Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0121674435 = product of:
  0.024334887 = sum of:
    0.024334887 = product of:
      0.048669774 = sum of:
        0.048669774 = weight(_text_:science in 542) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048669774 = score(doc=542,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.35285735 = fieldWeight in 542, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=542)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This opinion piece takes Google's response to the so-called COVID-19 infodemic, as a starting point to argue for the need to consider societal relevance as a complement to other types of relevance. The authors maintain that if information science wants to be a discipline at the forefront of research on relevance, search engines, and their use, then the information science research community needs to address itself to the challenges and conditions that commercial search engines create in. The article concludes with a tentative list of related research topics.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.5, S.637-642

0.011220072 = product of:
  0.022440145 = sum of:
    0.022440145 = product of:
      0.04488029 = sum of:
        0.04488029 = weight(_text_:science in 3353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04488029 = score(doc=3353,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.32538348 = fieldWeight in 3353, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3353)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study investigates online material published in reaction to a Science Magazine report showing the absence of peer-review and editorial processes in a set of fee-charging open access journals in biology. Quantitative and qualitative textual analyses are combined to map conceptual relations in these reactions, and to explore how understandings of scholarly communication and publishing relate to specific conceptualizations of science and of the hedging of scientific knowledge. A discussion of the connection of trust and scientific knowledge and of the role of peer review for establishing and communicating this connection provides for the theoretical and topical framing. Special attention is paid to the pervasiveness of digital technologies in formal scholarly communication processes. Three dimensions of trust are traced in the material analyzed: (a) trust through personal experience and informal knowledge, (b) trust through organized, internal control, (c) trust through form. The article concludes by discussing how certain understandings of the conditions for trust in science are challenged by perceptions of possibilities for deceit in digital environments.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.2, S.450-467

0.0070961965 = product of:
  0.014192393 = sum of:
    0.014192393 = product of:
      0.028384786 = sum of:
        0.028384786 = weight(_text_:science in 822) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028384786 = score(doc=822,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 822, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=822)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The paper seeks to reconsider open access and its relation to issues of "development" by highlighting the ties the open access movement has with the hegemonic discourse of development and to question some of the assumptions about science and scientific communication upon which the open access debates are based. The paper also aims to bring out the conflict arising from the convergence of the hegemonic discourses of science and development with the contemporary discourse of openness. Design/methodology/approach - The paper takes the form of a critical reading of a range of published work on open access and the so-called "developing world" as well as of various open access declarations. The argument is supported by insights from post-development studies. Findings - Open access is presented as an issue of moral concern beyond the narrow scope of scholarly communication. Claims are made based on hegemonic discourses that are positioned as a priori and universal. The construction of open access as an issue of unquestionable moral necessity also impedes the problematisation of its own heritage. Originality/value - This paper is intended to open up the view for open access's less obvious alliances and conflicting discursive ties and thus to initiate a politisation, which is necessary in order to further the debate in a more fruitful way.

0.0070944675 = product of:
  0.014188935 = sum of:
    0.014188935 = product of:
      0.02837787 = sum of:
        0.02837787 = weight(_text_:22 in 3073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02837787 = score(doc=3073,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3073, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3073)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.0050177686 = product of:
  0.010035537 = sum of:
    0.010035537 = product of:
      0.020071074 = sum of:
        0.020071074 = weight(_text_:science in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020071074 = score(doc=607,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - To provide an analysis of the notion of "information poverty" in library and information science (LIS) by investigating concepts, interests and strategies leading to its construction and thus to examine its role as a constitutive element of the professional discourse. Design/methodology/approach - Starting from a Foucauldian notion of discourse, "information poverty" is examined as a statement in its relation to other statements in order to highlight assumptions and factors contributing to its construction. The analysis is based on repeated and close reading of 35 English language articles published in LIS journals between 1995 and 2005. Findings - Four especially productive discursive procedures are identified: economic determinism, technological determinism and the "information society", historicising the "information poor", and the library profession's moral obligation and responsibility. Research limitations/implications - The material selection is linguistically and geographically biased. Most of the included articles originate in English-speaking countries. Therefore, results and findings are fully applicable only in an English language context. Originality/value - The focus on overlapping and at times conflicting discursive procedures, i.e. the results of alliances and connections between statements, highlights how the "information poor" emerge as a category in LIS as the product of institutionally contingent, professional discourse. By challenging often unquestioned underlying assumptions, this article is intended to contribute to a critical examination of LIS discourse, as well as to the analysis of the discourses of information, which dominate contemporary society. It is furthermore seen to add to the development of discourse analytical approaches in LIS research.

0.0050177686 = product of:
  0.010035537 = sum of:
    0.010035537 = product of:
      0.020071074 = sum of:
        0.020071074 = weight(_text_:science in 3546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020071074 = score(doc=3546,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 3546, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3546)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand how meaning is assigned to online searching by viewing it as a mundane, yet often invisible, activity of everyday life and an integrated part of various social practices. Design/methodology/approach Searching is investigated with a sociomaterial approach with a starting point in information searching as entangled across practices and material arrangements and as a mundane part of everyday life. In total, 21 focus groups with 127 participants have been carried out. The study focusses particularly on peoples' experiences and meaning-making and on how these experiences and the making of meaning could be understood in the light of algorithmic shaping. Findings An often-invisible activity such as searching is made visible with the help of focus group discussions. An understanding of the relationship between searching and everyday life through two interrelated narratives is proposed: a search-ification of everyday life and a mundane-ification of search. Originality/value The study broadens the often narrow focus on searching in order to open up for a research-based discussion in information science on the role of online searching in society and everyday life.