-
Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995)
0.05
0.049310975 = product of:
0.09862195 = sum of:
0.012869149 = weight(_text_:a in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012869149 = score(doc=3061,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.22065444 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
0.0857528 = sum of:
0.017222093 = weight(_text_:information in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017222093 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
0.06853071 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06853071 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Discusses briefly the application of hypertext in library user training with particular reference to a specific hypertext based tutorial designed to teach library school students the basics knowledge of abstracts and abstracting process
- Date
- 27. 1.1996 18:22:06
- Source
- Journal of education for library and information science. 36(1995) no.2, S.170-173
- Type
- a
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996)
0.03
0.030183844 = product of:
0.06036769 = sum of:
0.008916007 = weight(_text_:a in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008916007 = score(doc=4411,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
0.051451683 = sum of:
0.010333257 = weight(_text_:information in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010333257 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 4411, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4411)
0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041118424 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Structured abstracts are abstracts which include subheadings such as: background, aims, participants methods and results. These are rapidly replacing traditional abstracts in medical periodicals, but the number and detail of the subheadings used varies, and there is a range of different typographic settings. Reviews a number of studies designed to investigate readers' preferences for different typographic settings and layout. Over 400 readers took part in the study: students; postgraduates; research workers and academics in the social sciences. The most preferred version emerged from the last of 3 studies and 2 additional studies were then carried out to determine preferences for the overall position and layout of this most preferred version on a A4 page. The most preferred version for the setting of the subheadings are printed in bold capital letters
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
- Type
- a
-
Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996)
0.03
0.029586587 = product of:
0.059173174 = sum of:
0.0077214893 = weight(_text_:a in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0077214893 = score(doc=7244,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 7244, 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=7244)
0.051451683 = sum of:
0.010333257 = weight(_text_:information in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010333257 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 7244, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7244)
0.041118424 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041118424 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7244, 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=7244)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Considers the principles of indexing and the intellectual skills involved in order to determine what automatic indexing systems would be required in order to supplant or complement the human indexer. Good indexing requires: considerable prior knowledge of the literature; judgement as to what to index and what depth to index; reading skills; abstracting skills; and classification skills, Illustrates these features with a detailed description of abstracting and indexing processes involved in generating entries for the mechanical engineering database POWERLINK. Briefly assesses the possibility of replacing human indexers with specialist indexing software, with particular reference to the Object Analyzer from the InTEXT automatic indexing system and using the criteria described for human indexers. At present, it is unlikely that the automatic indexer will replace the human indexer, but when more primary texts are available in electronic form, it may be a useful productivity tool for dealing with large quantities of low grade texts (should they be wanted in the database)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
- Source
- Journal of librarianship and information science. 28(1996) no.4, S.217-225
- Type
- a
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996)
0.03
0.027375106 = product of:
0.05475021 = sum of:
0.008307 = weight(_text_:a in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008307 = score(doc=7673,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.14243183 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
0.046443213 = sum of:
0.012177859 = weight(_text_:information in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012177859 = score(doc=7673,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
0.034265354 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034265354 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Reports results of 2 studies to determine if structured abstracts offer any advantage to users in terms of whether they are easier to search. In study 1, using a specially prepared electronic database of abstracts in either their original format or the structured format, 52 users were asked to find the answers to 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts in traditional format followed by 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts set in the structured format. Time and error data were recorded automatically. In study 2, using a printed database, 56 users were asked to to find 5 abstracts that reprted a particular kind of study and then find 5 more references that reported another kind of study. In study 1 users performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts but there were some unexplainable practice effects. In study 2, the users again performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts. However, there were asymmetrical transfer effects: users who responded first to the structured abstracts responded more quickly to the following traditional abstracts than did those users who responded first to the traditional abstracts. Nevertheless, the overall findings support the hypothesis that it is easier for user to search structured abstracts than it is to search traditional abstracts
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356
- Type
- a
-
Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988)
0.02
0.0188538 = product of:
0.0377076 = sum of:
0.010295319 = weight(_text_:a in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010295319 = score(doc=2832,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 2832, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2832)
0.027412282 = product of:
0.054824565 = sum of:
0.054824565 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054824565 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17712717 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2832, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2832)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Reference librarians, who are thoroughly familiar with the purpose, scope and arrangement of abstract periodicals, are uniquely qualified for the task of writing abstracts. The procedures described here offer a relatively simple way for them to write acceptable abstracts from the outset. Although research is being conducted in the area of machine generated abstracts, there wll continue to be a role for human abstractors.
- Source
- Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
- Type
- a
-
Fraenkel, A.S.; Klein, S.T.: Information retrieval from annotated texts (1999)
0.01
0.013725506 = product of:
0.027451012 = sum of:
0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010402009 = score(doc=4308,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 4308, 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=4308)
0.017049003 = product of:
0.034098007 = sum of:
0.034098007 = weight(_text_:information in 4308) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034098007 = score(doc=4308,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 4308, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4308)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 50(1999) no.10, S.845-854
- Type
- a
-
Koltay, T.: Abstracting: information literacy on a professional level (2009)
0.01
0.0131749455 = product of:
0.026349891 = sum of:
0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 3610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010402009 = score(doc=3610,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 3610, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3610)
0.015947882 = product of:
0.031895764 = sum of:
0.031895764 = weight(_text_:information in 3610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031895764 = score(doc=3610,freq=14.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.3592092 = fieldWeight in 3610, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3610)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Purpose - This paper aims to argue for a conception of information literacy (IL) that goes beyond the abilities of finding information as it includes communication skills. An important issue in this is that abstractors exercise IL on a professional level. Design/methodology/approach - By stressing the importance of the fact that information literacy extends towards verbal communication the paper takes an interdisciplinary approach, the main component of which is linguistics. Findings - It is found that verbal communication and especially analytic-synthetic writing activities play an important role in information literacy at the level of everyday language use, semi-professional and professional summarising of information. The latter level characterises abstracting. Originality/value - The paper adds to the body of knowledge about information literacy in general and in connection with communication and abstracting.
- Type
- a
-
Sen, B.K.: Research articles in LISA Plus : problems of identification (1997)
0.01
0.011228737 = product of:
0.022457475 = sum of:
0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010402009 = score(doc=430,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
0.012055466 = product of:
0.024110932 = sum of:
0.024110932 = weight(_text_:information in 430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024110932 = score(doc=430,freq=8.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 430, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=430)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to determine how easy and quickly research articles in library and information science could be retrieved from the LISA Plus CD-ROM database. Results show that the search with the descriptor 'research' retrieves all types of articles and it is necessary to read through every abstract to locate the research articles. The introductory sentence of a substantial number of abstracts hinder the process of identification since the sentence provides such information as the conference where the paper was presented, the special issue or the section of a periodical where the article is located; or obvious background information. Suggests measures whereby research articles can be identified easily and rapidly
- Source
- Malaysian journal of library and information science. 2(1997) no.1, S.97-106
- Type
- a
-
Hartley, J.: Do structured abstracts take more space? : And does it matter? (2002)
0.01
0.011228737 = product of:
0.022457475 = sum of:
0.010402009 = weight(_text_:a in 582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010402009 = score(doc=582,freq=2.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 582, 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=582)
0.012055466 = product of:
0.024110932 = sum of:
0.024110932 = weight(_text_:information in 582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024110932 = score(doc=582,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 582, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=582)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 28(2002) no.5, S.417-422
- Type
- a
-
Endres-Niggemeyer, B.: Content analysis : a special case of text compression (1989)
0.01
0.010740098 = product of:
0.021480195 = sum of:
0.012869149 = weight(_text_:a in 3549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012869149 = score(doc=3549,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.22065444 = fieldWeight in 3549, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3549)
0.008611047 = product of:
0.017222093 = sum of:
0.017222093 = weight(_text_:information in 3549) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017222093 = score(doc=3549,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3549, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3549)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Presents a theoretical model, based on the Flower/Hayes model of expository writing, of the process involved in content analysis for abstracting and indexing.
- Source
- Information, knowledge, evolution. Proceedings of the 44th FID Congress, Helsinki, 28.8.-1.9.1988. Ed. by S. Koshiala and R. Launo
- Type
- a
-
Booth, A.; O'Rouke, A.J.: ¬The value of structured abstracts in information retrieval from MEDLINE (1997)
0.01
0.010090019 = product of:
0.020180037 = sum of:
0.0132912 = weight(_text_:a in 764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0132912 = score(doc=764,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.22789092 = fieldWeight in 764, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=764)
0.0068888376 = product of:
0.013777675 = sum of:
0.013777675 = weight(_text_:information in 764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013777675 = score(doc=764,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 764, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=764)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Presents a structured abstract of the actual article. Outlines the debate on the value of structured abstracts and describes a research project into their use, which investigated records of cardiovascular disease downloaded from MEDLINE and tested against clinical questions derived from a survey of CD-ROM use in 3 health science libraries. It was found that structured abstracts improve precision at the expense of recall and place heavier demands on the skills of selecting fields to search within the abstract. Indicates directions for further research
- Type
- a
-
Spiteri, L.F.: Library and information science vs business : a comparison of approaches to abstracting (1997)
0.01
0.010077151 = product of:
0.020154301 = sum of:
0.011629799 = weight(_text_:a in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011629799 = score(doc=3699,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 3699, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3699)
0.008524502 = product of:
0.017049003 = sum of:
0.017049003 = weight(_text_:information in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017049003 = score(doc=3699,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 3699, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3699)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- The library and information science (LIS) literature on abstracting makes little mention about abstracting conducted in the corporate / business environment, whereas the business literature suggests that abstarcting is a very important component of business writing. Examines a variety of publications from LIS and business in order to compare and contrast their approaches to the following aspects of abstracting: definitions of abstracts; types of abstracts; purpose of abstracts; and writing of abstracts. Summarises the results of the examination which revealed a number of similarities, differences, and inadequacies in the ways in which both fields approach abstracting. Concludes that both fields need to develop more detailed guidelines concerning the cognitive process of abstracting and suggests improvements to the training af absractors based on these findings
- Type
- a
-
Tibbo, H.R.: Abstracting across the disciplines : a content analysis of abstracts for the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities with implications for abstracting standards and online information retrieval (1992)
0.01
0.010018803 = product of:
0.020037606 = sum of:
0.010295319 = weight(_text_:a in 2536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010295319 = score(doc=2536,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 2536, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2536)
0.009742287 = product of:
0.019484574 = sum of:
0.019484574 = weight(_text_:information in 2536) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019484574 = score(doc=2536,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.21943474 = fieldWeight in 2536, 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=2536)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Reports on a comparison of the "content categories" listed in the ANSI/ISO abstracting standards to actual content found in abstracts from the sciences, social sciences, and the humanities. The preliminary findings question the fundamental concept underlying these standards, namely, that any one set of standards and generalized instructions can describe and elicit the optimal configuration for abstracts from all subject areas
- Source
- Library and information science research. 14(1992) no.1, S.31-56
- Type
- a
-
Wilson, M.J.; Wilson, M.L.: ¬A comparison of techniques for measuring sensemaking and learning within participant-generated summaries (2013)
0.01
0.009602629 = product of:
0.019205257 = sum of:
0.0117478715 = weight(_text_:a in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0117478715 = score(doc=612,freq=20.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.20142901 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
0.0074573862 = product of:
0.0149147725 = sum of:
0.0149147725 = weight(_text_:information in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0149147725 = score(doc=612,freq=6.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- While it is easy to identify whether someone has found a piece of information during a search task, it is much harder to measure how much someone has learned during the search process. Searchers who are learning often exhibit exploratory behaviors, and so current research is often focused on improving support for exploratory search. Consequently, we need effective measures of learning to demonstrate better support for exploratory search. Some approaches, such as quizzes, measure recall when learning from a fixed source of information. This research, however, focuses on techniques for measuring open-ended learning, which often involve analyzing handwritten summaries produced by participants after a task. There are two common techniques for analyzing such summaries: (a) counting facts and statements and (b) judging topic coverage. Both of these techniques, however, can be easily confounded by simple variables such as summary length. This article presents a new technique that measures depth of learning within written summaries based on Bloom's taxonomy (B.S. Bloom & M.D. Engelhart, 1956). This technique was generated using grounded theory and is designed to be less susceptible to such confounding variables. Together, these three categories of measure were compared by applying them to a large collection of written summaries produced in a task-based study, and our results provide insights into each of their strengths and weaknesses. Both fact-to-statement ratio and our own measure of depth of learning were effective while being less affected by confounding variables. Recommendations and clear areas of future work are provided to help continued research into supporting sensemaking and learning.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.2, S.291-306
- Type
- a
-
Molina, M.P.: Documentary abstracting : toward a methodological approach (1995)
0.01
0.0093884235 = product of:
0.018776847 = sum of:
0.0118880095 = weight(_text_:a in 1790) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0118880095 = score(doc=1790,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 1790, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1790)
0.0068888376 = product of:
0.013777675 = sum of:
0.013777675 = weight(_text_:information in 1790) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013777675 = score(doc=1790,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 1790, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1790)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- In the general abstracting process (GAP), there are 2 types of data: textual, within a particular framed trilogy (surface, deep, and rhetoric); and documentary (abstractor, means of production, and user demands). Proposes its development, the use of the following disciplines, among others: linguistics (structural, tranformational, and textual), logic (formal and fuzzy), and psychology (cognitive). The model for that textual transformation is based on a system of combined strategies with 4 key stages: reading understanding, selection, interpretation, and synthesis
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 46(1995) no.3, S.225-234
- Type
- a
-
Hartley, J.: Is it appropriate to use structured abstracts in non-medical science journals? (1998)
0.01
0.0093884235 = product of:
0.018776847 = sum of:
0.0118880095 = weight(_text_:a in 2999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0118880095 = score(doc=2999,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 2999, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2999)
0.0068888376 = product of:
0.013777675 = sum of:
0.013777675 = weight(_text_:information in 2999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013777675 = score(doc=2999,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2999, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2999)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to consider whether or not structured abstracts can be used efectively in non medical science periodicals. Reviews a selection of studies on structured abstracts from the medical and psychological literature, presents examples of structured abstracts published in non medical science periodicals and considers how original abstracts might be written in a structured form for these periodicals. Concludes that, in light of these example studies, editors of these periodicals should consider the value of adopting structured abstracts
- Source
- Journal of information science. 24(1998) no.5, S.359-364
- Type
- a
-
Endres-Niggemeyer, B.; Maier, E.; Sigel, A.: How to implement a naturalistic model of abstracting : four core working steps of an expert abstractor (1995)
0.01
0.00938377 = product of:
0.01876754 = sum of:
0.012739806 = weight(_text_:a in 2930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012739806 = score(doc=2930,freq=12.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 2930, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2930)
0.006027733 = product of:
0.012055466 = sum of:
0.012055466 = weight(_text_:information in 2930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012055466 = score(doc=2930,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 2930, 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=2930)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- 4 working steps taken from a comprehensive empirical model of expert abstracting are studied in order to prepare an explorative implementation of a simulation model. It aims at explaining the knowledge processing activities during professional summarizing. Following the case-based and holistic strategy of qualitative empirical research, the main features of the simulation system were developed by investigating in detail a small but central test case - 4 working steps where an expert abstractor discovers what the paper is about and drafts the topic sentence of the abstract
- Source
- Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.5, S.631-674
- Type
- a
-
Hartley, J.; Betts, L.: Common weaknesses in traditional abstracts in the social sciences (2009)
0.01
0.008928751 = product of:
0.017857501 = sum of:
0.006304569 = weight(_text_:a in 3115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006304569 = score(doc=3115,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 3115, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3115)
0.011552933 = product of:
0.023105865 = sum of:
0.023105865 = weight(_text_:information in 3115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023105865 = score(doc=3115,freq=10.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.2602176 = fieldWeight in 3115, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3115)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Detailed checklists and questionnaires have been used in the past to assess the quality of structured abstracts in the medical sciences. The aim of this article is to report the findings when a simpler checklist was used to evaluate the quality of 100 traditional abstracts published in 53 different social science journals. Most of these abstracts contained information about the aims, methods, and results of the studies. However, many did not report details about the sample sizes, ages, or sexes of the participants, or where the research was carried out. The correlation between the lengths of the abstracts and the amount of information present was 0.37 (p < .001), suggesting that word limits for abstracts may restrict the presence of key information to some extent. We conclude that authors can improve the quality of information in traditional abstracts in the social sciences by using the simple checklist provided in this article.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.10, S.2010-2018
- Type
- a
-
Rothkegel, A.: Abstracting from the perspective of text production (1995)
0.01
0.008828767 = product of:
0.017657533 = sum of:
0.011629799 = weight(_text_:a in 3740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011629799 = score(doc=3740,freq=10.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 3740, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3740)
0.006027733 = product of:
0.012055466 = sum of:
0.012055466 = weight(_text_:information in 3740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012055466 = score(doc=3740,freq=2.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 3740, 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=3740)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- An abstract itself is a text which is subjected to general and specific conditions of text production. The goal - namely the forming of the abstract as a text - controls the whole process of abstracting. This goal oriented view contrasts to most approaches in this domain which are source text oriented. Production strategies are described in terms of text structure building processes which are reconstructed with methods of modelling in the area of text linguistics and computational linguistics. This leads to a close relationship between thr representation of the model and the resulting text. Gives examples in which authentic material of abstracts is analyzed according to the model. The model itself integrates 3 text levels which are combined and represented in terms of the writer's activities
- Source
- Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.5, S.777-784
- Type
- a
-
Busch-Lauer, I.-A.: Abstracts in German medical journals : a linguistic analysis (1995)
0.01
0.008766453 = product of:
0.017532906 = sum of:
0.009008404 = weight(_text_:a in 3677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009008404 = score(doc=3677,freq=6.0), product of:
0.05832264 = queryWeight, product of:
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 3677, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3677)
0.008524502 = product of:
0.017049003 = sum of:
0.017049003 = weight(_text_:information in 3677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017049003 = score(doc=3677,freq=4.0), product of:
0.088794395 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.05058132 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 3677, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3677)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
- Abstract
- Compares formats and linguistic devices of German abstracts and their English equivalents, written by German medical scholars to English native speakers. The source is 20 abstracts taken from German medical journals representing different degrees of specialism. The analysis includes: the overall length of articles/abstracts; the representation/arrangement of sections; the linguistic devices. Results show no correlation between the length of articles and the length of abstracts. In contrast to native speaking author abstracts, 'background information' predominated in the structure of the studied German non-native speaker abstracts, whereas 'purpose of study' and 'conclusions' were not clearly stated. In linguistic terms, the German abstracts frequently contained lexical hegdes, complex and enumerating sentence structure; passive voice and post tense as well as various types of linking structures
- Source
- Information processing and management. 31(1995) no.5, S.769-776
- Type
- a
