Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Lee, H.-L."
  1. Chen, S.-J.; Lee, H.-L.: Art images and mental associations : a preliminary exploration (2014) 0.02
    0.022521732 = product of:
      0.056304332 = sum of:
        0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009138121 = score(doc=1416,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 1416, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1416)
        0.04716621 = sum of:
          0.009472587 = weight(_text_:information in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.009472587 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1416, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1416)
          0.037693623 = weight(_text_:22 in 1416) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037693623 = score(doc=1416,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16237405 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046368346 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1416, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1416)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    This paper reports on the preliminary findings of a study that explores mental associations made by novices viewing art images. In a controlled environment, 20 Taiwanese college students responded to the question "What does the painting remind you of?" after viewing each digitized image of 15 oil paintings by a famous Taiwanese artist. Rather than focusing on the representation or interpretation of art, the study attempted to solicit information about how non-experts are stimulated by art. This paper reports on the analysis of participant responses to three of the images, and describes a12-type taxonomy of association emerged from the analysis. While 9 of the types are derived and adapted from facets in the Art & Architecture Thesaurus, three new types - Artistic Influence Association, Reactive Association, and Prototype Association - are discovered. The conclusion briefly discusses both the significance of the findings and the implications for future research.
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
    Type
    a
  2. Lee, H.-L.; Olson, H.A.: Hierarchical navigation : an exploration of Yahoo! directories (2005) 0.01
    0.008113983 = product of:
      0.020284958 = sum of:
        0.010812371 = weight(_text_:a in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010812371 = score(doc=3991,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
        0.009472587 = product of:
          0.018945174 = sum of:
            0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 3991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018945174 = score(doc=3991,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3991, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3991)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Although researchers have theorized the critical importance of classification in the organization of information, the classification approach seems to have given way to the alphabetical subject approach in retrieval tools widely used in libraries, and research an how users utilize classification or classification-like arrangements in information seeking has been scant. To better understand whether searchers consider classificatory structures a viable alternative to information retrieval, this article reports an a study of how 24 library and information science students used Yahoo! directories, a popular search service resembling classification, in completing an assigned simple task. Several issues emerged from the students' reporting of their search process and a comparison between hierarchical navigation and keyword searching: citation order of facets, precision vs. recall, and other factors influencing searchers' successes and preferences. The latter included search expertise, knowledge of the discipline, and time required to complete the search. Without a definitive conclusion, we suggest a number of directoons for further research.
    Type
    a
  3. Lee, H.-L.; Carlyle, A.: Academic library gateways to online information : a taxonomy of organizational structures (2003) 0.01
    0.0077931583 = product of:
      0.019482896 = sum of:
        0.0100103095 = weight(_text_:a in 2698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0100103095 = score(doc=2698,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2698, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2698)
        0.009472587 = product of:
          0.018945174 = sum of:
            0.018945174 = weight(_text_:information in 2698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.018945174 = score(doc=2698,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 2698, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2698)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Reports a preliminary analysis of organizational schemes applied by academic libraries worldwide to arrange their electronic resources an their Web-based information gateways. The unsystematic sample consists of 41 academic libraries in 10 countries representing 4 languages, Chinese, English, German, and Spanish. The study reveals a widely accepted practice in applying 6 simplistic methods to organizing online information: by resource type, alphabetical by title, alphabetical by subject (mostly discipline and genre), by vendor/publisher, by broad classification, and random. In addition, it notes a marked difference between libraries in the English-speaking world and those in other countries in that the former present significantly more systematic characteristics.
    Theme
    Information Gateway
    Type
    a
  4. Lee, H.-L.; Clyde, J.: Users' perspectives of the "Collection" and the online catalogue (2004) 0.01
    0.0066833766 = product of:
      0.016708441 = sum of:
        0.0100103095 = weight(_text_:a in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0100103095 = score(doc=2654,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
        0.0066981306 = product of:
          0.013396261 = sum of:
            0.013396261 = weight(_text_:information in 2654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.013396261 = score(doc=2654,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2654, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2654)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    The paper reports an a study that examined the parameters provided in the online catalogue of a university library for defining its collection and subcollections that would facilitate information seeking. Taking a user-centered approach, the study asked two questions: (1) Does the online catalogue provide a useful collection structure for the users? (2) Are there any parameters that are considered useful by the users for structuring the collection absent from the online catalogue? The online catalogue was found to adequately provide only a few of the user collection and subcollection parameters, including user privilege and document type. However, it lacked most of the important parameters required by the users, including catalogue representation of the entire collection and disciplinary categories for defining subject subcollections.
    Source
    Knowledge organization and the global information society: Proceedings of the 8th International ISKO Conference 13-16 July 2004, London, UK. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine
    Type
    a
  5. Martínez-Ávila, D.; Smiraglia, R.; Lee, H.-L.; Fox, M.: What is an author now? (2015) 0.01
    0.0053406116 = product of:
      0.013351529 = sum of:
        0.010194 = weight(_text_:a in 2321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010194 = score(doc=2321,freq=28.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.19066721 = fieldWeight in 2321, product of:
              5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
                28.0 = termFreq=28.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2321)
        0.003157529 = product of:
          0.006315058 = sum of:
            0.006315058 = weight(_text_:information in 2321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006315058 = score(doc=2321,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046368346 = queryNorm
                0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 2321, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2321)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.4 = coord(2/5)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss and shed light on the following questions: What is an author? Is it a person who writes? Or, is it, in information, an iconic taxonomic designation (some might say a "classification") for a group of writings that are recognized by the public in some particular way? What does it mean when a search engine, or catalog, asks a user to enter the name of an author? And how does that accord with the manner in which the data have been entered in association with the names of the entities identified with the concept of authorship? Design/methodology/approach - The authors use several cases as bases of phenomenological discourse analysis, combining as best the authors can components of eidetic bracketing (a Husserlian technique for isolating noetic reduction) with Foucauldian discourse analysis. The two approaches are not sympathetic or together cogent, so the authors present them instead as alternative explanations alongside empirical evidence. In this way the authors are able to isolate components of iconic "authorship" and then subsequently engage them in discourse. Findings - An "author" is an iconic name associated with a class of works. An "author" is a role in public discourse between a set of works and the culture that consumes them. An "author" is a role in cultural sublimation, or a power broker in deabstemiation. An "author" is last, if ever, a person responsible for the intellectual content of a published work. The library catalog's attribution of "author" is at odds with the Foucauldian discursive comprehension of the role of an "author." Originality/value - One of the main assets of this paper is the combination of Foucauldian discourse analysis with phenomenological analysis for the study of the "author." The authors turned to Foucauldian discourse analysis to discover the loci of power in the interactions of the public with the named authorial entities. The authors also looked to phenomenological analysis to consider the lived experience of users who encounter the same named authorial entities. The study of the "author" in this combined way facilitated the revelation of new aspects of the role of authorship in search engines and library catalogs.
    Type
    a
  6. Choi, I.; Lee, H.-L.: ¬A keyword analysis of user studies in knowledge organization : the emerging framework (2016) 0.00
    0.0021795689 = product of:
      0.010897844 = sum of:
        0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 4893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010897844 = score(doc=4893,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 4893, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4893)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a sustainable world: challenges and perspectives for cultural, scientific, and technological sharing in a connected society : proceedings of the Fourteenth International ISKO Conference 27-29 September 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil / organized by International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO), ISKO-Brazil, São Paulo State University ; edited by José Augusto Chaves Guimarães, Suellen Oliveira Milani, Vera Dodebei
    Type
    a
  7. Lee, H.-L.; Lee, W.-C.: Proclaiming intellectual authority through classification : the case of the seven epitomes (2011) 0.00
    0.0016346768 = product of:
      0.008173384 = sum of:
        0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 4295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008173384 = score(doc=4295,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4295, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4295)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The study investigates the main structure of the classification applied in the Seven Epitomes (Qilue), the first documented Chinese library catalog completed a few years before the Common Era. Based on a close examination of the partially extant text and structure of the catalog, other historical records and secondary sources, the authors identify two principal classification methods in the scheme being studied: dichotomy and ranking. It is theorized that the compiler of the catalog, Liu Xin, used ru classicism, or Confucianism, as the principle for guiding the construction of three sets of ranked dichotomies that manifested into the six main classes in the set sequence. As a result, he successfully achieved the chief goal he intended for the catalog-to proclaim classicism as the intellectual authority. This design made the catalog, and its numerous successors in imperial China for two thousand years, an effective aid for intellectual, political, and social control.
    Type
    a
  8. Lee, H.-L.: Origins of the main classes in the first Chinese bibliographic classification (2008) 0.00
    0.0014156717 = product of:
      0.007078358 = sum of:
        0.007078358 = weight(_text_:a in 2273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007078358 = score(doc=2273,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 2273, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2273)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Content
    The aim of the paper is to provide an improved understanding of the classification applied in the Seven Epitomes (Qi lüe), the first documented classified library catalogue in China (completed in the first century BCE). Chinese bibliographers have suggested that Liu Xin, the compiler of the catalogue, followed the Principle of Classicist Values, state of scholarship, literary warrant, and ideas of yin/yang and the Five Phases to devise the six-fold classification. By applying a multidimensional framework constructed for a large-scale research project, the author re-examined the origins of the six main classes in the catalogue within its own social, cultural, and political contexts. Issues highlighted for discussion include the concept of "discipline", the limitation of the classification in relation to literary warrant, and the motives of intellectual control and social engineering.
    Type
    a
  9. Smiraglia, R.P.; Lee, H.-L.: Rethinking the authorship principle (2012) 0.00
    0.0014156717 = product of:
      0.007078358 = sum of:
        0.007078358 = weight(_text_:a in 5575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007078358 = score(doc=5575,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 5575, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5575)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The fundamental principle of order in the library catalogue is the authorship principle, which serves as the organizing node of an alphabetico-classed system, in which "texts" of "works" are organized first alphabetically by uniform title of the progenitor work and then are subarranged using titles for variant instantiations, under the heading for an "author." We analyze case studies of entries from (1) the first documented imperial library catalogue, the Seven Epitomes (Qilue [??]), in China; (2) Abelard's Works, which featured prominently in the 1848 testimony of Antonio Panizzi; and (3) The French Chef and the large family of instantiated works associated with it. Our analysis shows that the catalogue typically contains many large superwork sets. A more pragmatic approach to the design of catalogues is to array descriptions of resources in relation to the superwork sets to which they might belong. In all cases, a multidimensional faceted arrangement incorporating ideational nodes from the universe of recorded knowledge holds promise for greatly enhanced retrieval capability.
    Type
    a
  10. Lee, H.-L.: Navigating hierarchies vs. searching by keyword : two cultural perspectives (2006) 0.00
    0.0013485396 = product of:
      0.0067426977 = sum of:
        0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 239) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067426977 = score(doc=239,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 239, 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=239)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Source
    Knowledge organization for a global learning society: Proceedings of the 9th International ISKO Conference, 4-7 July 2006, Vienna, Austria. Hrsg.: G. Budin, C. Swertz u. K. Mitgutsch
    Type
    a
  11. Lee, H.-L.; Zhang, L.: Tracing the conceptions and treatment of genre in Anglo-American cataloging (2013) 0.00
    0.0013485396 = product of:
      0.0067426977 = sum of:
        0.0067426977 = weight(_text_:a in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0067426977 = score(doc=1961,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1961, 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=1961)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    This study examines the conceptions and treatment of genre in four sets of modern Anglo-American cataloging rules spanning 171 years. Genre-related rules are first identified through "genre(s)," "form(s)," and "type(s)" keyword searches, and manual examination of the contents, then analyzed by level of treatment genre receives and by user tasks, as defined in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records. While genre is found to be sporadically addressed across the rules, its significance has increased over time. In conclusion, the authors call for a rigorous and functional definition of genre and an integrated approach to genre in cataloging.
    Type
    a