SIGIA-L Mail Archives: Re: [Sigia-l] Concepts and Categories [l
Re: [Sigia-l] Concepts and Categories [longish] was mixing apples and oranges and tomatoes
From: Tanya Rabourn (rabourn_at_columbia.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 12 2002 - 15:47:25 EDT
> I thought the below-referenced paper spoke more to category labels than
> it did to category content (redundant or not). I.e., user "confusion"
> seemed more a product of overly general labels of top-level categories
> than a product of finding some things repeated within more than one
> category ... FWIW.
That's not what they concluded. It discusses redundancy on the next to
last page (pg.4).
"Follow up analyses showed a strong correlation between the proportion of
redundant sub categories and the frequency with which a top-level category
was confused with other categories (r (9) = .76, p < .05). This finding
suggests that a high level of redundancy makes it very difficult for users
to learn to differentiate one category from another."
Still though, it is just one study. I don't know of any others that
address it. It would be good to see one done that involved more specific
content and top level category labels.
Tanya Rabourn <rabourn_at_columbia.edu>
[User Services Consultant]
AcIS R & D <www.columbia.edu/acis/rad>
Sigia-l mailing list
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2
: Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:55:09 EST