Comparison of Decision Tree Methods in Classification of Researcher’s Cognitive styles in Academic Environment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v74.1112Keywords:
Data mining, classification, cognitive style, decision tree, academic environmentAbstract
In today's internet world, providing feedbacks to users based on what they need and their knowledge is essential. Classification is one of the data mining methods used to mine large data. There are several classification techniques used to solve classification problems. In this article, classification techniques are used to classify researchers as "Expert" and "Novice" based on cognitive styles factors in academic settings using several Decision Tree techniques. Decision Tree is the suitable technique to choose for classification in order to categorize researchers as "Expert" and "Novice" because it produces high accuracy. Environment Waikato Knowledge Analysis (WEKA) is an open source tool used for classification. Using WEKA, the Random Forest technique was selected as the best method because it provides accuracy of 92.72728. Based on these studies, most researchers have a better knowledge of their own domain and their problems and show more competencies in their information seeking behavior compared to novice researchers. This is because the "experts" have a clear understanding of their research problems and is more efficient in information searching activities. Classification techniques are implemented as a digital library search engine because it can help researchers to have the best response according to their demand.
References
Jantan, H., A. R. Hamdan, and Z. A. Othman. 2009. Classification for Talent Management Using Decision Tree Induction Techniques. Conference on Data Mining and Optimization. 15–20.
Ranjan, J. 2008. Data Mining Techniques for Better Decisions in Human Resource Management Systems. International Journal of Business Information Systems. 3(5): 464–481.
Chien, C. F., and L. F. Chen. 2008. Data Mining to Improve Personnel Selection and Enhance Human Capital: A Case Study in High-technology Industry. Expert Systems and Applications. 34: 280–290.
Han, J., and M. Kamber. 2006. Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
Jayasimman, L., and E. George Dharma Prakash Raj. 2012. Classification Accuracy in Cognitive Load for Users Preference in Web Based Learning. International Journal of Computer Applications. 54(16).
Nithyasri, B., K.Nandhini, and E. Chandra. 2010. Classification Techniques in Education Domain. International Journal on Computer Science and Engineering. 02(05): 1679–1684.
Worrell, C. A., Sh. M. Brady, and J. W. Bala. 2012. Comparison of Data Classification Methods for Predictive Ranking of Banks Exposed to Risk Of Failure. IEEE CIFEr Paper Number: 61. Approved for Public Release: 12-0294.
Mamani Barnaghi, P., V. Alizadeh Sahzabi, and A. Abu Bakar. 2012. A Comparative Study for Various Methods of Classification. International Conference on Information and Computer Networks. 27.
Kharya, Sh. 2012. Using Data Mining Techniques for Diagnosis and Prognosis of Cancer Disease. International Journal of Computer Science, Engineering and Information Technology. 2(2): 55–66.
Endo, A., T. Shibata, and H. Tanaka. 2008. Comparison of Seven Algorithms to Predict Breast Cancer Survival. Biomedical Soft Computing and Human Sciences. 13(2): 11–16.
Othman, M. F. B., and T. Moh Shan Yau. 2006. Comparison of Different Classification Techniques Using WEKA for Breast Cancer. International Conference on Biomedical Engineering (BIOMED). 11–14 .
Ford, N., T. D. Wilson, A. Foster, D. Ellis, and A. Spink. 2002. Information Seeking and Mediated Searching. Part 4. Cognitive Styles in Information Seeking. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 53: 728–735.
Davidson, D. 1977. The Effect of Individual Differences of Cognitive Style on Judgments of Document Relevance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 28(5): 274–84.
Rholes, J. M., and J. B. Droessler. 1984. Online database searchers: Cognitive style. In National Online Meeting Proceedings, New York. 305–311.
Johnson, K. A., and M. D. White. 1982. The Cognitive Style of Reference Librarians.RQ.21. (3): 239–246.
Johnson, K., and M. White. 1981. Individuality in Learning. The Field Dependence/Field Independence of Information Professional Students. Library Research. 3(4): 355–369.
Montgomery, P. 1991. Cognitive Style and the Level of Cooperation Between the Library Media Specialist and Classroom Teacher. Integration The Vlsi Journal. 16(3): 185–191.
Huang, C. 1998. The Relationships of Cognitive Styles and Image Matching. Bulletin of Library and Information Science. 27: 55–71.
Crossland, M. D., R. T. Herschel, W. C. Perkins, and J. N. Scudder. 2000. The Impact of Task and Cognitive Style on Decision-making Effectiveness Using a Geographic Information System. Journal of End User Computing. 2(1): 14–23.
Palmquist, R. A. 2001. Cognitive Style and Users’ Metaphors for the Web: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Academic Librarianship. 27(1): 24–32.
Ford, N., and R. Ford. 1992. Learning Strategies in an Ideal Computer Assisted Learning Environment. British Journal of Educational Technology. 23: 195–211.
Ellis, D., N. Ford, and F. Wood. 1992. Hypertext and learning styles. Final Report of a Project Funded by the Learning Technology Unit. Sheffield: Employment Department.
Chou, C., and H. Lin. 1998. The Effect of Navigation Map Types and Cognitive Styles on Learners’ Performance in a Computer Networked Hypertext Learning System. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia. 7(2/3): 151–176.
Wang, P., W. B. Hawk, and C. Tenopir. 2000. Users’ Interaction with World Wide Web Resources: An Exploratory Study Using a Holistic Approach. Information Processing and Management. 36: 229–251.
Palmquist, R. A., and K. S. Kim. 2000. Cognitive Style and On Line Database Search Experience as Predictors Of Web Search Performance. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 51(6): 558–566.
Abdelhalim, A., and I. Traore. 2009. A New Method for Learning Decision Trees from Rules. In the Eighth International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA'09).
Caruana, R., N. Karampatziakis, and A. Yessenalina. 2008. An Empirical Evaluation of Supervised Learning In High Dimensions. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML).
Breiman, L. 2001. Random Forests. Machine Learning. 45(1): 5–32. doi:10.1023/A:1010933404324).
Ross Quinlan, J. 1993. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning. San Francisco, C. A. USA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Landwehr, N., M. Hall, and E. Frank. 2003. Logistic Model Trees. European Conference on Machine Learning. Springer-Verlag. 241–252.
Witten, I. H, and E. Frank. 2005. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques. San Francisco, CA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Wayne, I., and P. Langley. 1992. Induction of One-Level Decision Trees, in ML92. Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Machine Learning, Aberdeen, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann : 233–240.
Witten, I. H., and E. Frank. 2005. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques. San Francisco, CA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann.
Larose, D. 2005. An Introduction to Data Mining. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Breiman, L., J. H. Friedman, R. A. Olshen, and C. J. Stone. 1984. Classification and Regression Trees. Monterey, CA: Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole Advanced Books & Software.
Ford, N., F. Wood, and C. Walsh. 1994. Cognitive Styles and Searching. On-line & CDROM Review. 18(2): 79–86.
Spink, A., T. D. Wilson, N. Ford, A. Foster, and D. Ellis. 2002. Information-Seeking and Mediated Searching. Part 1. Theoretical Framework and Research Design. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 53(9): 695–703.
Wilson, T. D., N. Ford, D. Ellis , A. Foster, and A. Spink. 2002. Information Seeking and Mediated Searching: Part 2. Uncertainty and its Correlates. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 53(9): 704–715.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright of articles that appear in Jurnal Teknologi belongs exclusively to Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Penerbit UTM Press). This copyright covers the rights to reproduce the article, including reprints, electronic reproductions, or any other reproductions of similar nature.
