Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.00806464 = product of:
  0.01612928 = sum of:
    0.01612928 = product of:
      0.03225856 = sum of:
        0.03225856 = weight(_text_:c in 141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03225856 = score(doc=141,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14107318 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040897828 = queryNorm
            0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 141, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=141)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.00806464 = product of:
  0.01612928 = sum of:
    0.01612928 = product of:
      0.03225856 = sum of:
        0.03225856 = weight(_text_:c in 2021) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03225856 = score(doc=2021,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14107318 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040897828 = queryNorm
            0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 2021, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2021)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.0067773275 = product of:
  0.013554655 = sum of:
    0.013554655 = product of:
      0.08132793 = sum of:
        0.08132793 = weight(_text_:authors in 396) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08132793 = score(doc=396,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1864456 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040897828 = queryNorm
            0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 396, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=396)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - In "Coming across information serendipitously - Part 1: a process model" the authors identified common elements of researchers' experiences of "coming across information serendipitously". These experiences involve a mix of unexpectedness and insight and lead to a valuable, unanticipated outcome. In this article, the authors aim to show how the elements of unexpectedness, insight and value form a framework for subjectively classifying whether a particular experience might be considered serendipitous and, if so, just how serendipitous. Design/methodology/approach - The classification framework was constructed by analysing 46 experiences of coming across information serendipitously provided by 28 interdisciplinary researchers during critical incident interviews. "Serendipity stories" were written to summarise each experience and to facilitate their comparison. The common elements of unexpectedness, insight and value were identified in almost all the experiences. Findings - The presence of different mixes of unexpectedness, insight and value in the interviewees' experiences define a multi-dimensional conceptual space (which the authors call the "serendipity space"). In this space, different "strengths" of serendipity exist. The classification framework can be used to reason about whether an experience falls within the serendipity space and, if so, how "pure" or "dilute" it is. Originality/value - The framework provides researchers from various disciplines with a structured means of reasoning about and classifying potentially serendipitous experiences.

0.006720532 = product of:
  0.013441064 = sum of:
    0.013441064 = product of:
      0.026882129 = sum of:
        0.026882129 = weight(_text_:c in 3979) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026882129 = score(doc=3979,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14107318 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040897828 = queryNorm
            0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 3979, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3979)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.006720532 = product of:
  0.013441064 = sum of:
    0.013441064 = product of:
      0.026882129 = sum of:
        0.026882129 = weight(_text_:c in 661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026882129 = score(doc=661,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14107318 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040897828 = queryNorm
            0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 661, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=661)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.006260626 = product of:
  0.012521252 = sum of:
    0.012521252 = product of:
      0.07512751 = sum of:
        0.07512751 = weight(_text_:authors in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07512751 = score(doc=607,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.1864456 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.040897828 = queryNorm
            0.40294603 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose Belkin and Robertson (1976a) reflected on the ethical implications of theoretical research in information science and warned that there was potential for abuse of knowledge gained by undertaking such research and applying it to information systems. In particular, they identified the domains of advertising and political propaganda that posed particular problems. The purpose of this literature review is to revisit these ideas in the light of recent events in global information systems that demonstrate that their fears were justified. Design/methodology/approach The authors revisit the theory in information science that Belkin and Robertson used to build their argument, together with the discussion on ethics that resulted from this work in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The authors then review recent literature in the field of information systems, specifically information retrieval, social media and recommendation systems that highlight the problems identified by Belkin and Robertson. Findings Information science theories have been used in conjunction with empirical evidence gathered from user interactions that have been detrimental to both individuals and society. It is argued in the paper that the information science and systems communities should find ways to return control to the user wherever possible, and the ways to achieve this are considered. Research limitations/implications The ethical issues identified require a multidisciplinary approach with research in information science, computer science, information systems, business, sociology, psychology, journalism, government and politics, etc. required. This is too large a scope to deal with in a literature review, and we focus only on the design and implementation of information systems (Zimmer, 2008a) through an information science and information systems perspective. Practical implications The authors argue that information systems such as search technologies, social media applications and recommendation systems should be designed with the recipient of the information in mind (Paisley and Parker, 1965), not the sender of that information. Social implications Information systems designed ethically and with users in mind will go some way to addressing the ill effects typified by the problems for individuals and society evident in global information systems. Originality/value The authors synthesize the evidence from the literature to provide potential technological solutions to the ethical issues identified, with a set of recommendations to information systems designers and implementers.