Search (12 results, page 1 of 1)

0.022779368 = product of:
  0.045558736 = sum of:
    0.045558736 = sum of:
      0.008118451 = weight(_text_:a in 293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.008118451 = score(doc=293,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 293, 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=293)
      0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037440285 = score(doc=293,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 293, 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=293)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper presents an evolving framework for human information behaviour, including information exploration, seeking, filtering, use and dissemination. It is based on empirical studies of human information behaviour in a variety of settings (Iivonen & Sonnenwald, 1998; Sonnenwald, 1993, 1995, 1996) and theories from a variety of research traditions, including information science, communication, sociology and psychology that inform our understanding of human information behaviour. I begin formulating the framework by discussing fundamental concepts, such as context, situation and social networks. Building on these concepts, I propose a series of propositions that strive to elucidate the framework. Key ideas in the framework include the introduction of the role of social networks in information exploration, and the concept of an `information horizon' in which we can act to explore information.

Date

22. 3.2002 9:46:09

Type

a

0.0028703054 = product of:
  0.005740611 = sum of:
    0.005740611 = product of:
      0.011481222 = sum of:
        0.011481222 = weight(_text_:a in 309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011481222 = score(doc=309,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.2161963 = fieldWeight in 309, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=309)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reports preliminary results of a study which applied a taxonomy of communication roles that characterize collaboration in the design process, devised by Dianne E. Sonnenwald (Information processing and management 31(1995) no.6, S.859-877 and Design studies 17(1996) no.3, S.277-301) to the performance of teams in design projects in the USA. Data was gathered from a design team in a high technology start up company in Northern California designing a new product related to telephone systems. Results supported the existence of the communication roles suggested by earlier studies and the idea that individuals in a design team may assume several roles at once and the roles corresponded to the roles suggested by the model

Type

a

0.00270615 = product of:
  0.0054123 = sum of:
    0.0054123 = product of:
      0.0108246 = sum of:
        0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 3179) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0108246 = score(doc=3179,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 3179, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3179)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.0023678814 = product of:
  0.0047357627 = sum of:
    0.0047357627 = product of:
      0.009471525 = sum of:
        0.009471525 = weight(_text_:a in 4991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009471525 = score(doc=4991,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4991, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4991)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.002269176 = product of:
  0.004538352 = sum of:
    0.004538352 = product of:
      0.009076704 = sum of:
        0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 1667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009076704 = score(doc=1667,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 1667, 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=1667)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Discusses a new model of search term selection and its implications. The model characterizes the selection of search terms as the navigation of multiple discourses, including controlled vocabularies, documents and their domains, the practice of indexing, clients' speech and search requests, databases and the searcher's own knowledge of the search process. Suggests that the multiple aspects of these discourses influences search term selection. The discourse of a controlled vocabulary is analyzed from various aspects and described as an example of a discourse. Professional searchers and the end users may benefit from adopting this new model of search term selection, learning to see alternative, effective search terms in addition to the words they would normally use. The model can also be incorporated in human computer interfaces of information retrieval systems to support the selection of search terms in a passive or active manner

Type

a

0.002269176 = product of:
  0.004538352 = sum of:
    0.004538352 = product of:
      0.009076704 = sum of:
        0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 4382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009076704 = score(doc=4382,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 4382, 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=4382)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze the relationship between citation ranking and peer evaluation in assessing senior faculty research performance. Other studies typically derive their peer evaluation data directly from referees, often in the form of ranking. This study uses two additional sources of peer evaluation data: citation contant analysis and book review content analysis. 2 main questions are investigated: (a) To what degree does citation ranking correlate with data from citation content analysis, book reviews and peer ranking? (b) Is citation ranking a valif evaluative indicator of research performance of senior faculty members? This study shows that citation ranking can provide a valid indicator for comparative evaluation of senior faculty research performance

Type

a

0.002269176 = product of:
  0.004538352 = sum of:
    0.004538352 = product of:
      0.009076704 = sum of:
        0.009076704 = weight(_text_:a in 5201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009076704 = score(doc=5201,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 5201, 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=5201)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this issue Maglaughin and Sonnenwald provided 12 graduate students with searches related to the student's work and asked them to judge the twenty most recent retrieved representations by highlighting passages thought to contribute to relevance, marking out passages detracting from relevance, and providing a relevant, partially relevant or relevant judgement on each. By recorded interview they were asked about how these decisions were made and to describe the three classes of judgement. The union of criteria identified in past studies did not seem to fully capture the information supplied so a new set was produced and coding agreement found to be adequate. Twenty-nine criteria were identified and grouped into six categories based upon the focus of the criterion. Multiple criteria are used for most judgements, and most criteria may have either a positive or negative effect. Content was the most frequently mentioned criterion.

Type

a

0.0022374375 = product of:
  0.004474875 = sum of:
    0.004474875 = product of:
      0.00894975 = sum of:
        0.00894975 = weight(_text_:a in 2692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00894975 = score(doc=2692,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 2692, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2692)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We conducted an experiment with a posttest, between-subjects design to evaluate the potential of emerging 3D telepresence technology to support collaboration in emergency health care. 3D telepresence technology has the potential to provide richer visual information than do current 2D video conferencing techniques. This may be of benefit in diagnosing and treating patients in emergency situations where specialized medical expertise is not locally available. The experimental design and results concerning information behavior are presented in the article Exploring the Potential of Video Technologies for Collaboration in Emergency Medical Care: Part I. Information Sharing (Sonnenwald et al., this issue). In this article, we explore paramedics' task performance during the experiment as they diagnosed and treated a trauma victim while working alone or in collaboration with a physician via 2D videoconferencing or via a 3D proxy. Analysis of paramedics' task performance shows that paramedics working with a physician via a 3D proxy performed the fewest harmful interventions and showed the least variation in task performance time. Paramedics in the 3D proxy condition also reported the highest levels of self-efficacy. Interview data confirm these statistical results. Overall, the results indicate that 3D telepresence technology has the potential to improve paramedics' performance of complex medical tasks and improve emergency trauma health care if designed and implemented appropriately.

Type

a

0.0020714647 = product of:
  0.0041429293 = sum of:
    0.0041429293 = product of:
      0.008285859 = sum of:
        0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 1754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008285859 = score(doc=1754,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 1754, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1754)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Collaboration is often a critical aspect of scientific research, which is dominated by complex problems, rapidly changing technology, dynamic growth of knowledge, and highly specialized areas of expertise. An individual scientist can seldom provide all of the expertise and resources necessary to address complex research problems. This paper describes collaboration among a group of scientists, and considers how their experiences are socially shaped. The scientists were members of a newly formed distributed, multi-disciplinary academic research center that was organized into four multi-disciplinary research groups. Each group had 14 to 34 members, including faculty, postdoctoral fellows and students, at four geographically dispersed universities. To investigate challenges that emerge in establishing scientific collaboration, data were collected about members' previous and current collaborative experiences, perceptions regarding collaboration, and work practices during the center's first year of operation. The data for the study includes interviews with members of the Center, observations of videoconferences and meetings, and a Center-wide sociometric survey. Data analysis has led to the development of a framework that identifies forms of collaboration that emerged among scientists (e.g., complementary and integrative collaboration) and associated factors, which influenced collaboration including personal compatibility, work connections, incentives, and infrastructure. These results may inform the specification of social and organizational practices, which are needed to establish collaboration in distributed, multi-disciplinary research centers.

Type

a

0.0020714647 = product of:
  0.0041429293 = sum of:
    0.0041429293 = product of:
      0.008285859 = sum of:
        0.008285859 = weight(_text_:a in 2693) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008285859 = score(doc=2693,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.15602624 = fieldWeight in 2693, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2693)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We are investigating the potential of 3D telepresence, or televideo, technology to support collaboration among geographically separated medical personnel in trauma emergency care situations. 3D telepresence technology has the potential to provide richer visual information than current 2D videoconferencing techniques. This may be of benefit in diagnosing and treating patients in emergency situations where specialized medical expertise is not locally available. The 3D telepresence technology does not yet exist, and there is a need to understand its potential before resources are spent on its development and deployment. This poses a complex challenge. How can we evaluate the potential impact of a technology within complex, dynamic work contexts when the technology does not yet exist? To address this challenge, we conducted an experiment with a posttest, between-subjects design that takes the medical situation and context into account. In the experiment, we simulated an emergency medical situation involving practicing paramedics and physicians, collaborating remotely via two conditions: with today's 2D videoconferencing and a 3D telepresence proxy. In this article, we examine information sharing between the attending paramedic and collaborating physician. Postquestionnaire data illustrate that the information provided by the physician was perceived to be more useful by the paramedic in the 3D proxy condition than in the 2D condition; however, data pertaining to the quality of interaction and trust between the collaborating physician and paramedic show mixed results. Postinterview data help explain these results.

Type

a

0.001757696 = product of:
  0.003515392 = sum of:
    0.003515392 = product of:
      0.007030784 = sum of:
        0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 2881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007030784 = score(doc=2881,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 2881, 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=2881)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Proposes a model of the search term selection process based on an empirical study of professional searchers during the pre-online stage of the search process. The model chraracterises the selection of search terms as the navigation of different discourses. 6 discourses emerged as sources of search terms: controlled vocabularies, documents and the domain, the practice of indexing, clients' search request, databases and the searchers' own search experience. Searchers navigate the discourses dynamically and have preferences for certain discourses. Emphasises the multiplicity and complexity of sources of search terms, the dynamic nature of the search term selection process and the complex analysis and synthesis of differences and similarities among sources of search terms. Searchers may need to understand fundamental aspects of multiple discourses in order to select search terms

Type

a

0.0011959607 = product of:
  0.0023919214 = sum of:
    0.0023919214 = product of:
      0.0047838427 = sum of:
        0.0047838427 = weight(_text_:a in 3983) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0047838427 = score(doc=3983,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.090081796 = fieldWeight in 3983, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3983)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

New video technologies are emerging to facilitate collaboration in emergency healthcare. One such technology is 3D telepresence technology for medical consultation (3DMC) that may provide richer visual information to support collaboration between medical professionals to, ideally, enhance patient care in real time. Today only an early prototype of 3DMC exists. To better understand 3DMC's potential for adoption and use in emergency healthcare before large amounts of development resources are invested we conducted a visioning study. That is, we shared our vision of 3DMC with emergency room physicians, nurses, administrators, and information technology (IT) professionals working at large and small medical centers, and asked them to share their perspectives regarding 3DMC's potential benefits and disadvantages in emergency healthcare and its compatibility and/or lack thereof with their and their organization's current ways of working. We found that social and technical challenges can be identified regarding new innovations even before working prototypes are available. The compatibility of 3DMC with current ways of working was conceptualized by participants in terms of processes, relationships, and resources. Both common and unique perceptions regarding 3DMC emerged, illustrating the need for 3DMC, and other collaboration technologies, to support interwoven situational awareness across different technological frames.

Type

a