Influences on the Outcome of Literature Searches for Integrative Research Reviews

Abstract

Three influences on the outcomes of literature searches undertaken as part of integrative research reviews were examined: (1) the degree of expertise of the searcher; (2) the amount of information available (i.e., keywords, bibliographics, abstracts), and (3) the cognitive characteristics of the searcher. Participants were presented with descriptions of documents varying in (1) topic area (related or not related to their expertise), (2) amount of information, and (3) whether the document was relevant or irrelevant to the search. Results revealed no difference between experts and nonexperts in accuracy of judging relevant documents, but experts were better able to discern that irrelevant documents were in fact irrelevant. Judgments based on abstracts were more accurate than judgments based on keywords or bibliographrcs, which did not differ, and this effect was more pronounced for relevant than irrelevant articles. Participants who had previously conducted more literature searches or published more research reviews made more accurate judgments, as did searchers high in conceptual complexity or tolerance of ambiguity.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allport, G. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Bates, B. (1977). "Factors affecting subject catalog search success ." J. of the Amer. Society for Information Sci. 28: 161-169.

Bieri, J. (1968). "Cognitive complexity and judgment of inconsistent information," in R.P. Abelson et al. (eds.) Theories of Cognitive Consistency: A Sourcebook. Skokie, IL: Rand McNally.

Budner, S. (1962). "Tolerance of ambiguity as a personality variable ." J. of Personality 30: 29-50.

Campbell, D. (1960) "Recommendations for APA test standards regarding construct, trait, or discriminant validity." Amer. Psychologist 15: 546-553.

Cooper, H. (1989) Integrating Research: A Guide for Literature Reviews (2nd ed.) Newbury Park, CA : Sage.

Cuadra, C. and R. Katter (1967) Experimental Studies of Relevance Judgments. Santa Monica, CA: Systems Development Corp .

Davidson, D. (1977) "The effects of cognitive style on judgments of document relevance." J. of the Amer. Society for Information Sci. 28: 273-284.

Dym, E. ( 1967) "Relevance predictability: I. Investigation background and procedures." in A. Kent et al. (eds.) Electronic Handbook of Information: Testing and Evaluation . Washington, DC: Thompson.

10.

Elstein, A. , L. Shulman , and S. Sprafka (1978) Medical Problem Solving. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

11.

Fenichel, C. (1980) "An examination of the relation between searching behavior and searcher background." Online Rev. 4: 341-347.

12.

Findley, M. and H. Cooper (1983) "Locus of control and academic achievement: a literature review." J. of Personality and Social Psychology 44: 419-427.

13.

Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1949) "Intolerance of ambiguity as an emotional and perceptual personality variable," in J. Bruner and D. Krech (eds.) Perception and Personality : A Symposium. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press.

14.

Frenkel-Brunswik, E. (1954) "Further explorations by a contributor to 'The authoritarian personality,'" pp. 226-275 in R. Christie and M. Jahoda (eds.) Studies in the Scope and Method of "The Authoritarian Personality." New York: Free Press.

15.

Honess, T. (1976) "Cognitive complexity and social prediction." British J. of Social and Clinical Psychology 15: 23-31.

16.

Howard, H. (1982) "Measures that discriminate among online searchers with different training and experience." Online Rev. 6: 315-327.

17.

Myers, J. (1972) Fundamentals of Experimental Design (2nd ed.). Newton, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

18.

Oldroyd, B. (1984) "Study of strategies used in online searching 5: differences between the experienced and inexperienced searcher." Online Rev. 8: 233-244.

19.

Ottenbacher, K. and H. Cooper (1983) "Drug treatment of hyperactivity in children." Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 25: 353-357.

20.

Rath, G. , A. Resnick , and T. Savage (1961) "Comparisons of four types of lexical indicators ." Amer. Documentation 12: 126-130.

21.

Rees, S. and D. Schultz (1967) A Field Experimental Approach to the Study of Relevance Assessments in Relation to Document Searching. Cleveland, OH: Case Western Reserve University, Center for Documentation and Communication Research.

22.

Robinson, J. and P. Shaver (1973) Measures of Social Psychological Attitudes. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

23.

Saracevic, T. (1970) "The concept of 'relevance' in information science: a historical review," in T. Saracevic (ed.) Introduction to Information Science. New York

Bowker

24.

Saracevic, T. (1975) "Relevance: a review of and a framework for the thinking on the notion in information science." J. of the Amer. Society for Information Sci. 26: 321-343.

25.

SAS Institute (1985) SAS Users Guide: Statistics. Cory, NC: Author .

26.

Schroder, H.M. (1971) "Conceptual complexity and personality organization ," pp. 240-273 in H.M. Schroder and P. Streufort (eds.) Personality Theory and Information Processing. New York: Ronald.

27.

Schroder, H.M. and P. Streufort (1962) The Measurement of Four Systems Varying in Levels of Abstractness. Tech. Rep. no. 11. Washington, DC Office of Naval Research.

28.

Scott, W.A. (1962) "Cognitive complexity and cognitive flexibility ." Sociometry 25: 405-414.

29.

Smith, M. and G. Glass (1977) "Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcomes " Amer Psychologist 32: 752-760.

30.

Tom, D. , H. Cooper , and H. McGRAW (1984) "Influences of student background and teacher authoritarianism on teacher expectations." J. of Educ. Psychology 76: 259-265.

31.

Vannoy, J. (1965) "Generality of cognitive complexity-simplicity as a personal construct." J. of Personality and Social Psychology 2: 385-396.