Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Schöne Literatur"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Vernitski, A.; Rafferty, P.: Approaches to fiction retrieval research : from theory to practice? (2011) 0.01
    0.007566384 = product of:
      0.052964687 = sum of:
        0.052964687 = weight(_text_:case in 4720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052964687 = score(doc=4720,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18173204 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.29144385 = fieldWeight in 4720, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4720)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter considers fiction retrieval research and initiatives, providing an overview of some of the approaches that have been developed. In particular, it describes two recent approaches to fiction retrieval that have made use of theoretical concepts drawn from literary theory. Fiction is an interesting information domain because it includes documents that serve two purposes, which are reading for pleasure and scholarly study (Beghtol, 1994), but fiction retrieval has not always focused on both aspects. In the 19th century, the approach was to treat fiction from a knowledge perspective within general classification schemes. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), the Library of Congress Classification (LCC) and the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) contain classes for literature, with the main subdivision in each case being the language in which it is written. Further subdivision is possible based on literary form, historical period or the works of an individual author (Riesthuis, 1997).
  2. Birdi, B.; Ford, N.: Towards a new sociological model of fiction reading (2018) 0.00
    0.004498276 = product of:
      0.03148793 = sum of:
        0.03148793 = product of:
          0.06297586 = sum of:
            0.06297586 = weight(_text_:studies in 4540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06297586 = score(doc=4540,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.3818022 = fieldWeight in 4540, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4540)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Although much previous research has considered how we read, less attention has been paid to why we read, and the influence not only of individual or text-related factors on a reader's intention to read, but also of broader societal factors. This article presents a novel, empirically-based model of fiction reading in a public library context, taking into account the characteristics differentiating the readers of individual fiction genres. It begins with a literature review of factors motivating a reading choice or habit, and of the effects of reading different fiction genres, before introducing three previous studies by the first author into readers' attitudes towards, and engagement with, fiction and selected fiction genres. The methodologies are then summarized both for the three previous studies and the present study. The authors present a combined analysis that integrates the findings of the previous studies in order to generate a new, evidence-based model for the reading of fiction genres. Incorporating both demographic and motivational aspects, this model illustrates how the broad themes of the fiction reader profile interrelate, giving them a new causal ordering. Finally, there is a discussion of the implications of this work for library and information science research and practitioner communities.
  3. Scharl, A.; Hubmann-Haidvogel, A.H.; Jones, A.; Fischl, D.; Kamolov, R.; Weichselbraun, A.; Rafelsberger, W.: Analyzing the public discourse on works of fiction : detection and visualization of emotion in online coverage about HBO's Game of Thrones (2016) 0.00
    0.004447426 = product of:
      0.031131983 = sum of:
        0.031131983 = weight(_text_:management in 842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031131983 = score(doc=842,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 842, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=842)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 52(2016) no.1, S.129-138
  4. Gonçalo Oliveira, H.: Automatic generation of poetry inspired by Twitter trends (2016) 0.00
    0.004447426 = product of:
      0.031131983 = sum of:
        0.031131983 = weight(_text_:management in 2388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031131983 = score(doc=2388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13932906 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041336425 = queryNorm
            0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 2388, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2388)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Knowledge discovery, knowledge engineering and knowledge management: 7th International Joint Conference, IC3K 2015, Lisbon, Portugal, November 12-14, 2015, Revised Selected Papers. Eds.: A. Fred et al
  5. Sauperl, A.: Pinning down a novel : characteristics of literary works as perceived by readers (2012) 0.00
    0.002597081 = product of:
      0.018179566 = sum of:
        0.018179566 = product of:
          0.03635913 = sum of:
            0.03635913 = weight(_text_:studies in 4548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03635913 = score(doc=4548,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16494368 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.041336425 = queryNorm
                0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 4548, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4548)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The subject description of novels in library catalogues is traditionally limited to the classification number with no description of the story. On the other hand, enthusiastic readers describe novels by tags or reviews in Web services. The purpose of this paper is to analyse readers' descriptions of novels and suggest an enhancement of the catalogue record which would be useful to the readers. Design/methodology/approach - The original research involved a content analysis of tags and reviews written by users in the online bookstore Amazon.com, the online reader advisory service LibraryThing, and the reading promotion project Primorci beremo. The results were compared to previously published results. Findings - The characteristics that most frequently elicit comments by readers are: the names of the creators and literary characters, geographic names and the titles of works, the time frame in which the story takes place, and the literary genre. Their evaluation of a novel was expressed with an opinion, an analysis, or a professional review. Awards were mentioned, and readers often also expressed their personal experience with the novel. They connected the novel with a sequel or series, with otherwise related novels, movies, etc. Often, pictures of the cover and other factual data were included. Research limitations/implications - Research was limited to readers' experiences and descriptions of literary works written in prose. Practical implications - It is suggested that the time frame, genre and awards received should be included in the functional requirements models. Originality/value - Original research was conducted over a longer period of time. The results were re-evaluated and compared to previously published results from studies by different researchers.