Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Referieren"
  1. Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995) 0.02
    0.01857433 = product of:
      0.03714866 = sum of:
        0.03714866 = product of:
          0.07429732 = sum of:
            0.07429732 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07429732 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19203177 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.054837555 = 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(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    27. 1.1996 18:22:06
  2. Bakewell, K.G.B.; Rowland, G.: Indexing and abstracting (1993) 0.02
    0.016324414 = product of:
      0.032648828 = sum of:
        0.032648828 = product of:
          0.065297656 = sum of:
            0.065297656 = weight(_text_:work in 5540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.065297656 = score(doc=5540,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.20127523 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.054837555 = queryNorm
                0.32441974 = fieldWeight in 5540, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5540)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    British librarianship and information work 1986-1990. Ed. by D. Bromley and A.M. Allott
  3. Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988) 0.01
    0.014859463 = product of:
      0.029718926 = sum of:
        0.029718926 = product of:
          0.059437852 = sum of:
            0.059437852 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.059437852 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19203177 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.054837555 = 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(1/2)
    
    Source
    Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
  4. Jizba, L.: Reflections on summarizing and abstracting : implications for Internet Web documents, and standardized library cataloging databases (1997) 0.01
    0.014283863 = product of:
      0.028567726 = sum of:
        0.028567726 = product of:
          0.05713545 = sum of:
            0.05713545 = weight(_text_:work in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05713545 = score(doc=701,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.20127523 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.054837555 = queryNorm
                0.28386727 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Comments on the value of abstracts or summary notes to information available online via the Internet and WWW and concludes that automated abstracting techniques would be highly useful if routinely applied to cataloguing or metadata for Internet documents and documents in other databases. Information seekers need external summary information to assess content and value of retrieved documents. Examines traditional models for writers, in library audiovisual cataloguing, periodical databases and archival work, along with innovative new model databases featuring robust cataloguing summaries. Notes recent developments in automated techniques, computational research, and machine summarization of digital images. Recommendations are made for future designers of cataloguing and metadata standards
  5. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996) 0.01
    0.011144597 = product of:
      0.022289194 = sum of:
        0.022289194 = product of:
          0.04457839 = sum of:
            0.04457839 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04457839 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19203177 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.054837555 = 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(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
  6. Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996) 0.01
    0.011144597 = product of:
      0.022289194 = sum of:
        0.022289194 = product of:
          0.04457839 = sum of:
            0.04457839 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04457839 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19203177 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.054837555 = 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(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22
  7. Koltay, T.: Abstracts and abstracting : a genre and set of skills for the twenty-first century (2010) 0.01
    0.010202759 = product of:
      0.020405518 = sum of:
        0.020405518 = product of:
          0.040811036 = sum of:
            0.040811036 = weight(_text_:work in 4125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040811036 = score(doc=4125,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.20127523 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.054837555 = queryNorm
                0.20276234 = fieldWeight in 4125, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4125)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Despite their changing role, abstracts remain useful in the digital world. Aimed at both information professionals and researchers who work and publish in different fields, this book summarizes the most important and up-to-date theory of abstracting, as well as giving advice and examples for the practice of writing different kinds of abstracts. The book discusses the length, the functions and basic structure of abstracts. A new approach is outlined on the questions of informative and indicative abstracts. The abstractors' personality, their linguistic and non-linguistic knowledge and skills are also discussed with special attention. The process of abstracting, its steps and models, as well as recipient's role are treated with special distinction. Abstracting is presented as an aimed (purported) understanding of the original text, its interpretation and then a special projection of the information deemed to be worth of abstracting into a new text.Despite the relatively large number of textbooks on the topic there is no up-to-date book on abstracting in the English language. In addition to providing a comprehensive coverage of the topic, the proposed book contains novel views - especially on informative and indicative abstracts. The discussion is based on an interdisciplinary approach, blending the methods of library and information science and linguistics. The book strives to a synthesis of theory and practice. The synthesis is based on a large and existing body of knowledge which, however, is often characterised by misleading terminology and flawed beliefs.
  8. Wilson, M.J.; Wilson, M.L.: ¬A comparison of techniques for measuring sensemaking and learning within participant-generated summaries (2013) 0.01
    0.010202759 = product of:
      0.020405518 = sum of:
        0.020405518 = product of:
          0.040811036 = sum of:
            0.040811036 = weight(_text_:work in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040811036 = score(doc=612,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.20127523 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.054837555 = queryNorm
                0.20276234 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.6703904 = idf(docFreq=3060, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    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.
  9. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996) 0.01
    0.009287165 = product of:
      0.01857433 = sum of:
        0.01857433 = product of:
          0.03714866 = sum of:
            0.03714866 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03714866 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19203177 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.054837555 = 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(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356