{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0344626168224299, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0040887850467289715, 'mean_word_length': 5.513307984790875, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Influences of a Knowledge Representation Tool on Searchers with Varying Cognitive Abilities

While current systems are effective in helping searchers resolve simple information needs (e.g., fact-finding), they provide less support for searchers working on complex information-seeking tasks. Complex search tasks involve a wide range of (meta)cognitive activities, including goal-setting, organizing information, drawing inferences, monitoring progress, and revising mental models and search strategies. We report on a lab study (N=32) that investigated the influences of a knowledge representation tool called the OrgBox, developed to support searchers with complex tasks. The OrgBox tool was integrated into a custom-built search system and allowed study participants to drag-and-drop textual passages into the tool, organize passages into logical groupings called “boxes”, and make notes on passages and boxes. The OrgBox was compared to a baseline tool (called the Bookmark) that allowed participants to save textual passages, but not organize them nor make notes. Knowledge representation tools such as the OrgBox may provide special benefits for users with different cognitive profiles. In this paper, we explore two cognitive abilities: (1) working memory capacity and (2) switching ability. Participants in the study were asked to gather information on a complex subject and produce an outline for a hypothetical research paper. We investigate the influences of the tool (OrgBox vs. Bookmark) and the participant’s working memory capacity and switching ability on three types of outcomes: (RQ1) search behaviors, (RQ2) post-task perceptions, and (RQ3) the quality of outlines produces by participants.