高等教育计算机论文翻译公司,计算机专业翻译 - - 论文翻译求助完结子版 - 小木虫论坛-学术科研互动平台...

We attempted to categorize our participants using previous

strategy classifications [2,13], but were only partially

successful. Therefore we developed our own classification

based on participants’ strategy descriptions (Table 3). Our

sample included 2 no-filers (folderless spring-cleaners), and

8 frequent filers - but no spring-cleaners (users who only

clean their inbox periodically). The remaining 21 participants

had large inboxes (>75 items, average 1137), like the nofilers

and spring-cleaners in [13], however their reported

strategies did not match these classifications. They filed

some new emails immediately (typically those of perceived

long-term value such as e-commerce receipts), and deleted

low-value spam. Other messages were left in the inbox,

which was occasionally spring-cleaned. In other words they

employed multiple strategies – a combination of frequent

filer, spring cleaner, and no-filer, e.g. (P25: “I’d like to

manage as and when I receive them but I don’t. I do it

periodically - 10 minutes a day just to categorize the things

that are important. 10 or 15 I’ll categorize ... the rest of them

I think oh I’ll get round to doing that at some stage - but I

don’t normally. However I did spend an hour on a train last

week tidying my emails because I was bored. I reduced my

inbox by about 1500”). We divided the 21 multiple-strategy

participants into two sub-groups, E2 and E3, based on the

extent to which they reported manually filing new messages

on a daily basis. E2 users filed many emails everyday, whilst

E3 users only filed a few (<5) messages of particular longterm

value: (P31: “I have a folder for registrations. I’ve got

other [unused] folders – I don’t even know what they are.

The vast majority [of email] is a big long list”). E1/E2 users

indicated that organization was a priority for them, whilst

E3/E4 users considered it to be less important.