Combining bibliometrics, information retrieval, and relevance theory, Part 2: Some implications for information science

When bibliometric data are converted to term frequency (tf) and inverse document frequency (idf) values, plotted as pennant diagrams, and interpreted according to Sperber and Wilsonʹs relevance theory (RT), the results evoke major variables of information science (IS). These include topicality, in the sense of intercohesion and intercoherence among texts; cognitive effects of texts in response to peopleʹs questions; peopleʹs levels of expertise as a precondition for cognitive effects;processing effort as textual or other messages are received; specificity of terms as it affects processing effort; relevance, defined in RT as the effects/effort ratio; and authority of texts and their authors. While such concerns figure automatically in dialogues between people, they become problematic when people create or use or judge literature-based information systems. The difficulty of achieving worthwhile cognitive effects and acceptable processing effort in human-system dialogues explains why relevance is the central concern of IS. Moreover, since relevant communication with both systems and unfamiliar people is uncertain, speakers tend to seek cognitive effects that cost them the least effort. Yet hearers need greater effort, often greater specificity, from speakers if their responses are to be highly relevant in their turn. This theme of mismatch manifests itself in vague reference questions, underdeveloped online searches, uncreative judging in retrieval evaluation trials, and perfunctory indexing. Another effect of least effort is a bias toward topical relevance over other kinds. RT can explain these outcomes as well as more adaptive ones. Pennant diagrams, applied here to a literature search and a Bradford-style journal analysis, can model them. Given RT and the right context, bibliometrics may predict psychometrics.