Search (39 results, page 2 of 2)

  • × author_ss:"Bates, M.J."
  • × language_ss:"e"
  1. Bates, M.J.: Document familiarity, relevance, and Bradford's law : the Getty Online Searching Project report; no.5 (1996) 0.01 
    0.0084460005 = product of:
  0.021115001 = sum of:
    0.012184162 = weight(_text_:a in 6978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012184162 = score(doc=6978,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.22789092 = fieldWeight in 6978, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6978)
    0.0089308405 = product of:
      0.017861681 = sum of:
        0.017861681 = weight(_text_:information in 6978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017861681 = score(doc=6978,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 6978, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6978)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The Getty Online Searching Project studied the end user searching behaviour of 27 humanities scholars over a 2 year period. A number of scholars anticipated that they were already familiar with a percentage of records their searches retrieved. High document familiarity can be a significant factor in searching: Draws implications regarding the impact of high document familiarity on relevance and information retrieval theory. Makes speculations regarding high document familiarity and Bradford's law
    Source
    Information processing and management. 32(1996) no.6, S.697-707
    Type
    a
  2. Bates, M.J.: Information search tactics (1979) 0.01 
    0.008134423 = product of:
  0.020336056 = sum of:
    0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 2407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00770594 = score(doc=2407,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 2407, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2407)
    0.012630116 = product of:
      0.025260232 = sum of:
        0.025260232 = weight(_text_:information in 2407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025260232 = score(doc=2407,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 2407, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2407)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    As part of the study of human information search strategy, the concept of the search tactic, or move made to futher a search, is introduced. 29 search tactics are named, defined, and discussed in 4 categories: monitoring, file structure, search formulation, and term. Implications of the search tactics for research in search strategy are considered. The search tactics are inteded to be practically useful in information searching. This approach to searching is designed to be general, yet nontrivial; it is applicable to both bibliographic and reference searches and in both manual and on-line systems
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 30(1979), S.205-214
    Type
    a
  3. Bates, M.J.: Idea tactics (1979) 0.01 
    0.0077237748 = product of:
  0.019309437 = sum of:
    0.008258085 = weight(_text_:a in 2406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008258085 = score(doc=2406,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 2406, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2406)
    0.011051352 = product of:
      0.022102704 = sum of:
        0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 2406) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022102704 = score(doc=2406,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 2406, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2406)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    An information search tactic is a move made to further a search. In this article, 17 "idea tactics" are presented: tactics to help generate new ideas or solutions to problems in information searching. The focus of these tactics is psychological; they are intended to help improve the information specialist's thinking and creative processes in searching. The tactics are applicable to all kinds of situations - both bibliographical and reference searches, and in both manual and on-line systems. Research leads for the study of idea tactics are suggested, and experimental design problems associated with the testing of all sorts of search tactics are discussed
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 30(1979), S.280-289
    Type
    a
  4. Bates, M.J.: ¬The design of databases and other information resources for humanities scholars : the Getty Online Searching Project report no.4 (1994) 0.01 
    0.0074575767 = product of:
  0.018643942 = sum of:
    0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 6989) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00770594 = score(doc=6989,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 6989, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6989)
    0.010938003 = product of:
      0.021876005 = sum of:
        0.021876005 = weight(_text_:information in 6989) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021876005 = score(doc=6989,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 6989, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6989)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The forth report in a series of studies, based on the 2 year Getty Art History Information Project; where humanities scholars were trained in DIALOG online searching and then allowed 24 hour unlimited access to DIALOG. Complete transaction logs were taken and form the data upon which the Getty Online Searching Project is based. Data obtained from the study is used to draw conclusions about the design of humanities information resources, particularly databases and other online resources
    Type
    a
  5. Bates, M.J.: Birger Hjørland's Manichean misconstruction of Marcia Bates' work (2011) 0.01 
    0.0074575767 = product of:
  0.018643942 = sum of:
    0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 2056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00770594 = score(doc=2056,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 2056, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2056)
    0.010938003 = product of:
      0.021876005 = sum of:
        0.021876005 = weight(_text_:information in 2056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021876005 = score(doc=2056,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.2687516 = fieldWeight in 2056, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2056)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    It is argued and demonstrated that Birger Hjoerland's critiques of Marcia Bates' articles on the nature of information and the nature of browsing misrepresent the content of these articles, and further, frame the argument as a Manichean conflict between Hjørland's enlightened "discursive" and social approach versus Bates' benighted behavioral approach. It is argued that Bates' work not only contains much of value that has been ignored by Hjørland but also contains ideas that mostly complement, rather than conflict with, those of Hjørland.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.10, S.2038-2044
    Theme
    Information
    Type
    a
  6. Bates, M.J.: ¬The Getty End-User Online Searching Project in the humanities, report no.6 : overview and conclusions (1996) 0.01 
    0.0073474604 = product of:
  0.01836865 = sum of:
    0.009437811 = weight(_text_:a in 7261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009437811 = score(doc=7261,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 7261, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7261)
    0.0089308405 = product of:
      0.017861681 = sum of:
        0.017861681 = weight(_text_:information in 7261) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017861681 = score(doc=7261,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 7261, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7261)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Over a 2 year period, the Getty Information Institute (formerly the Getty Art History Information Program) sponsored and carried out a major study of end user online searching by humanities scholars. Complete logs of the searches and output were captured, and the 27 scholars involved were interviewed in depth. Reviews the study and its results, with particular emphasis on matters of interest to academic librarians. Implications are drawn for academic library reference service and collection development, as well as for cataloguing in the online and digital environment
    Type
    a
  7. Bates, M.J.: ¬The nature of browsing (2020) 0.01 
    0.007058388 = product of:
  0.01764597 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 5865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=5865,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5865, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5865)
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 5865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=5865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 5865, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5865)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.5, S.616
    Type
    a
  8. Bates, M.J.: ¬The selected works of Marcia J. Bates : Volume I: Information and the information professions. Volume II: Information searching theory and practice. Volume III: Information users and information system design (2016) 0.01 
    0.0067381444 = product of:
  0.01684536 = sum of:
    0.002724461 = weight(_text_:a in 4045) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.002724461 = score(doc=4045,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.050957955 = fieldWeight in 4045, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4045)
    0.014120899 = product of:
      0.028241798 = sum of:
        0.028241798 = weight(_text_:information in 4045) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028241798 = score(doc=4045,freq=40.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.3469568 = fieldWeight in 4045, product of:
              6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
                40.0 = termFreq=40.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4045)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Throughout most of human history, people got the information they needed for their lives more or less automatically and unthinkingly--through people they talked with, and from their own life experiences. Today, we are inundated with information but often know little about how to find our way through the vast sea of recorded knowledge to get to what we really want and need. In the information sciences researchers have thought a great deal about information seeking, and have studied people in the grip of trying to satisfy an information need. Much has been learned about how to enable comfortable and fun information searching in human, paper, and digital environments. Professor Marcia Bates of UCLA's Department of Information Studies has collected fifteen of her major papers on information searching in theory and practice in this volume. The articles address many aspects of searching for information, including searching tactics and techniques, the "vocabulary problem" in online searching, the kinds of indexing terms to use in various contexts, the Bradford Distribution and its effects on searching in large databases, the true nature of browsing, and how to design computer interfaces for successful searching. For all the variety in types of information systems, the human being interacting with an information source is remarkably stable in psychology and behavior. These human traits and system features are explored in depth in this book. Bates' popular articles, "What is Browsing--Really?" and "The Design of Browsing and Berrypicking Techniques for the Online Search Interface," are included. This is Volume II of three containing selected works by Bates. The others are titled: Information and the Information Professions (Vol. I) and Information Users and Information System Design (Vol. III)
  9. Bates, M.J.; Wilde, D.N.; Siegfried, S.: ¬An analysis of search terminology used by humanities scholars : the Getty online searching project report number 1 (1993) 0.01 
    0.0062546856 = product of:
  0.015636714 = sum of:
    0.0068111527 = weight(_text_:a in 2707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0068111527 = score(doc=2707,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 2707, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2707)
    0.008825562 = product of:
      0.017651124 = sum of:
        0.017651124 = weight(_text_:information in 2707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017651124 = score(doc=2707,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 2707, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2707)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The Getty art history information program carried out a two-year project to study how humanities scholars operate as end users of online databases. Visiting scholars at the Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities in Santa Monica, California, were offered the opportunity to so unlimited subsidized searching of DIALOG databases. This first report from the project analyzes the vocabulary terms twenty-two scholars used in their natural language descriptions of their information needs and in their online searches. The data were extracted from 165 natural language statements and 1.068 search terms. Vocabulary categories used by humanities scholars were found to differ markedly from those used in the sciences, a fact that imposes distinctive demands on thesaurus development and the design of online information systems. Humanities scholars searched for far more named individuals, geographical terms, chronological terms, and discipline terms than was the case in a comparative science sample. The analysis provides substantial support for the growing perception that information needs of humanities scholars are distinct from those of scholars in other fields, and that the design of information-providing systems for these scholars must take their unique qualitites into account
    Type
    a
  10. Siegfried, S.; Bates, M.J.; Wilde, D.N.: ¬A profile of end-user searching behavior by humanities scholars : the Getty online searching project report no.2 (1993) 0.01 
    0.0058368337 = product of:
  0.014592084 = sum of:
    0.009010308 = weight(_text_:a in 4348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009010308 = score(doc=4348,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 4348, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4348)
    0.0055817757 = product of:
      0.011163551 = sum of:
        0.011163551 = weight(_text_:information in 4348) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011163551 = score(doc=4348,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 4348, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4348)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The Getty Art History Information Program carried out a two-year project to study how advanced humanities scholars operate as end users of online databases. Visiting scholars at the Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities in Santa Monica, CA, were offered the oppotunity to do unlimited subsidized searching of DIALOG databases. This second report from the project analyzes how much searching the scholars did, the kinds of search techniques and DIALOG features they used., and their learning curves. Search features studied included commands, Boolean logic, types of vocabulary, and proximity operators. Error rates were calculated, as well as how often the scholars used elementary search formulations and introduced new search features and capabiblities into their searches. The amount of searching done ranged from none at all to dozens of hours. A typical search tended to be simple, using one-word search terms and little or no Boolean logic. Starting with a full day of DIALOG training, the scholars began their search experience at a reasonably high level of competence; in general, they maintained a stable level of competence throughout the early hours of their search experience
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 44(1993), S.273-291
    Type
    a
  11. Bates, M.J.: ¬The nature of browsing (2019) 0.01 
    0.005822873 = product of:
  0.014557183 = sum of:
    0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 2265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067426977 = score(doc=2265,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 2265, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2265)
    0.007814486 = product of:
      0.015628971 = sum of:
        0.015628971 = weight(_text_:information in 2265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015628971 = score(doc=2265,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 2265, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2265)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The recent article by McKay et al. on browsing (2019) provides a valuable addition to the empirical literature of information science on this topic, and I read the descriptions of the various browsing cases with interest. However, the authors refer to my article on browsing (Bates, 2007) in ways that do not make sense to me and which do not at all conform to what I actually said.
    Content
    Bezug (Letter to the editor) zu: McKay, D., Chang, S.,, Smith, W., Buchanan, G.: The things we talk about when we talk about browsing: an empirical typology of library browsing behavior. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (2019).
    Type
    a
  12. Bates, M.J.: Indexing and access for digital libraries and the Internet : Human, database, and domain factors (1998) 0.01 
    0.005822873 = product of:
  0.014557183 = sum of:
    0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 2160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0067426977 = score(doc=2160,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 2160, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2160)
    0.007814486 = product of:
      0.015628971 = sum of:
        0.015628971 = weight(_text_:information in 2160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015628971 = score(doc=2160,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 2160, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2160)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Discussion in the research community and among the general public regarding content indexing (especially subject indexing) and access to digital resources, especially on the Internet, has underutilized research on a variety of factors that are important in the design of such access mechanisms. Some of these factors and issues are reviewed and implications drawn for information system design in the era of electronic access. Specifically the following are discussed: Human factors: Subject searching vs. indexing, multiple terms of access, flok classification, basic level terms, and folk access; Database factors: Bradford's law, vocabulary scalability, the Resnikoff-Dolby 30:1 Rule; Domain factors: Role of domain in indexing
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 49(1998) no.13, S.1185-1205
    Type
    a
  13. Bates, M.J.: Improving user access to library catalog and portal information (2004) 0.00 
    0.0047055925 = product of:
  0.011763981 = sum of:
    0.005448922 = weight(_text_:a in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005448922 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 2593, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2593)
    0.006315058 = product of:
      0.012630116 = sum of:
        0.012630116 = weight(_text_:information in 2593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012630116 = score(doc=2593,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2593, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2593)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    In this lecture, Dr. Bates summarizes the research she recently conducted in her role as a Principal Investigator for the Library of Congress Action Plan on Bibliographic Control of Web Resources. Her investigations focused on three particular topics: User access vocabulary, Links among bibliographic families, and Staging of access to resources in the interface. From each of these perspectives, she shares her recommendations on how to achieve enhanced access to and display of records for selected Web resources across multiple systems.
  14. Bates, M.J.: Rethinking subject cataloging in the online environment (1989) 0.00 
    0.0021795689 = product of:
  0.010897844 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=119,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  15. Bates, M.J.: How to use controlled vocabularies more effectively in online searching (1989) 0.00 
    0.0021322283 = product of:
  0.010661141 = sum of:
    0.010661141 = weight(_text_:a in 2883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010661141 = score(doc=2883,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 2883, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2883)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Optimal retrieval in on-line searching can be achieved through combined use of both natural language and controlled vocabularies. However, there is a large variety of types of controlled vocabulary in data bases and often more than one in a single data base. Optimal use of these vocabularies requires understanding what types of languages are involved, and taking advantage of the particular mix of vocabularies in a given data base. Examples 4 major types of indexing and classification used in data bases and puts these 4 in the context of 3 other approaches to subject access. Discusses how to evaluate a new data base for various forms of subject access.
    Type
    a
  16. Bates, M.J.: How to use controlled vocabularies more effectively in online searching (1989) 0.00 
    0.0021322283 = product of:
  0.010661141 = sum of:
    0.010661141 = weight(_text_:a in 207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010661141 = score(doc=207,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 207, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=207)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Optimal retrieval in on-line searching can be achieved through combined use of both natural language and controlled vocabularies. However, there is a large variety of types of controlled vocabulary in data bases and often more than one in a single data base. Optimal use of these vocabularies requires understanding what types of languages are involved, and taking advantage of the particular mix of vocabularies in a given data base. Examples 4 major types of indexing and classification used in data bases and puts these 4 in the context of 3 other approaches to subject access. Discusses how to evaluate a new data base for various forms of subject access.
    Type
    a
  17. Bates, M.J.: ¬The design of browsing and berrypicking : techniques for the online search interface (1989) 0.00 
    0.0019071229 = product of:
  0.009535614 = sum of:
    0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 2228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009535614 = score(doc=2228,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 2228, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2228)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  18. White, H.D.; Bates, M.J.; Wilson, P.: For information specialists : interpretations of reference and bibliographic work (1992) 0.00 
    0.0018945175 = product of:
  0.009472587 = sum of:
    0.009472587 = product of:
      0.018945174 = sum of:
        0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 7742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018945174 = score(doc=7742,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 7742, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7742)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
  19. Bates, M.J.: ¬The fallacy of the perfect thirty-item online search (1984) 0.00 
    0.001541188 = product of:
  0.00770594 = sum of:
    0.00770594 = weight(_text_:a in 857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00770594 = score(doc=857,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 857, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=857)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Problems in determining output size are sometimes associated with the performance of online bibliographic searches for clients in academic and other libraries. These problems are examined through discussion of a fallacy in thinking that arises when searchers try to produce the "perfect thirty-item" online search. Origins of the fallacy are explored by considering sources of misunderstandings between client and searcher and by identifying differences between manual and online searching. Several types of online searches are distinguished, and search techniques that avoid the fallacy are recommended for each search type
    Type
    a

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 36
  • el 3
  • m 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Classifications