Related works on searches

2.3.1. Individual differences in Web searches

Web searches involve complex cognitive processes that are strongly affected by individual user characteristics. The literature contains many studies focused on differences in cognitive perspective, especially in the area of prior knowledge (see, for example, Last, O’

Donnell & Kelly, 2001; Rouet, 2003; Shapiro, 2000). Kim and Allen (2002) note that cognitive style and task type directly influence search behaviors, and Yuan (1997) adds that search experiences influence search command decisions. Holscher and Strube (2000) and Lazander, Biemans and Wopereis (2000) are among researchers who have explored differences in information search behaviors associated with different levels of information search expertise, which implies different types or strengths of cognitive factors. According to Bilal and Kirby (2002), a list of such factors should include user comprehension of the search task, individual experience with Web surfing, skill level for manipulating search engines, and the amount of attention an individual gives to a search task. All of the researchers listed in this paragraph have considered how differences in user cognitive or skill perspectives impact

search behavior.

Groups of users can still develop search strategies based on shared prior knowledge.

Ford, Miller and Moss (2005) report that attitudes toward the Internet and demographic factors can also affect Web search strategies. In an earlier study, Ford and Miller (1996) observed females who were unable to find their way, frequently became lost or lacked a sense of control, and tended to only look at items suggested to them. Ford and Miller also studied how self-efficacy (in this context, indicating an individual’s judgment of his or her personal ability to find information) impacts perceptions of and approaches to information seeking.

Besides human factors, researchers such as Bilal (2000, 2001), Kim and Allen (2002), and Last, O’Donnell and Kelly (2001) state that search task type affects student reactions to hypertext.

Figure 2.Perspectives (including human factors, tools, and task types) that affect Web search strategies.

The studies cited to this point allow for a summary of human factors that influence search strategies (including cognitive, affective, skill, and demographic) (Fig. 2) and to

analyze how thinking style levels (an affective human factor) help determine young students’

search strategies—a topic that has not received proper attention in search behavior studies.

This dissertation also constitutes an attempt to summarize human, search engine, and search task factors that can serve as indicators of how students interact with and respond to search engine interfaces. Combined, all of these indicators influence search strategies.

One current approach to improving the user search experience consists of providing a personalized interface; most search engines use some form of a personal (Google) or social (Yahoo) search history mechanism to achieve this. Data mining-related techniques are used to analyze search histories to recognize search patterns (interests) that reflect human factors.

Human factors that can be identified as exerting significant impacts on search behaviors can be used to predict search intentions. As an important human factor that strongly affects daily personal behavior, thinking style has significant potential for impacting information seeking behavior on the Web. Thus, instead of using data mining techniques to explore raw data for recognizing user search patterns, integrating thinking style into search engine interface design may exert a much greater impact on search intention identification.

2.3.2. Thinking style

Thinking style refers to personal preferences in one’s abilities to deal with problems, not the abilities themselves. Accordingly, people with the same abilities may express different behaviors due to the strengths of their preferences (Sternberg, 1988, 1994). Human mental functions can be discussed in terms of five “mental self-government” dimensions: function, form, level, scope, and leaning. The function dimension involves preferences for formulating ideas, carrying out rules initiated by others, or comparing and evaluating ideas. The form dimension concerns various goal-setting and self-management behavioral styles. The level dimension distinguishes between preferences for dealing with problems at relatively abstract

or detailed levels. The scope dimension includes a preference for working alone or with others.

The learning dimension addresses a preference for working on tasks that involve novelty and ambiguity or tasks that require adherence to existing rules and procedures (Zhang & Sternberg, 2005).

Sternberg and Grigorenko (1995) suggest that individuals look for learning activities that match their preferred thinking style. With the advent of Internet technology, some researchers are focusing on how thinking styles impact Internet-centered learning contexts.

However, to the best of my knowledge the literature does not contain any studies on the impacts of thinking style on Internet-based information seeking behavior (frequently referred to as “search behavior”). One of my goals in this dissertation is to determine if a specific thinking style emerges over time when conducting Internet searches in the same manner that it emerges as part of other daily life skills and abilities.

Thinking style can affect judgments concerning immediate issues at hand. In the face of different activities that happen concurrently, individuals may initiate different goals or develop different behavioral patterns. Using goal setting as an example, some people tend toward single-mindedness, others carefully set priorities, and still others are motivated by multiple (often competing) goals perceived as having equal importance. During the search process, some individuals are inclined to grasp the “big picture” of a search task while others focus on a few specific concepts to establish a deeper understanding. The former are satisfied with abstract issues and the latter require detail.