Search (358 results, page 18 of 18)

0.001387099 = product of:
  0.005548396 = sum of:
    0.005548396 = product of:
      0.016645188 = sum of:
        0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 5818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016645188 = score(doc=5818,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 5818, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5818)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The social dynamics of alternative facts: why what you believe depends on who you know. Why should we care about having true beliefs? And why do demonstrably false beliefs persist and spread despite bad, even fatal, consequences for the people who hold them? Philosophers of science Cailin OConnor and James Weatherall argue that social factors, rather than individual psychology, are whats essential to understanding the spread and persistence of false beliefs. It might seem that theres an obvious reason that true beliefs matter: false beliefs will hurt you. But if thats right, then why is it (apparently) irrelevant to many people whether they believe true things or not? The Misinformation Age, written for a political era riven by fake news, alternative facts, and disputes over the validity of everything from climate change to the size of inauguration crowds, shows convincingly that what you believe depends on who you know. If social forces explain the persistence of false belief, we must understand how those forces work in order to fight misinformation effectively.

0.001387099 = product of:
  0.005548396 = sum of:
    0.005548396 = product of:
      0.016645188 = sum of:
        0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 5838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016645188 = score(doc=5838,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 5838, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5838)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze and re-direct recent schematic and empirical scholarship on Habermas' theory of the public sphere in library and information science (LIS). Design/methodology/approach This paper conducts a critical analysis of the relevant literature in light of Habermas' origination and use/purpose of the public sphere concept. Findings The authors examined here produced a schematic operationalization of the public sphere that thinned the concept, but in turn, that schematization has produced insight into the civil society functions and communications of libraries, both within and without. For this work to be meaningful, the considerations and contexts of democratic society must be reinserted. Research limitations/implications Further explorations of the relationship between the public sphere and civil society as they are manifested around and in libraries is called for. Additionally, Weigand's approach to producing data/evidence on the public sphere and libraries should be furthered. Practical implications Understanding the role and function of libraries in democratic societies is essential for libraries to play a productive democratic role in those societies and thus, in guiding them. Social implications This paper helps to situate the bewildering circumstances of libraries who face both popular support and broad political-social questioning of their role and place. Originality/value This paper arguably interjects a more sophisticated and nuanced theoretical picture of the public sphere than prior precis presented in the LIS literature have undertaken. It also engages a unique set of empirical-theoretical students from another perspective in order to deepen and shift that research discourse.

0.001387099 = product of:
  0.005548396 = sum of:
    0.005548396 = product of:
      0.016645188 = sum of:
        0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 5914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016645188 = score(doc=5914,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 5914, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5914)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.7, S.729-741

0.001387099 = product of:
  0.005548396 = sum of:
    0.005548396 = product of:
      0.016645188 = sum of:
        0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 5941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016645188 = score(doc=5941,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 5941, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5941)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.9, S.1116-1128

0.001387099 = product of:
  0.005548396 = sum of:
    0.005548396 = product of:
      0.016645188 = sum of:
        0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 5974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016645188 = score(doc=5974,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 5974, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5974)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

To ascertain the diffusion and influence of Savolainen's ELIS model and its use as a theoretical and/or methodological basis for research. Design/methodology/approach A context citation analysis was made of the work where this researcher published his model. Analysis covered the year of publication, the type of work and the subject matter of the citing documents concerned. In-context citations were analysed for their frequency in each citing text, style, location and content cited. Findings The ELIS model received 18.5 cites/year. 20.2 per cent of them corresponded to papers published in journals in other areas, mainly computer science. The average of cites per paper was 1.8; 64.5 percent of the citing works cited them only once. 60 per cent of the cites were considered essential. Only 13.7 per cent of these cites appear in theory or methods. 37 per cent of the citing documents contained no concept relating to the model. Research limitations/implications The method used focuses on the most direct context of a cite (sentence or paragraph), but isolates it from the general context (full document, other documents by the author or their social capital). It has, however, allowed this research issue to be dealt with under laboratory conditions and revealed nuances hidden by the absolute number of cites. Originality/value It has become evident that the dissemination and influence of the ELIS model are less than what the total number of cites indicates and that it has scarcely been incorporated into research design. Despite its popularity, it is not being validated and/or refuted by way of empirical data.

0.001387099 = product of:
  0.005548396 = sum of:
    0.005548396 = product of:
      0.016645188 = sum of:
        0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016645188 = score(doc=352,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 352, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=352)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72(2021) no.10, S.1234-1246

0.001387099 = product of:
  0.005548396 = sum of:
    0.005548396 = product of:
      0.016645188 = sum of:
        0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016645188 = score(doc=382,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 382, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=382)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72(2021) no.10, S.1295-1305

0.001387099 = product of:
  0.005548396 = sum of:
    0.005548396 = product of:
      0.016645188 = sum of:
        0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016645188 = score(doc=526,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 73(2022) no.4, S.511-527

0.001387099 = product of:
  0.005548396 = sum of:
    0.005548396 = product of:
      0.016645188 = sum of:
        0.016645188 = weight(_text_:science in 684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016645188 = score(doc=684,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 684, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=684)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0011769925 = product of:
  0.00470797 = sum of:
    0.00470797 = product of:
      0.01412391 = sum of:
        0.01412391 = weight(_text_:science in 4267) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01412391 = score(doc=4267,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.123474345 = fieldWeight in 4267, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4267)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

An alternative point of view is that increases in information and transmission channels do not automatically result in overload. This view can be mapped to beliefs that the character of the information society does not afford change along the order of magnitude of a Bronze Age or Industrial Revolution. While there has indeed been some refocusing of priorities, boundaries, equipment, and skill sets in commercial and social life, information and technology merely provide the means of maintaining a certain status quo. There is also recognition that even as some people become increasingly connected, everyone (even in industrialized capitalist areas) does not participate in or benefit from an "information revolution." By some estimates, the Industrial Revolution was accomplished over a range of 100 years or more, when you trace it over various continents and cultures. If in "the western world" (the instigator of discussions about an information explosion and its economic, political, and social consequences) we are indeed moving from an industrial to an information society, it is reasonable to suspect that such change world take considerable time and has therefore not yet been accomplished. It is also reasonable to expect uncertainty about its nature and contradictory assessments about our experience of it. It is therefore reasonable to expect uncertain descriptions of the consequences of such change, including mixed perceptions of the phenomenon of information overload. Because overload is a contingent concept, this article addresses core themes found in the literature about overload, as well as related themes, such its presumed origin in the information society. Deliberation about the advent of the information age is instructive, but this is not the only way of understanding the meaning of information overload. The experience of overload is also examined by looking at the nature and function of human "information behavior" and cognitive processes. The newer topics in library and information science, such as information literacy, social informatics, and information seeking in context (ISIC), are reviewed in order to illuminate information overload to the fullest extent possible. After thus establishing a frame of reference from various areas, the article concludes with a definition of overload that offers the best fit for all of these themes.

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.72, [=Suppl.35]

0.0011096792 = product of:
  0.004438717 = sum of:
    0.004438717 = product of:
      0.01331615 = sum of:
        0.01331615 = weight(_text_:science in 5985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01331615 = score(doc=5985,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.11641272 = fieldWeight in 5985, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5985)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This research explores, using a Grounded Theory approach, the question of how a particular group of undergraduate university students differentiates the values of retrieved information in a contemporary research process. Specifically it attempts to isolate and label those specific techniques, processes, formulae-both objective and subjective-that the students use to identify, prioritize, and successfully incorporate the most useful and valuable information into their research project. The research reviews the relevant literature covering the areas of: epistemology, knowledge acquisition, and cognitive learning theory; early relevance research; the movement from relevance models to information seeking in context; and the proximate recent research. A research methodology is articulated using a Grounded Theory approach, and the research process and research participants are fully explained and described. The findings of the research are set forth using three Thematic Sets- Traditional Relevance Measures; Structural Frames; and Metaphors: General and Ecological-using the actual discourse of the study participants, and a theoretical construct is advanced. Based on that construct, it can be theorized that identification and analysis of the metaphorical language that the particular students in this study used, both by way of general and ecological metaphors-their stories-about how they found, handled, and evaluated information, can be a very useful tool in understanding how the students identified, prioritized, and successfully incorporated the most useful and relevant information into their research projects. It also is argued that this type of metaphorical analysis could be useful in providing a bridging mechanism for a broader understanding of the relationships between traditional user relevance studies and the concepts of frame theory and sense-making. Finally, a corollary to Whitmire's original epistemological hypothesis is posited: Students who were more adept at using metaphors-either general or ecological-appeared more comfortable with handling contradictory information sources, and better able to articulate their valuing decisions. The research concludes with a discussion of the implications for both future research in the Library and Information Science field, and for the practice of both Library professionals and classroom instructors involved in assisting students involved in information valuing decision-making in a research process.

0.0011096792 = product of:
  0.004438717 = sum of:
    0.004438717 = product of:
      0.01331615 = sum of:
        0.01331615 = weight(_text_:science in 1064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01331615 = score(doc=1064,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.11641272 = fieldWeight in 1064, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1064)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The organization of information and the process of seeking information are fundamental activities, and thus fields of study, related to library and information science (LIS). Both endeavors are pragmatic in the sense that the ideas of information seeking behavior and the process of organizing information relates to some ideas of how users tend to behave when information is needed in order to fulfill a task of some kind. An important difference is, however, that information systems are primarily driven by principles of semantic structure, whereas users are driven by genuine information needs. Knowledge organization (KO), which is considered a subfield within LIS, has a particular focus on the organization of semantic units, and their relations (Hjørland 2008; Hodge 2000; Thellefsen 2010), however, it is our impression that the users information need, even though acknowledged, often is neglected or only mentioned en passant. The concept of information need is a core concept in LIS, and is, in particular, a core concept within the subfield of information retrieval (IR) that describes the state of uncertainty or anomalous knowledge state that precedes a user's information seeking behavior. Information need is, however, an intricate concept, and is only addressed in the LIS literature as some kind of elusive cognitive state. One may ask 'is an information need always individual or personal, and under what circumstances?' The present paper argues that the concept of information need may profit from a pragmatic and semeiotic perspective, which also may prove fruitful for KO. The paper thus discusses the concept of information need through three premises that is formulated based in Peirce's pragmatic semeiotic: 1) as the intricate relation between believe and doubt, 2) as a pragmatic process of clarification, and 3) as an activity of cognition taking place within a universe of discourse. The paper is rounded by a discussion of how this semeiotic analysis can be useful for KO.

0.0011096792 = product of:
  0.004438717 = sum of:
    0.004438717 = product of:
      0.01331615 = sum of:
        0.01331615 = weight(_text_:science in 2154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01331615 = score(doc=2154,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.11641272 = fieldWeight in 2154, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2154)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Why do some nations prosper while others do not? While economists often turn to measures like GDP or per-capita income to answer this question, interdisciplinary theorist Cesar Hidalgo argues that there is a better way to understand economic success. Instead of measuring the money a country makes, he proposes, we can learn more from measuring a country's ability to make complex products--in other words, the ability to turn an idea into an artifact and imagination into capital. In Why Information Grows, Hidalgo combines the seemingly disparate fields of economic development and physics to present this new rubric for economic growth. He argues that viewing development solely in terms of money and politics is too simplistic to provide a true understanding of national wealth. Rather, we should be investigating what makes some countries more capable than others. Complex products--from films to robots, apps to automobiles--are a physical distillation of an economy's knowledge, a measurable embodiment of the education, infrastructure, and capability of an economy. Economic wealth is about applying this knowledge to turn ideas into tangible products, and the more complex these products, the more economic growth a country will experience. Just look at the East Asian countries, he argues, whose rapid rise can be attributed to their ability to manufacture products at all levels of complexity. A radical new interpretation of global economics, Why Information Grows overturns traditional assumptions about wealth and development. In a world where knowledge is quite literally power, Hidalgo shows how we can create societies that are limited by nothing more than their imagination"-- "Why do some nations prosper while others do not? Economists usually turn to measures such as gross domestic product or per capita income to answer this question, but interdisciplinary theorist Cesar Hidalgo argues that we can learn more by measuring a country's ability to make complex products. In Why Information Grows, Hidalgo combines the seemingly disparate fields of economic development and physics to present this new rubric for economic growth. He believes that we should investigate what makes some countries more capable than others. Complex products-from films to robots, apps to automobiles-are a physical distillation of an economy's knowledge, a measurable embodiment of its education, infrastructure, and capability. Economic wealth accrues when applications of this knowledge turn ideas into tangible products; the more complex its products, the more economic growth a country will experience. A radical new interpretation of global economics, Why Information Grows overturns traditional assumptions about the development of economies and the origins of wealth and takes a crucial step toward making economics less the dismal science and more the insightful one."

9.80827E-4 = product of:
  0.003923308 = sum of:
    0.003923308 = product of:
      0.011769924 = sum of:
        0.011769924 = weight(_text_:science in 589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011769924 = score(doc=589,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.10289528 = fieldWeight in 589, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=589)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

LCSH

Information science / Examinations / Study guides

Subject

Information science / Examinations / Study guides

9.709693E-4 = product of:
  0.0038838773 = sum of:
    0.0038838773 = product of:
      0.011651631 = sum of:
        0.011651631 = weight(_text_:science in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011651631 = score(doc=2632,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.101861134 = fieldWeight in 2632, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2632)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

How is knowledge acquired and represented in memory? By what process do individuals come to change their ideas, conceptions, or knowledge? Although the first question has been central to cognitive psychologists' research agendas for many years, relatively less is known about the change process. We examine 3 research literatures to broaden our understanding of the process of knowledge change. In particular, we draw on models of conceptual change from cognitive psychology, social psychology, and science education. Each model adds a new perspective on the change process. Based on the literature from these models of change, we developed a new model that represents our reconceptualization of the change process. We describe the model and use it to point out new areas of research to be addressed. Psychology has, at its foundation, an abiding interest in understanding the construction of knowledge. How do individuals come to perceive, know, remember, and learn? How do individuals acquire new knowledge? How is knowledge represented and organized in memory? How do individuals come to change their knowledge? These questions have served as conceptual frameworks for psychological, as well as philosophical, thought for centuries (Hunt, 1993).

8.3225936E-4 = product of:
  0.0033290375 = sum of:
    0.0033290375 = product of:
      0.009987112 = sum of:
        0.009987112 = weight(_text_:science in 3380) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009987112 = score(doc=3380,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.08730954 = fieldWeight in 3380, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3380)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Here, we introduce PI now. We cover core ideas, explaining how they relate both to traditional philosophy, and to the conceptual issues arising all over the place - such as in computer science, AI, natural and social sciences, as well as in popular culture. This is the first version, for 2013. Next year we'll tell you about PI 2014. We hope you love PI as much as we do! If so, let us have your feedback, and come back in 2014. Maybe some of you will ultimately join us as researchers. Either way, enjoy it. Yours, Patrick, Bert, Simon, Nir, Federico, Carson, Phyllis, Andrew, Eric, Giuseppe, Federica, Christoph, Mariarosaria, Matteo, Orlin, and Hector.

6.935495E-4 = product of:
  0.002774198 = sum of:
    0.002774198 = product of:
      0.008322594 = sum of:
        0.008322594 = weight(_text_:science in 3686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008322594 = score(doc=3686,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.07275795 = fieldWeight in 3686, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3686)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 56(2005) no.9, S.1008-1009 (D.E. Agosto): "This second edition of Information Literacy: Essential Skills for the Information Age remains true to the first edition (published in 1998). The main changes involved the updating of educational standards discussed in the text, as well as the updating of the term history. Overall, this book serves as a detailed definition of the concept of information literacy and focuses heavily an presenting and discussing related state and national educational standards and policies. It is divided into 10 chapters, many of which contain examples of U.S. and international information literacy programs in a variety of educational settings. Chapter one offers a detailed definition of information literacy, as well as tracing the deviation of the term. The term was first introduced in 1974 by Paul Zurkowski in a proposal to the national Commission an Libraries and Information Science. Fifteen years later a special ALA committee derived the now generally accepted definition: "To be information literate requires a new set of skills. These include how to locate and use information needed for problem-solving and decision-making efficiently and effectively" (American Library Association, 1989, p. 11). Definitions for a number of related concepts are also offered, including definitions for visual literacy, media literacy, computer literacy, digital literacy, and network literacy. Although the authors do define these different subtypes of information literacy, they sidestep the argument over the definition of the more general term literacy, consequently avoiding the controversy over national and world illiteracy rates. Regardless of the actual rate of U.S. literacy (which varies radically with each different definition of "literacy"), basic literacy, i.e., basic reading and writing skills, still presents a formidable educational goal in the U.S. In fact, More than 5 million high-schoolers do not read well enough to understand their textbooks or other material written for their grade level. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, 26% of these students cannot read material many of us world deem essential for daily living, such as road signs, newspapers, and bus schedules. (Hock & Deshler, 2003, p. 27)

6.935495E-4 = product of:
  0.002774198 = sum of:
    0.002774198 = product of:
      0.008322594 = sum of:
        0.008322594 = weight(_text_:science in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008322594 = score(doc=1323,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11438741 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043425296 = queryNorm
            0.07275795 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Turn analyzes the research of information seeking and retrieval (IS&R) and proposes a new direction of integrating research in these two areas: the fields should turn off their separate and narrow paths and construct a new avenue of research. An essential direction for this avenue is context as given in the subtitle Integration of Information Seeking and Retrieval in Context. Other essential themes in the book include: IS&R research models, frameworks and theories; search and works tasks and situations in context; interaction between humans and machines; information acquisition, relevance and information use; research design and methodology based on a structured set of explicit variables - all set into the holistic cognitive approach. The present monograph invites the reader into a construction project - there is much research to do for a contextual understanding of IS&R. The Turn represents a wide-ranging perspective of IS&R by providing a novel unique research framework, covering both individual and social aspects of information behavior, including the generation, searching, retrieval and use of information. Regarding traditional laboratory information retrieval research, the monograph proposes the extension of research toward actors, search and work tasks, IR interaction and utility of information. Regarding traditional information seeking research, it proposes the extension toward information access technology and work task contexts. The Turn is the first synthesis of research in the broad area of IS&R ranging from systems oriented laboratory IR research to social science oriented information seeking studies. TOC:Introduction.- The Cognitive Framework for Information.- The Development of Information Seeking Research.- Systems-Oriented Information Retrieval.- Cognitive and User-Oriented Information Retrieval.- The Integrated IS&R Research Framework.- Implications of the Cognitive Framework for IS&R.- Towards a Research Program.- Conclusion.- Definitions.- References.- Index.