Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0035696921 = product of:
  0.021418152 = sum of:
    0.021418152 = weight(_text_:in in 8185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021418152 = score(doc=8185,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.36069193 = fieldWeight in 8185, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8185)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Libraries in Latvia, as in other Easternm European countries, have begun implementing automated systems. Outlines the stae of automation in Latvian libraries and discusses the problems associated with providing subject access in their computerized catalogues. Discusses issues relating to subject searching and retrieval in Latvian online catalogues, makes recommendations for further progress in Latvian online catalogues in general and for subject access in particular. Also considers user education and general library concerns

0.0023611297 = product of:
  0.014166778 = sum of:
    0.014166778 = weight(_text_:in in 2373) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014166778 = score(doc=2373,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.23857531 = fieldWeight in 2373, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2373)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Research conducted in the early 80's has shown that subject access is still one of the most dominant approaches in OPACs. However, while some of the subject searches result in no recall, others often retrieve so much that users are discouraged to proceed further. These and other problems were investigated and solutions were found in improving search methods (such as word stemming, extending search to full bibliographical record and providing end user thesaurus) and indexing techniques (such as ny enhancing subject headings with table of contents and back of the book indexes or by traditional systems). More recent research indicates that the real answer to the question of 'precision without sacrificing recall' lies in the developing 'user friendly novel interfaces' and also in designing 'knowledge based systems', wherein sers would not be expected to learn query formulation or even to be familiar with the indexing language of the system. Several interesting studies and research projects on the subject have produced a whole gamut of information, but one can still visualise the evolving trends of research vis-a-vis their future prospects as possible solutions

0.0023281053 = product of:
  0.013968632 = sum of:
    0.013968632 = weight(_text_:in in 2133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013968632 = score(doc=2133,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 2133, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2133)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The relevance of retrieved documents or document descriptions has been a central measurement in the evaluation of information retrieval (IR) systems. Online public access catalogues (OPACs) are similar in many ways and so relevance should be an appropriate evaluation tool in measuring their performance. The development of relevance in evaluating IR systems is described and also the important differences between such systems and OPACs. Characteristics of the end-users of both systems are discussed with the conclusion that end-users' motivation and behaviour are as yet not fully understood. The implcations of this is that relevance is a central feature, but only one, of an OPAC user's overall information need

0.0019955188 = product of:
  0.011973113 = sum of:
    0.011973113 = weight(_text_:in in 6472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011973113 = score(doc=6472,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 6472, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6472)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Studies of indexing neglect the first stage of the process, that is, subject analysis. In this study, novice indexers were asked to analyse three short, popular journal articles; to express the general subject as well as the primary and secondary topics in natural laguage statements; to state what influenced the analysis and to comment on the ease or difficulty of this process. The factors which influenced the process were: the subject discipline concerned, factual vs. subjective nature of the text, complexity of the subject, clarity of text, possible support offered by bibliographic apparatus such as title, etc. The findings showed that with the social science and science texts, the general subject could be determined with ease, while this was more difficult with the humanities text. Clear evidence emerged of the importance of bibliographical apparatus in defining the general subject. There was varying difficulty in determining the primary and secondarx topics

0.001682769 = product of:
  0.010096614 = sum of:
    0.010096614 = weight(_text_:in in 3730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010096614 = score(doc=3730,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 3730, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3730)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

State of the art review of enhancements in online catalogues over a 3 year period, taking for granted those features that are now standard and mainly discussing issues related to problem areas, in particular, subject access and user searching behaviour, as well as new developments that directly impinge on the catalogue's future: new interface developments and network access and resources

0.001682769 = product of:
  0.010096614 = sum of:
    0.010096614 = weight(_text_:in in 1828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010096614 = score(doc=1828,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 1828, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1828)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Reports on research that aims to test the effect of information cues constructed from the reading context approach on fiction searching and selection in public libraries. Assesses problems associated with the construction of information cues for fiction searching from the pragmatic approach, literary warrant approach and user-enquiries-analysis approach

0.001682769 = product of:
  0.010096614 = sum of:
    0.010096614 = weight(_text_:in in 4468) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010096614 = score(doc=4468,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 4468, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4468)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The physical organisation of items on library shelves using any classification scheme is inevitable a compromise. The best efforts to achieve an arrangement that is helpful to users will be thwarted by the multifaceted nature of these items and the specific needs of the user and the library. Items on a particular subject will be scattered throughout the library building(s) across disciplines, by physical form, by frequency of use and whether and for how long they may be borrowed. Even thought he rich information content of multifaceted items may be represented in the notation, the items required by a user will be scattered across library shelves when the item is placed in a single relative location. This paper explores these issues uisng examples from a University Library classified using the DDC. The electronic context of the library OPAC can transcend the constraints imposed by the predominantly physical nature of library collections, yet the current use of classification schemes in on-line systems retains many of these limitations. Examples of such systems applying DDC on the WWW are discussed and compared with a system that seeks to use DDC in what is called view-based searching. The interface and the resulting browsing and searching capability of a view-based OPAC are described. Ways in which subject access to library collections can be improved and disciplinary scatter resolved by assigning multiple class number to items and exploiting the rich Dewey structure in a faceted form are discussed. It is suggested that the informative power of visual classificatory structures at the search interface will be beneficial to the broader learning experience of the user. The paper concludes that the application of classification schemes in electronic interfaces should not be bound by the the physical constraints that no longer apply in an electronic context but be exploited to provide a complete, flexible and individual interface as determined by the needs of each user

0.0012620769 = product of:
  0.0075724614 = sum of:
    0.0075724614 = weight(_text_:in in 3879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075724614 = score(doc=3879,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 3879, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3879)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Reports results of a study which applied a typological procedure, developed by Lazairsfeld from the social sciences, to a set of qualitative data on fiction reading habits for the purpose of forming a practical typology of fiction borrowers. The data was collected from a sample of 300 readers in 2 medium sized UK public libraries over a 2 month period. The procedure, using an inductive research approach, first mapped readers along 6 dimensions of reading habits which emerged from the data frequencies of borrowing, the numbers of authors currently read, the literary/recreational orientation of reading, searching approaches usually applied, sureness (confidence) in book selection and then proceeded to reduce the number of combinations formed by these dimensions, based on their relationships. A typology of 7 types of fiction borrowers was devised: readers of particularism; readers of frequent literary pluralism; readers of infrequent literary pluralism; readers of frequent recreational pluralism; readers of infrequent recreational pluralism; readers of frequent universalism; and readers of infrequent universalism

0.0011898974 = product of:
  0.0071393843 = sum of:
    0.0071393843 = weight(_text_:in in 8116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071393843 = score(doc=8116,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 8116, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8116)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Shortened and revised version of a paper presented during an Education Librarian's Group session at the Under One Umbrella Two Conference, organized by the Library Association in Manchester, 9-11 Jul 93. With the possibility of free text searching and easy access to CD-ROM databases, users often do not realise that subject searching is enhanced by familiarity with the controlled vocabulary underlying the indexing system of the database. Discusses the construction of information retrieval thesauri, the problems of terminology and how the use of thesauri can make searching more effective, using education thesauri as examples