Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0057512526 = product of:
  0.040258765 = sum of:
    0.020129383 = weight(_text_:web in 859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020129383 = score(doc=859,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11165301 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03421255 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 859, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=859)
    0.020129383 = weight(_text_:web in 859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020129383 = score(doc=859,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11165301 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03421255 = queryNorm
        0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 859, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=859)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)

Content

The notion of the classification scheme as a transitional element or "boundary object" (Star, 1989) offers an alternative to the more traditional approach that views classification as an organizational structure imposed upon a body of knowledge to facilitate access within a universal and frequently static framework. Recognition of the underlying relationship between user access and the collective knowledge structures that are the basis for knowledge production indicates the dynamic role of classification in supporting coherence and articulation across heterogeneous contexts. To this end, it is argued that the library should be an active participant in the production of knowledge, and that this role can be effected by the development of classificatory structures that can support the needs of a diverse information ecology consisting of a complex web of interacting agents, users, and technologies. Within such an information ecology, a classificatory structure cannot follow a one-size-fits-all paradigm but must evolve in cooperative interaction between librarians and their user groups.

0.0037475973 = product of:
  0.05246636 = sum of:
    0.05246636 = weight(_text_:analyse in 2423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05246636 = score(doc=2423,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18025847 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.268782 = idf(docFreq=618, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03421255 = queryNorm
        0.29106182 = fieldWeight in 2423, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.268782 = idf(docFreq=618, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2423)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)

Abstract

Search statements in this revision process can be viewed as a 'move' in the overall search strategy. Very little is known about how end users develop and revise their search strategies. A study was conducted to analyse the moves made in 244 data base searches conducted by 26 medical students at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Students search INQUIRER, a data base of facts and concepts in microbiology. The searches were conducted during a 3-week period in spring 1990 and were recorded by the INQUIRER system. Each search statement was categorised, using Fidel's online searching moves (S. Online review 9(1985) S.61-74) and Bates' search tactics (s. JASIS 30(1979) S.205-214). Further analyses indicated that the most common moves were Browse/Specity, Select Exhaust, Intersect, and Vary, and that selection of moves varied by student and by problem. Analysis of search tactics (combinations of moves) identified 5 common search approaches. The results of this study have implcations for future research on search behaviours, for thedesign of system interfaces and data base structures, and for the training of end users