[Sigia-l] search results and thesauri

[Tal Herman]

On Thu, 23 May 2002, Tal Herman wrote:

> While we preserve for the journalist the terms that they search for, we
> don't reveal the synonyms that were relied upon to find their results set.
> I don't find this approach problematic in the least for the audience we
are
> serving and the service that we are providing.  The journalists simply
don't
> care if the word 'moslem' was translated to it's officially approved
synonym
> 'muslim' during the course of the search, or if their spelling of 'Koran'
> was changed to 'Qu'ran' for purposes of the search.  All they care about
is
> if they've gotten a results set that satisfies their need for a particular
> kind of expert.

To which Andrew McNaughton responded on 24 May 2002,

> If you are only dealing with *precise* synonyms, this is entirely
> un-problematic.  The problem comes around if "Qu'ran" is not a preferred
> term and you list experts in the Qu'ran under "Muslim" or "Middle Eastern
> Reliegion" or some such term.  Using broader terms or related terms in a
> search which are not precisely the same as the user's search can improve
> results, but because these terms are not precise synonyms, the result is
> not always appropriate to the search intent, and it can lead to unexpected
> results.  This is the sort of issue that makes it important to give users
> feedback on the terms that are actually used in the search, and the
> opportunity to modify them.

I think that I have to disagree with Andrew on this one.  I'll admit that as
an IA, it offends my sensibilities not to reveal to the searcher the tricks
that I'm using to get them the results for their search.  On the other hand,
it's my obligation to provide the searcher with as good a results set as
possible without distracting them with unnecessary information.  In the case
of the particular application we're talking about here, the results set
includes the titles of relevant books authored, papers presented, and
courses taught by the scholar(s) whose names are returned in response to the
query, and this additional information provides the context for the
journalist to make the decision about whom to contact.

The searcher is not directly exposed to the taxonomy at all (unless browsing
for scholars using the taxonomic hierarchy).  It is quite possible that a
user might enter a term for which there was a precise match in the taxonomy
and the results returned would not contain any direct reference at all to
that term.  For example, to pick a current hot topic, the journalist might
search for the term 'taliban' because he or she is doing a story on
Afghanistan.  The list of results for any particular scholar might not
include the word 'taliban' at all, although 'taliban' may be an entry in the
taxonomy.  On the other hand, the term 'taliban' may not be a part of the
taxonomy, rather experts on the Taliban might be grouped under the term
'afghanistan' or 'islamic fundamentalism', along with experts in other
subjects relevant to Afghanistan or other types of Islamic fundementalist
groups.

For the journalist, this distinction is relatively unimportant.  The
additional information included with a scholar name lists the materials that
caused that scholar to be returned as part of the results set and is enough
of a basis upon which the decision to contact or not contact a particular
scholar can be made.  Thus, the question is really one of audience.  In this
case, the audience doesn't need exposure to synonyms, rather they need
exposure to other information relevant to the search results so that they
can decide on their own which result is best for their needs.

Journalists often aren't looking for an expert in the _exact_ area they are
investigating.  Rather, they are looking for the person who best matches the
various criteria that are important for a source for the particular story,
which may or may not include the scholar being an authority on the subject
at hand so long as they have some knowledge of the subject.  An example of
this is the source criteria for journalists working for regional news
outlets.  It's often more important for a regional outlet to quote someone
who is geographically local than finding the leading national expert on the
particular subject.

To be fair, we do in some instances provide access to broader term/narrower
term relationships in an explicit fashion.  For example, if a search term or
it's synonym matches an existing taxonomy category and there are no scholars
assigned to that category, we will return results for scholars with a
narrower or broader expertise in the area along with an explanation that no
one matched exactly the terms being looked for but someone in the results
set might be useful as a source anyway.

Tal

tal herman||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
therman-at-seralat.com||http://www.seralat.com
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||