Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.008394462 = product of:
  0.03357785 = sum of:
    0.03357785 = product of:
      0.0671557 = sum of:
        0.0671557 = weight(_text_:software in 7426) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0671557 = score(doc=7426,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = queryNorm
            0.3719205 = fieldWeight in 7426, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7426)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Experimental subjects wrote abstracts of an article using a simplified version of the TEXNET abstracting assistance software. In addition to the fulltext, the 35 subjects were presented with either keywords or phrases extracted automatically. The resulting abstracts, and the times taken, were recorded automatically; some additional information was gathered by oral questionnaire. Results showed considerable variation among subjects, but 37% found the keywords or phrases quite or very useful in writing their abstracts. Statistical analysis failed to support deveral hypothesised relations; phrases were not viewed as significantly more helpful than keywords; and abstracting experience did not correlate with originality of wording, approximation of the author abstract, or greater conciseness. Results also suggested possible modifications to the software

0.008394462 = product of:
  0.03357785 = sum of:
    0.03357785 = product of:
      0.0671557 = sum of:
        0.0671557 = weight(_text_:software in 4809) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0671557 = score(doc=4809,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.18056466 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045514934 = queryNorm
            0.3719205 = fieldWeight in 4809, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4809)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Experimental subjects wrote abstracts using a simplified version of the TEXNET abstracting assistance software. In addition to the full text, subjects were presented with either keywords or phrases extracted automatically. The resulting abstracts, and the times taken, were recorded automatically; some additional information was gathered by oral questionnaire. Selected abstracts produced were evaluated on various criteria by independent raters. Results showed considerable variation among subjects, but 37% found the keywords or phrases 'quite' or 'very' useful in writing their abstracts. Statistical analysis failed to support several hypothesized relations: phrases were not viewed as significantly more helpful than keywords; and abstracting experience did not correlate with originality of wording, approximation of the author abstract, or greater conciseness. Requiring further study are some unanticipated strong correlations including the following: Windows experience and writing an abstract like the author's; experience reading abstracts and thinking one had written a good abstract; gender and abstract length; gender and use of words and phrases from the original text. Results have also suggested possible modifications to the TEXNET software