Search (13 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Informationsmittel"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Cho, H.; Chen, M.-H.; Chung, S.: Testing an integrative theoretical model of knowledge-sharing behavior in the context of Wikipedia (2010) 0.01
    0.013071639 = product of:
      0.026143279 = sum of:
        0.0070626684 = product of:
          0.028250674 = sum of:
            0.028250674 = weight(_text_:based in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028250674 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
        0.019080611 = product of:
          0.038161222 = sum of:
            0.038161222 = weight(_text_:22 in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038161222 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16438834 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3460, 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=3460)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This study explores how and why people participate in collaborative knowledge-building practices in the context of Wikipedia. Based on a survey of 223 Wikipedians, this study examines the relationship between motivations, internal cognitive beliefs, social-relational factors, and knowledge-sharing intentions. Results from structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis reveal that attitudes, knowledge self-efficacy, and a basic norm of generalized reciprocity have significant and direct relationships with knowledge-sharing intentions. Altruism (an intrinsic motivator) is positively related to attitudes toward knowledge sharing, whereas reputation (an extrinsic motivator) is not a significant predictor of attitude. The study also reveals that a social-relational factor, namely, a sense of belonging, is related to knowledge-sharing intentions indirectly through different motivational and social factors such as altruism, subjective norms, knowledge self-efficacy, and generalized reciprocity. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.
    Date
    1. 6.2010 10:13:22
  2. Schumann, L.; Stock, W.G.: ¬Ein umfassendes ganzheitliches Modell für Evaluation und Akzeptanzanalysen von Informationsdiensten : Das Information Service Evaluation (ISE) Modell (2014) 0.01
    0.0055651786 = product of:
      0.022260714 = sum of:
        0.022260714 = product of:
          0.04452143 = sum of:
            0.04452143 = weight(_text_:22 in 1492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04452143 = score(doc=1492,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16438834 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1492, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1492)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 9.2014 18:56:46
  3. Hartmann, B.: Ab ins MoMA : zum virtuellen Museumsgang (2011) 0.00
    0.0047701527 = product of:
      0.019080611 = sum of:
        0.019080611 = product of:
          0.038161222 = sum of:
            0.038161222 = weight(_text_:22 in 1821) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038161222 = score(doc=1821,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16438834 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1821, 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=1821)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22
  4. Okoli, C.; Mehdi, M.; Mesgari, M.; Nielsen, F.A.; Lanamäki, A.: Wikipedia in the eyes of its beholders : a systematic review of scholarly research on Wikipedia readers and readership (2014) 0.00
    0.0047701527 = product of:
      0.019080611 = sum of:
        0.019080611 = product of:
          0.038161222 = sum of:
            0.038161222 = weight(_text_:22 in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038161222 = score(doc=1540,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16438834 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1540, 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=1540)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    18.11.2014 13:22:03
  5. Martínez-Ávila, D.; Chaves Guimarães, J.A.; Pinho, F.A.; Fox, M.J.: ¬The representation of ethics and knowledge organization in the WoS and LISTA databases (2015) 0.00
    0.0047701527 = product of:
      0.019080611 = sum of:
        0.019080611 = product of:
          0.038161222 = sum of:
            0.038161222 = weight(_text_:22 in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.038161222 = score(doc=2358,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16438834 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2358, 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=2358)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    17. 2.2018 16:50:22
  6. Höhn, S.: Stalins Badezimmer in Wikipedia : Die Macher der Internet-Enzyklopädie diskutieren über Verantwortung und Transparenz. Der Brockhaus kehrt dagegen zur gedruckten Ausgabe zurück. (2012) 0.00
    0.0028108396 = product of:
      0.011243358 = sum of:
        0.011243358 = product of:
          0.022486717 = sum of:
            0.022486717 = weight(_text_:22 in 2171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.022486717 = score(doc=2171,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16438834 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 2171, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2171)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Content
    Der neue Herausgeber des Brockhaus, ein Tochterverlag von Bertelsmann, hat unterdessen angekündigt, zum gedruckten Lexikon zurückzukehren. Etwa Anfang 2015 soll die 22. Auflage erscheinen. In Zeiten des virtuellen Informationsoverkills gebe es einen Bedarf an Orientierung, an Relevanzvorgaben, sagt Geschäftsführer Christoph Hünermann. Ausgerechnet Bertelsmann druckte 2008 ein knapp 1 000 Seiten langes Wikipedia-Lexikon mit den 50 000 meist gesuchten Begriffen. Eine Experten-Redaktion überprüfte die Einträge sicherheitshalber zuvor - soll allerdings kaum Fehler gefunden haben."
    Source
    Frankfurter Rundschau. Nr.76 vom 29.3.2012, S.22-23
  7. Ofek, N.; Rokach, L.: ¬A classifier to determine which Wikipedia biographies will be accepted (2015) 0.00
    0.0024970302 = product of:
      0.009988121 = sum of:
        0.009988121 = product of:
          0.039952483 = sum of:
            0.039952483 = weight(_text_:based in 1610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.039952483 = score(doc=1610,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.28246817 = fieldWeight in 1610, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1610)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Wikipedia, like other encyclopedias, includes biographies of notable people. However, because it is jointly written by many contributors, it is subject to constant manipulation by contributors attempting to add biographies of non-notable people. Over time, Wikipedia has developed inclusion criteria for notable people (e.g., receiving a significant award) based on which newly contributed biographies are evaluated. In this paper we present and analyze a set of simple indicators that can be used to predict which article will eventually be accepted. These indicators do not refer to the content itself, but to meta-content features (such as the number of categories that the biography is associated with) and to author-based features (such as if it is a first-time author). By training a classifier on these features, we successfully reached a high predictive performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve [AUC] of 0.97) even though we overlooked the actual biography text.
  8. Haubner, S.: "Als einfacher Benutzer ist man rechtlos" : Unter den freiwilligen Wikipedia-Mitarbeitern regt sich Unmut über die Administratoren (2011) 0.00
    0.001987564 = product of:
      0.007950256 = sum of:
        0.007950256 = product of:
          0.015900511 = sum of:
            0.015900511 = weight(_text_:22 in 4567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.015900511 = score(doc=4567,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16438834 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 4567, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4567)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22
  9. Callahan, E.S.; Herring, S.C.: Cultural bias in Wikipedia content on famous persons (2011) 0.00
    0.0017656671 = product of:
      0.0070626684 = sum of:
        0.0070626684 = product of:
          0.028250674 = sum of:
            0.028250674 = weight(_text_:based in 4764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028250674 = score(doc=4764,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 4764, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4764)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Wikipedia advocates a strict "neutral point of view" (NPOV) policy. However, although originally a U.S-based, English-language phenomenon, the online, user-created encyclopedia now has versions in many languages. This study examines the extent to which content and perspectives vary across cultures by comparing articles about famous persons in the Polish and English editions of Wikipedia. The results of quantitative and qualitative content analyses reveal systematic differences related to the different cultures, histories, and values of Poland and the United States; at the same time, a U.S./English-language advantage is evident throughout. In conclusion, the implications of these findings for the quality and objectivity of Wikipedia as a global repository of knowledge are discussed, and recommendations are advanced for Wikipedia end users and content developers.
  10. Schroeder, A.; Wagner, C.: Governance of open content creation : a conceptualization and analysis of control and guiding mechanisms in the open content domain (2012) 0.00
    0.0017656671 = product of:
      0.0070626684 = sum of:
        0.0070626684 = product of:
          0.028250674 = sum of:
            0.028250674 = weight(_text_:based in 483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028250674 = score(doc=483,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 483, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=483)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The open content creation process has proven itself to be a powerful and influential way of developing text-based content, as demonstrated by the success of Wikipedia and related sites. Distributed individuals independently edit, revise, or refine content, thereby creating knowledge artifacts of considerable breadth and quality. Our study explores the mechanisms that control and guide the content creation process and develops an understanding of open content governance. The repertory grid method is employed to systematically capture the experiences of individuals involved in the open content creation process and to determine the relative importance of the diverse control and guiding mechanisms. Our findings illustrate the important control and guiding mechanisms and highlight the multifaceted nature of open content governance. A range of governance mechanisms is discussed with regard to the varied levels of formality, the different loci of authority, and the diverse interaction environments involved. Limitations and opportunities for future research are provided.
  11. McNamara, M.; Arnold, C.; Sarma, K.; Aberle, D.; Garon, E.; Bui, A.A.T.: Patient portal preferences : perspectives on imaging information (2015) 0.00
    0.0017656671 = product of:
      0.0070626684 = sum of:
        0.0070626684 = product of:
          0.028250674 = sum of:
            0.028250674 = weight(_text_:based in 2134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028250674 = score(doc=2134,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 2134, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2134)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Patient portals have the potential to provide content that is specifically tailored to a patient's information needs based on diagnoses and other factors. In this work, we conducted a survey of 41 lung cancer patients at an outpatient lung cancer clinic at the medical center of the University of California, Los Angeles, to gain insight into these perceived information needs and opinions on the design of a portal to fulfill them. We found that patients requested access to information related to diagnosis and imaging, with more than half of the patients reporting that they did not anticipate an increase in anxiety due to access to medical record information via a portal. We also found that patient educational background did not lead to a significant difference in desires for explanations of reports and definitions of terms.
  12. Kohn, R.S.: Of Descartes and of train schedules : Evaluating the Encyclopedia Judaica, Wikipedia, and other general and Jewish Studies encyclopedias (2010) 0.00
    0.0014713892 = product of:
      0.005885557 = sum of:
        0.005885557 = product of:
          0.023542227 = sum of:
            0.023542227 = weight(_text_:based in 3633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023542227 = score(doc=3633,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.16644597 = fieldWeight in 3633, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3633)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss the second edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica (2007) within its broader historical context of the production of encyclopedias in the twentieth and the twenty-first centuries. The paper contrasts the 2007 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica to the Jewish Encyclopedia published between 1901 and 1905, and to the first edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica published in 1972; then contrasts the 2007 edition of the Encyclopaedia Judaica to Wikipedia and to other projects of online encyclopedias. Design/methodology/approach - The paper provides a personal reflective review of the sources in question. Findings - That Encyclopaedia Judaica in its latest edition does not adequately replace the original first edition in terms of depth of scholarly work. It is considered that the model offered by Wikipedia could work well for the Encyclopaedia Judaica, allowing it to retain the core of the expert knowledge, and at the same time channel the energy of volunteer editors which has made Wikipedia such a success. Practical implications - The paper is of interest to those with an interest in encyclopedia design or Jewish studies. Originality/value - This paper provides a unique reflection on the latest edition of the encyclopedia and considers future models for its publication based on traditional and non-traditional methods.
  13. Zielinski, K.; Nielek, R.; Wierzbicki, A.; Jatowt, A.: Computing controversy : formal model and algorithms for detecting controversy on Wikipedia and in search queries (2018) 0.00
    0.0014713892 = product of:
      0.005885557 = sum of:
        0.005885557 = product of:
          0.023542227 = sum of:
            0.023542227 = weight(_text_:based in 5093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023542227 = score(doc=5093,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.14144066 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04694356 = queryNorm
                0.16644597 = fieldWeight in 5093, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5093)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Controversy is a complex concept that has been attracting attention of scholars from diverse fields. In the era of Internet and social media, detecting controversy and controversial concepts by the means of automatic methods is especially important. Web searchers could be alerted when the contents they consume are controversial or when they attempt to acquire information on disputed topics. Presenting users with the indications and explanations of the controversy should offer them chance to see the "wider picture" rather than letting them obtain one-sided views. In this work we first introduce a formal model of controversy as the basis of computational approaches to detecting controversial concepts. Then we propose a classification based method for automatic detection of controversial articles and categories in Wikipedia. Next, we demonstrate how to use the obtained results for the estimation of the controversy level of search queries. The proposed method can be incorporated into search engines as a component responsible for detection of queries related to controversial topics. The method is independent of the search engine's retrieval and search results recommendation algorithms, and is therefore unaffected by a possible filter bubble. Our approach can be also applied in Wikipedia or other knowledge bases for supporting the detection of controversy and content maintenance. Finally, we believe that our results could be useful for social science researchers for understanding the complex nature of controversy and in fostering their studies.