Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Voorbij, H."
  1. Voorbij, H.: Wetenschappelijke informatie zoeken op Internet : landelijk gebruikersoderzoek (1998) 0.01 
    0.0056159133 = product of:
  0.03931139 = sum of:
    0.027896244 = weight(_text_:web in 2868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027896244 = score(doc=2868,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 2868, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2868)
    0.011415146 = weight(_text_:information in 2868) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011415146 = score(doc=2868,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 2868, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2868)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    In 1997 a survey was held in the Netherlands by the Innovatie Wetenschappelijke Informatievoorziening (Innovation in Scientific Information Services) Steering Group to establish how much use students and research workers make of the Internet. 84% of respondents reported it useful for email communication, whilst 49% used it for consulting web documents. However, only 27% of respondents used it to consult electronic journals. A majority of respondents asked for greater assistance from library staff
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Searching for scientific information on the Internet: a national user survey
  2. Voorbij, H.: ¬Een goede titel behoeft geen trefwoord, of toch wel? : een vergelijkend oderzoek titelwoorden - trefwoorden (1997) 0.01 
    0.00524566 = product of:
  0.036719617 = sum of:
    0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 1446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0070627616 = score(doc=1446,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1446, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1446)
    0.029656855 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029656855 = score(doc=1446,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 1446, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1446)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    A recent survey at the Royal Library in the Netherlands showed that subject headings are more efficient than title keywords for retrieval purposes. 475 Dutch publications were selected at random and assigned subject headings. The study showed that subject headings provided additional useful information in 56% of titles. Subsequent searching of the library's online catalogue showed that 88% of titles were retrieved via subject headings against 57% through title keywords. Further precision may be achieved with the help of indexing staff, but at considerable cost
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  3. Voorbij, H.: Title keywords and subject descriptors : a comparison of subject search entries of books in the humanities and social sciences (1998) 0.00 
    0.0022955346 = product of:
  0.032137483 = sum of:
    0.032137483 = weight(_text_:wide in 4721) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032137483 = score(doc=4721,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.24476713 = fieldWeight in 4721, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4721)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    In order to compare the value of subject descriptors and title keywords as entries to subject searches, two studies were carried out. Both studies concentrated on monographs in the humanities and social sciences, held by the online public access catalogue of the National Library of the Netherlands. In the first study, a comparison was made by subject librarians between the subject descriptors and the title keywords of 475 records. They could express their opinion on a scale from 1 (descriptor is exactly or almost the same as word in title) to 7 (descriptor does not appear in title at all). It was concluded that 37 per cent of the records are considerably enhanced by a subject descriptor, and 49 per cent slightly or considerably enhanced. In the second study, subject librarians performed subject searches using title keywords and subject descriptors on the same topic. The relative recall amounted to 48 per cent and 86 per cent respectively. Failure analysis revealed the reasons why so many records that were found by subject descriptors were not found by title keywords. First, although completely meaningless titles hardly ever appear, the title of a publication does not always offer sufficient clues for title keyword searching. In those cases, descriptors may enhance the record of a publication. A second and even more important task of subject descriptors is controlling the vocabulary. Many relevant titles cannot be retrieved by title keyword searching because of the wide diversity of ways of expressing a topic. Descriptors take away the burden of vocabulary control from the user.
  4. Voorbij, H.: Searching scientific information on the Internet : a Dutch academic user survey (1999) 0.00 
    8.64828E-4 = product of:
  0.012107591 = sum of:
    0.012107591 = weight(_text_:information in 3546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012107591 = score(doc=3546,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.029633347 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 3546, 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=3546)
  0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    Abstract
    Examines the use and perceived importance of the Internet amongst students and academics in the Netherlands. A detailed questionnaire was distributed among 1.000 members of the academic community and 3 focus group interviews were held with faculty members. Among other findings, the study revealed the searching the WWW id not without difficulty. Libraries should support the users by performing traditional tasks, such as selection, bibliographical description, controlled subject indexing, current awareness, courses, and individual assistance. The WWW is being used primarily to search general, factual, ephemeral, or very specific information. At this moment, full text resources play only a minor role in the academic research process. The Internet may have conquered a place for itself, but it has not pushed aside traditional pronted and other information resources
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 50(1999) no.7, S.598-615

Languages

Themes