at microsoft corporation. In Proceedings of the
Human Factors Society 34th Annual Meeting.
Dumais, S., Cutrell, E., & Chen, H. (2004). Optimizing
search by showing results in context. Paper Presented at
the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems,,
United States,
Ericsson, K. & Simon, H. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal
reports as data (Rev. ed.), Cambridge, Ma: MIT Press.
Faisal.S, Carft.B, Caims,Pm., & Blanford, A. (2008).Internationlization , qualitative method and evaluation. In Proceedings of the 2008 conference on Beyond time and errors: novel evaluation methods for Infor3mation Visualization.
Gabbard, J.L., Hix, D., & Swan II, J.E. (1999). User-
centered design and evaluation of virtual environments,
IEEE Computer Graphics & Applications, 51-59.
Genuis, S. K. (2004).Web site usability testing: A critical
tool for libraries. Feliciter, 50(4), 161-164
Harter, S. (1992). Psychological relevance and information
science. Journal of the American Society for information
science , 43(9).
Harter, S., & Hert, C. (1997). Evaluation of information
retrieval system; approaches
issues and methods. Annual Review of Information Science
and technology, 32, 1-94.
Heo, M., & Hirtle, S. (2001). An empirical comparison of
visualization tools to assist information retrieval on
the Web. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, 52(8), 666–675.
Hearst, M. (1999). The use of categories and clusters for
organizing retrieval results. Natural language
information retrieval, 333-374.
Hearst, M.(2006). Clustering versus faceted categories for
information
exploration.Commun. ACM, 49 (4). 59-61.
Hsieh-Yee, I. (2001). Research on web behavior. Library&
Information science research, 23, 167-189.
Hunter, J. E., Schmidt, F. L, & Jackson, G. B. (1982). Meta-
analysis: cumulating research findings across studies.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications
Ingwersen, P. (2007). Cognitive perspectives of information
retrieval interaction:
elements of a cognitive IR theory. Journal of
Documentation ,52(1), 3-50.
Jain, K., Murty, M.N., & Flynn, P.J. (1999). Data
clustering: a review. ACM
Computing Surveys, 31(3).
Jeffries, R., Miller, J.R., Wharton, C., &Uyeda, K.M.
(1991). User interface evaluation in the real world :
A comparison of four techniques. Proceedings ACM CHI''91
Conference, 119-124
Jeng .J. (2005). Usability assessment of academic digital
libraries: effectivenss, efficiency,satisfaction, and
learnability. Libri: International Journal of Libraries
andInformation Services, 55(2/3), 96–121.
Julien, C.-A. , Leide, J. E., & Bouthillier, F.(2008).
Controlled User Evaluations of Information Visualization
Interfaces for Text Retrieval: Literature Review and Meta-
Analysis. JASIST, 59(6), 1012-1024.
Kagolovsky, Y., & Moehr, J. (2003). Current status of the
evaluation of Information retrieval. Journal of medical
systems, 27(5), 409-424.
Kaplan, B., & Maxwell, J. (1994). Qualitative research
methods for evaluating computer information systems.
Evaluating health care information systems: Methods and
applications, 45-68.
Kelly, D., & Cool, C. (2002). The effects of topic
familiarity on information search behavior. In
Proceedings of the 2nd ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on
Digital libraries, 74-75.
Koch, T., & Day, M. (1997). The role of classification
schemes in internet resource description anddiscovery.
Retrieved March 2, 2009, from:
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/desire/classification/classification.pdf.
Korfhage, R. (1991). To see or not to see—Is that the
query? 14th Annual International ACM/SIGIR Conference,
(pp. 131-141). Chicago: ACM Press.
Kosara, R., Healey, C. G., Interrante, V., Laidlaw, D. H.,
& Ware, C. (2003). User studies: Why, how, and when? IEEE
Computer Graphics and Applications. 272, 03.
Koshman, S. (2004). Comparing usability between a
visualization and text-based system for information
retrieval. Journal of Documentation , 60(5), 565-580.
Koshman, S. (2005). Testing user interaction with a
prototype visualization-based information retrieval
system. Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, 56(8), 824–833.
Koshman, S. (2006). Visualization-based information
retrieval on the Web. Library and Information Science
Research, 28(2), 192-207.
Kowalski, G. J., & Maybury, M. T. (2003). Information
Storage and Retrieval Systems(ch8). Boston, MA: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Krishnapuram, R., & Kummamuru, K. (2003). Automatic
taxonomy generation: issues and possibilities. Lecture
Notes in Computer Science, 2715, 52-63.
Kules, B., Shneiderman, B.:(2005).Categorized graphical
overviews for Web search results:An exploratory study
using us. government agencies as a meaningful and
stable structure. In: Proc. of the 3rd annual workshop on
HCI Research in MIS.
Kwasnik, B. H. (1992). The role of classification
structures in reflecting and building theory. In R. Fidel, B. H. Kwasnik, & P. J. Smith (Eds.), Advances in
classification research, vol. 3(Proceedings of the 3rd
ASIS SIG/CR Classification Research Workshop) (pp. 63-
81). Medford, NJ: Learned Information, for the American
Society for Information Science.
Lee, H.-L. & Olson, H. A. (2005). Hierarchical Navigation:
An Exploration of Yahoo! Directories. Knowledge
Organization, 32(1), 10-24.
Lin, X. (1997). Map displays for information retrieval.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science,
48, 40–54.
Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J., & Heath, C.(2000). Workplace
Studies: Recovering Work Practice and Informing Design;
Cambridge University Press.Mai, Jens-Erik. (2004).
Classification of the Web: challenges and inquiries.
Knowledge Organization, 31(2), 92-97.
Marcus, A., Comorski, D., & Sergeyev, A. (2005).
Supporting the evolution of a software visualization
ool through usability studies.
In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Program
Comprehension , 307–316.
Mazza, R. & Berre, A. (2007). Focus group methodology for
evaluating information visualization techniques and
tools.Proceedings of the 11th International Conference
Information Visualization.
Morse, E., Lewis, M., & Olsen, K. (2002). Testing visual
information retrieval methodologies case study:
comparative analysis of textual, icon, graphical and “spring” displays. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, 53(1), 28–40.
Nielsen, J. (1990). The art of navigating through
hypertext. Communications of the ACM, 33(3), 297-310.
Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. Boston: Academic
Press.
Nielsen Media. (1997). Search engines most popular method
of surfing the web [Website]. Commerce Net/Nielsen Media.
Retrieved 10.8.2009 from the World Wide Web: http://www.commerce.net/news/press/0416.html.
Nielsen, J. (2003). User empowerment and the fun factor. In
M.A. Blythe,
Nielsen, J. (2005).Mental models for search are getting
firmer. Alertbox. Retrieved December 11, 2009 from
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20050509.html
Norman, D.A. (2004). Emotional design: Why we love(or hate)
everyday things. New York: Basic Books.Osdin.
Nowell, L.T., France, R.K., Hix, D., Heath, L.S., & Fox,
E.A. (1996). Visualizing search results: Some alternatives
to query-document similarity. In Proceedings of the 19th
Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and
Development in Information Retrieval(pp. 67–75). New
York: ACM Press.
NPD New Media Services. (2000). NPD search and portal site
study. Retrieved October 15, 2009 from: http://searchenginewatch.com/reports/npd.html.
Overbeeke, k., Monk, A.E., & Wright, P.C.(Eds.), Funology:
From usability to enjoyment (pp. 103–105). Dordrecht,
The Netherlands: Kluwer..
Rivadeneira, W., & Bederson, B. (2003). A study of search
result clustering interfaces: Comparing textual and
zoomable user interfaces. Retrieved December 9, 2009,
from ftp://ftp.cs.umd.edu/pub/hcil/Reports-Abstracts-
Bibliography/2003-36html/2003-36.htm.
Rester, M., Pohl, M., Wiltner, S., Hinum, K., Miksch, S., Popow, C., & Ohmann, S. (2007). Mixing Evaluation Methods for Assessing the Utility of an Interactive InfoVis Technique. In J. Jacko (Ed.): Human-Computer Interaction, 604–613.
Robins, D. (2000). Interactive information retrieval: context and basic notions. Information Science, 3(2), 57-62.
Rubin, J. (1994). Handbook of usability testing: How to plan, design, and conduct tests. New Work:Wiley.
Samler, S., & Lewellen, K.(2004). Good taxonomy is key to successful searching.
EContent, 27(7/8), S20.
Saracevic, T. (1997). The stratified model of information retrieval interaction:Extension and application. Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 34, 313-327.
Sebrechts, M. M., Vasilakis, J., Miller, M. S., Cugini, J. V., & Laskowski, S. (1999). Visualization of search
results: A comparative evaluation of text, 2D, and 3D
interfaces. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual
International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and
Development in Information Retrieval, Berkeley, CA (pp.
3–10). New York7 ACM Press.
Shiaw, H.-Y., Jacob, R., & Crane, G. R. (2004). The 3D vase
museum: a new approach to context in a digital library.
In Proceedings of the 2004 Joint ACM/IEEE Conference on
Digital Libraries (JCDL''04), June 7-11, Tucson, Ariz, 125-
134.
Shneiderman , B.(1992). Designing the User interface.
Reading MA: Addison Wesley.
Shneiderman, B. (1994). Dynamic Queries for Visual
information Seeking; IEEE Software ,11(6), 70-77.
Spink, A. (1997). Study of interactive feedback during
mediated information retrieval. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science, 48(5), 382-394.
Song, M. (2000). Visualization in information retrieval: a
three-level analysis. Journal of Information Science, 26
(1), 3.
Su, L. (1992). Evaluation measures for interactive
information retrieval. Information Processing and Management: an International Journal, 28(4), 503-516.
Sutcliffe, A. G., Ennis, M. & Hu, J. (2000). Evaluating the
effectiveness of visual user interfaces for information
retrieval. International Journal of Human-Computer
Studies, 53(5) , 741-763.
Swan, R. C. & Allan, J. (1998). Aspect windows, 3-D
visualizations, and indirect comparisons of information
retrieval systems. Paper presented at the SIGIR ’98,
Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, Melbourne, Australia (pp. 171–181). New York7 :ACM Press.
Park, Albert. (2006). Intended Use Evaluation Approach for
Information Visualization. Unpublished master
dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State
University,Virginia.
Pirolli, Peter, Schank, Patricia, Hearst, Marti, & Diehl, Christine, (1996) Scatter/gather bromunicates the topic
structure of a very largewsing com text collection, Proc.
of ACM CHI96 Conference , ACM, 213-220
Tague-Sutcliffe,J.(1996). Some perspectives on the
evaluation of information retrieval systems. Journal of
the American Society for information science, 47(1), 1-3.
Tague-Sutcliffe,J.(1996). Some perspectives on the
evaluation of information retrieval systems. Journal of
the American Society for information science, 47(1), 1-3.
Tang, M.-C. (2007). Browsing and searching in a facted
information space: A naturalistic study of PubMed user''s
Interaction with a display tool. Journal of American
society for information science and technology, 58(13),
1998-2006
Tang,M.C., Wu,W.C., & Hung., B.W. (2009). Evaluating a
Metadata-based Term Suggestion Interface for PubMed with
Real Users with Real Requests. Proceedings of the Annual
Meeting of the American Society for Information Science &
Technology
Tory, M. & Moller, T.(2005). Evaluating visualizations: do
expert reviews work?. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 25(5), 8-11.
Tullis, Tom & Albert, Bill. (2008). Measuring the user
experience.
Turketen,O.,& Sharda., R.(2005).Clustering-Based Visual
Interfaces for Presentation of Web Search Results: An
Empirical Investigation. Information
Systems Frontiers, 7(3), 273-297.
V. González & A. Kobsa. (2003). A workplace study of the
adoption of information
visualization systems. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Knowledge Management, 92–102.
Vakkari, P. & Hakala, N. (2000). Change in relevance
criteria and problem stages in task performance. Journal
of Documentation, 56(5), 540–562.
Vakkari, P., Pennanen, M. & Serola, S. (2003). Changes of
search terms and tactics while writing a research
proposal: a longitudinal case study. Information
Processing & Management, 39(3), 445–463.
Veerasamy, A., & Heikes, R. (1997). Effectiveness of a
graphical display of retrieval results. In Proceedings of
SIGIR’97, Philadelphia, 236-245
Veerasamy, A.& Belkin, N.J. (1996). Evaluation of a Tool
for Visualization of Information Retrieval Results. In Frei, H.P. et al., (Eds.) Proceedings of the 19th Annual
International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and
Development in Information Retrieval, 85-92
Ware, C. (2004). Information visualization: Perception for
design(2nd ed.). San Francisco7 Morgan-Kaufmann.
Wiley, D. L. (1998). Beyond information retrieval: Ways to
provide content in context. Database, 21, 18–22.
Retrieved Novemeber 1, 2009, from http://www.onlineinc.com/database/DB1998/wiley8.html.
Wu, M., Fuller, M. & Wilkinson, R. (2001). Using
clustering and classification approaches in interactive
retrieval. Information Processing and Management, 37, 459-
484.
Wu, Mei-Mei & Sonnenwald, Diane(1999). Reflection on
Information Retrieval Evaluation. In Proceedings of 1999
EBTI, ECAI, SEER, & PNC Joint Meeting, Taipei, Academia
Sinica, 63-81.
Zeki, S. (1992). The visual image in mind and brain.
Scientific American, 267(3),
69-76.
Zhang, J. (2008). Visualization for Information
Retrieval.Springer, New York, NY.
Zhang, Y. (2008). The influence of mental models on
undergraduate students'' searching behavior on the Web.
Information Processing & Management, 44(3), 1330-134