Search (10 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Information"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  1. Hartel, J.: ¬The red thread of information (2020) 0.01
    0.009389086 = product of:
      0.043815732 = sum of:
        0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 5839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016822865 = score(doc=5839,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 5839, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5839)
        0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 5839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016822865 = score(doc=5839,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 5839, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5839)
        0.010170003 = product of:
          0.020340007 = sum of:
            0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 5839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020340007 = score(doc=5839,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5839, 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=5839)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose In The Invisible Substrate of Information Science, a landmark article about the discipline of information science, Marcia J. Bates wrote that ".we are always looking for the red thread of information in the social texture of people's lives" (1999a, p. 1048). To sharpen our understanding of information science and to elaborate Bates' idea, the work at hand answers the question: Just what does the red thread of information entail? Design/methodology/approach Through a close reading of Bates' oeuvre and by applying concepts from the reference literature of information science, nine composite entities that qualify as the red thread of information are identified, elaborated, and related to existing concepts in the information science literature. In the spirit of a scientist-poet (White, 1999), several playful metaphors related to the color red are employed. Findings Bates' red thread of information entails: terms, genres, literatures, classification systems, scholarly communication, information retrieval, information experience, information institutions, and information policy. This same constellation of phenomena can be found in resonant visions of information science, namely, domain analysis (Hjørland, 2002), ethnography of infrastructure (Star, 1999), and social epistemology (Shera, 1968). Research limitations/implications With the vital vermilion filament in clear view, newcomers can more easily engage the material, conceptual, and social machinery of information science, and specialists are reminded of what constitutes information science as a whole. Future researchers and scientist-poets may wish to supplement the nine composite entities with additional, emergent information phenomena. Originality/value Though the explication of information science that follows is relatively orthodox and time-bound, the paper offers an imaginative, accessible, yet technically precise way of understanding the field.
    Date
    30. 4.2020 21:03:22
  2. Yu, L.; Fan, Z.; Li, A.: ¬A hierarchical typology of scholarly information units : based on a deduction-verification study (2020) 0.00
    0.00403526 = product of:
      0.028246818 = sum of:
        0.020110816 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020110816 = score(doc=5655,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.17204987 = fieldWeight in 5655, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5655)
        0.008136002 = product of:
          0.016272005 = sum of:
            0.016272005 = weight(_text_:22 in 5655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.016272005 = score(doc=5655,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5655, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5655)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to lay a theoretical foundation for identifying operational information units for library and information professional activities in the context of scholarly communication. Design/methodology/approach The study adopts a deduction-verification approach to formulate a typology of units for scholarly information. It first deduces possible units from an existing conceptualization of information, which defines information as the combined product of data and meaning, and then tests the usefulness of these units via two empirical investigations, one with a group of scholarly papers and the other with a sample of scholarly information users. Findings The results show that, on defining an information unit as a piece of information that is complete in both data and meaning, to such an extent that it remains meaningful to its target audience when retrieved and displayed independently in a database, it is then possible to formulate a hierarchical typology of units for scholarly information. The typology proposed in this study consists of three levels, which in turn, consists of 1, 5 and 44 units, respectively. Research limitations/implications The result of this study has theoretical implications on both the philosophical and conceptual levels: on the philosophical level, it hinges on, and reinforces the objective view of information; on the conceptual level, it challenges the conceptualization of work by IFLA's Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records and Library Reference Model but endorses that by Library of Congress's BIBFRAME 2.0 model. Practical implications It calls for reconsideration of existing operational units in a variety of library and information activities. Originality/value The study strengthens the conceptual foundation of operational information units and brings to light the primacy of "one work" as an information unit and the possibility for it to be supplemented by smaller units.
    Date
    14. 1.2020 11:15:22
  3. Twidale, M.B.; Nichols, D.M.; Lueg, C.P.: Everyone everywhere : a distributed and embedded paradigm for usability (2021) 0.00
    0.0018186709 = product of:
      0.02546139 = sum of:
        0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02546139 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    We present a new paradigm to address the persistence of difficulties that people have in accessing and using information. Our idea consists of two main aspects: engaging wider society with usability and distributing the topic across disciplines. We claim that bad usability is a social justice issue. Primarily, we propose that usability should become the subject of widespread activism across society, enabling more people to realize that their usability problems are not due to inadequacies in themselves but in current designs. People should be encouraged and enabled to complain about their experiences with an expectation of improvements. We also propose that the current restriction of this topic to certain disciplinary units is overly narrow and that instead there should be radical embedding of usability concepts across many different fields and settings. We believe that the usability of information systems is core to information science and that information scientists should resume their historic role as heralds and pioneers of human-computer interaction.
  4. Day, R.E.: Trauma, time and information (2022) 0.00
    0.0018186709 = product of:
      0.02546139 = sum of:
        0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02546139 = score(doc=609,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 609, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=609)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose In this article the author would like to discuss information and the causal-temporal models as discussed in trauma theory and reports from trauma therapy. The article discusses two modes of temporality and the role of narrative explanations in informing the subject as to their past and present. Design/methodology/approach Conceptual analysis. Findings Information in trauma has different meanings, partly as a result of different senses of temporality that make up explanations of trauma in trauma theory. One important meaning is that of explanation itself as a cause or a therapeutic cure for trauma. Research limitations/implications The research proposes that trauma and trauma theory need to be understood in terms of the role of explanation, with explanation being understood as persuasion. This follows the historical genealogy of trauma theory from its origins in hypnosis and psychoanalysis. Originality/value The article examines the possibility of unconscious information and its effects in forming psychological subjectivity.
  5. González-Teruel, A.; Pérez-Pulido, M.: ¬The diffusion and influence of theoretical models of information behaviour : the case of Savolainen's ELIS model (2020) 0.00
    0.0015155592 = product of:
      0.021217827 = sum of:
        0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 5974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021217827 = score(doc=5974,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 5974, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5974)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    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.
  6. Koch, C.: Was ist Bewusstsein? (2020) 0.00
    0.0014528577 = product of:
      0.020340007 = sum of:
        0.020340007 = product of:
          0.040680014 = sum of:
            0.040680014 = weight(_text_:22 in 5723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040680014 = score(doc=5723,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5723, 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=5723)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    17. 1.2020 22:15:11
  7. Fugmann, R.: What is information? : an information veteran looks back (2022) 0.00
    0.0014528577 = product of:
      0.020340007 = sum of:
        0.020340007 = product of:
          0.040680014 = sum of:
            0.040680014 = weight(_text_:22 in 1085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040680014 = score(doc=1085,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1085, 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=1085)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    18. 8.2022 19:22:57
  8. Cooke, N.A.; Kitzie, V.L.: Outsiders-within-Library and Information Science : reprioritizing the marginalized in critical sociocultural work (2021) 0.00
    8.7171455E-4 = product of:
      0.0122040035 = sum of:
        0.0122040035 = product of:
          0.024408007 = sum of:
            0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.024408007 = score(doc=351,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 351, 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=351)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    18. 9.2021 13:22:27
  9. Yang, F.; Zhang, X.: Focal fields in literature on the information divide : the USA, China, UK and India (2020) 0.00
    7.264289E-4 = product of:
      0.010170003 = sum of:
        0.010170003 = product of:
          0.020340007 = sum of:
            0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020340007 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5835, 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=5835)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    13. 2.2020 18:22:13
  10. Belabbes, M.A.; Ruthven, I.; Moshfeghi, Y.; Rasmussen Pennington, D.: Information overload : a concept analysis (2023) 0.00
    7.264289E-4 = product of:
      0.010170003 = sum of:
        0.010170003 = product of:
          0.020340007 = sum of:
            0.020340007 = weight(_text_:22 in 950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020340007 = score(doc=950,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03002521 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 950, 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=950)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.071428575 = coord(1/14)
    
    Date
    22. 4.2023 19:27:56