Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0361197 = product of:
  0.0722394 = sum of:
    0.03828556 = weight(_text_:library in 4928) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03828556 = score(doc=4928,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 4928, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4928)
    0.033953834 = product of:
      0.06790767 = sum of:
        0.06790767 = weight(_text_:22 in 4928) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06790767 = score(doc=4928,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4928, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4928)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Inquiries made by academic library users are more complex than they may appear. Successful information retrieval based on complex queries is a function of cataloguing, classification, and the librarian's interpretation. Explores aspects of complexitiy using a proposed query as an example

Source

Journal of academic librarianship. 22(1996) no.2, S.111-117

0.014981594 = product of:
  0.059926376 = sum of:
    0.059926376 = weight(_text_:library in 2272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059926376 = score(doc=2272,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.45471698 = fieldWeight in 2272, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2272)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

For most of its modern history library and information science has been governed by the mode of thinking best characterized as positivism. This epistemology, shared with most of the social sciences for some time, features the quest for universal laws and the reduction of all phenomena, including behavioral, cognitive, and so on, to the physical, among other elements. This means to knowledge is unworkable for this field; a prposed replacement for it is hermeneutical phenomenology. This article outlines the elements of a revised epistemological approach that seeks an understanding of the essences of things (such as the library) and that takes into account, among other things, the intentional stances of the human actors within the realm of library and information science. Such a re-formated epistemology allows for a different set of questions asked and a different approach to answering them

Source

Library quarterly. 65(1995) no.3, S.295-318

0.008121594 = product of:
  0.032486375 = sum of:
    0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 307) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032486375 = score(doc=307,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 307, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=307)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports an examination of the results of 114 sessions on the online catalogue, at the Ellis Library, Missouri University at Columbia, to determine what types of searches were conducted and what search modes and fields (title, author) were used. Examination of tranaction logs revealed that title and author searches predominated and that the opportunity to construct Boolean searches was rarely taken advantage of. The searchers themselves reported that they were, on the whole, experienced at using the system; most searched the catalogue at least once a week. This is reflected in the relatively low instance of error and in the fact that most searches produced at least some hits. The majority of errors that were made in the process of searching were typographical

Source

Library resources and technical services. 39(1995) no.2, S.142-152

0.006699973 = product of:
  0.026799891 = sum of:
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 3976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=3976,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 3976, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3976)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Library and information science (LIS) is a discipline based on communication. Research questions in LIS include those focusing on the retrieval use of information, information services, and information technology. Moreover, the questions asked and the thought relevant to the study of information are communicated formally within the profession primarily through the literature. This sensitivity to communication suggests that discourse analysis has the advantage of being able to address questions regarding both spoken and written communications and so can be applied to matters of articulations of purpose in the field. 2 key elements of language form the heart of discourse analysis: form and function. Applications of discourse analysis to information include investigations of the social, political, and technical uses of the word information as they have implications for theory and practice