Search (27 results, page 2 of 2)

0.0016913437 = product of:
  0.0033826875 = sum of:
    0.0033826875 = product of:
      0.006765375 = sum of:
        0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 7950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006765375 = score(doc=7950,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 7950, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=7950)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0016913437 = product of:
  0.0033826875 = sum of:
    0.0033826875 = product of:
      0.006765375 = sum of:
        0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 3316) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006765375 = score(doc=3316,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3316, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3316)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article contributes to the growing body of research that explores the significance of context in health information behavior. Specifically, through the lens of trust judgments, it demonstrates that gender is a determinant of the information evaluation process. A questionnaire-based survey collected data from adults regarding the factors that influence their judgment of the trustworthiness of online health information. Both men and women identified credibility, recommendation, ease of use, and brand as being of importance in their trust judgments. However, women also take into account style, while men eschew this for familiarity. In addition, men appear to be more concerned with the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the information, the ease with which they can access it, and its familiarity, whereas women demonstrate greater interest in cognition, such as the ease with which they can read and understand the information. These gender differences are consistent with the demographic data, which suggest that: women consult more types of sources than men; men are more likely to be searching with respect to a long-standing health complaint; and, women are more likely than men to use tablets in their health information seeking. Recommendations for further research to better inform practice are offered.

Type

a

0.0016913437 = product of:
  0.0033826875 = sum of:
    0.0033826875 = product of:
      0.006765375 = sum of:
        0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 3597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006765375 = score(doc=3597,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3597, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3597)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

While there is significant progress with policy and a lively debate regarding the potential impact of open access publishing, few studies have examined academics' behavior and attitudes to open access publishing (OAP) in scholarly journals. This article seeks to address this gap through an international and interdisciplinary survey of academics. Issues covered include: use of and intentions regarding OAP, and perceptions regarding advantages and disadvantages of OAP, journal article publication services, peer review, and reuse. Despite reporting engagement in OAP, academics were unsure about their future intentions regarding OAP. Broadly, academics identified the potential for wider circulation as the key advantage of OAP, and were more positive about its benefits than they were negative about its disadvantages. As regards services, rigorous peer review, followed by rapid publication were most valued. Academics reported strong views on reuse of their work; they were relatively happy with noncommercial reuse, but not in favor of commercial reuse, adaptations, and inclusion in anthologies. Comparing science, technology, and medicine with arts, humanities, and social sciences showed a significant difference in attitude on a number of questions, but, in general, the effect size was small, suggesting that attitudes are relatively consistent across the academic community.

Type

a

0.001674345 = product of:
  0.00334869 = sum of:
    0.00334869 = product of:
      0.00669738 = sum of:
        0.00669738 = weight(_text_:a in 5596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00669738 = score(doc=5596,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 5596, 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=5596)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This article aims to define and explore the nature of wisdom, managerial wisdom, organisational wisdom and wisdom management. Design/methodology/approach - The paper draws on some of the diverse writings on wisdom, and explores the relevance of wisdom in the context of knowledge management. Findings - Wisdom has received little attention in the information management and systems, knowledge management and management literature. This is surprising since in this knowledge-based economy the link between data, information and knowledge is seen as pivotal by practitioners, consultants and academics. Originality/value - The article explores the nature of organisational wisdom and identifies a number of areas for further theory-making and empirical investigation.

Type

a

0.0014647468 = product of:
  0.0029294936 = sum of:
    0.0029294936 = product of:
      0.005858987 = sum of:
        0.005858987 = weight(_text_:a in 2030) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005858987 = score(doc=2030,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 2030, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2030)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Analyses some of the components of graphical user interfaces (GUI), applied to CD-ROM databases (windows, dialogue boxes, menus, commands, buttons, check boxes and icons) and remarks on the degree to which these are based on Windows software. Notes the constraints to GUIs that still remain even after databases have appeared in the marketplace: particularly mouse based problems. Discusses ways of evaluating GUIs and their specific components and reports a study of databases in which these types of interfaces are used. Notes the significant variability between products in the way that they apply GUIs and discusses whether database users would benefit from a certain degree of standardization in the basic interface structure using GUIs, or whether users would prefer greater control over the design of the local user interface. Concludes that the introduction of Windows based CD-ROM databases with graphical user interfaces will increasingly revolutionize the design of such databases. Makes 3 recommendations that would aim to enhance the user friendliness of CD-ROM interfaces: research to develop criteria for evaluating interfaces in the GUI environment; standardization of interface design between some products, particular for novice users; and facilities to allow experienced users to develop and tailor their own interface design

Type

a

0.001353075 = product of:
  0.00270615 = sum of:
    0.00270615 = product of:
      0.0054123 = sum of:
        0.0054123 = weight(_text_:a in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0054123 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 637, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=637)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0011839407 = product of:
  0.0023678814 = sum of:
    0.0023678814 = product of:
      0.0047357627 = sum of:
        0.0047357627 = weight(_text_:a in 7427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0047357627 = score(doc=7427,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 7427, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7427)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a