Search (470 results, page 24 of 24)

2.1111484E-4 = product of:
  0.003800067 = sum of:
    0.003800067 = weight(_text_:in in 680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003800067 = score(doc=680,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 680, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=680)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Abstract

In the UK, both anecdotal and research evidence points to ever greater and more sophisticated use of the Web to provide health information and advice. The study reported here adds to this research with an online survey of Internet users' reported use of the Web to access information about health and their opinions about the advice that can be obtained there. Over a period of three weeks more than 1,300 people responded to an online questionnaire produced by The British Life and Internet Project; 81 per cent or 997 of the respondents were British. The prime purpose of the questionnaire was to obtain information on the characteristics of the users of health information Web sites, to obtain feedback regarding for what they used online health sites and what were the perceived outcomes associated with using online health information.

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft: Health informatics

2.1111484E-4 = product of:
  0.003800067 = sum of:
    0.003800067 = weight(_text_:in in 1379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003800067 = score(doc=1379,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 1379, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1379)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Abstract

The authors report on the findings of a usability test conducted to evaluate the usability of the VeriaGrid online system. The VeriaGrid (www.theveriagrid.org) is a prototype virtual map that focuses on the provision of information related to the cultural heritage of the city of Veria (Greece). It has been developed under the Light Project by the Central Public Library of Veria (www.libver.gr). It is an interactive application that includes various functional or thematic areas such as an interactive digital map of Veria, image gallery, videoclips, panoramic site photos, and general information about the city of Veria. The findings of the usability test revealed that users had some difficulties in using novel features of the digital map (such as the Recommended Points and the Routes functions) and finding textual information about cultural heritage of the city of Veria. Users, however, were satisfied with the overall usability of the system. In light of these findings, some recommendations for improving the usability of the system are made.

1.9904094E-4 = product of:
  0.003582737 = sum of:
    0.003582737 = weight(_text_:in in 4876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003582737 = score(doc=4876,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 4876, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4876)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Abstract

EEVL consists of several distinct resources, which exist as separate databases. This article describes the approach taken to tackle a particular problem that was identified through evaluation studies, namely, that searches of the EEVL catalogue too frequently matched nor records. The solution described in this paper is a cross-search facility for 3 of the EEVL databases

1.9904094E-4 = product of:
  0.003582737 = sum of:
    0.003582737 = weight(_text_:in in 223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003582737 = score(doc=223,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 223, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=223)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Abstract

If you are an indexer who is accustomed to working in solitude with static words, you might face some big surprises in the production of a multimedia CD-ROM. You will not be working alone. You will not be working from a manuscript. Your dexterity with a dedicated software tool for indexing will be irrelevant. The coding or tagging might not be your worry either, because it will likely be done by members of a separate technical staff. The CD-ROM can currently hold 660 megabytes of data. Its production is a massive team effort. Because of the sheer volume of data involved, it is unlikely that one indexer working alone can handle the job in a reasonable period of time. The database for the actual index entries is likely to have been designed specifically for the project at hand, so the indexers will learn the software tools on the job. The entire project will probably be onscreen. So, if you choose to thrust yourself into this teeming amalgam of production, what are the prerequisites and what new things can you expect to learn? CD-ROM is an amorphous new medium with few rules. Your most important resume items might be your flexibility, imagination, and love of words. What remains unchanged from traditional back-of-the-book indexing is the need for empathy with the user; you will still need to come up with exactly the right word for the situation. What is new here is the situation: you might learn to envision the words that correspond to non-textual media such as graphics, photos, video clips, and musical passages. And because you will be dealing with vast amounts of textual and sensory data, you might find yourself rethinking the nature and purpose of an index as a whole. CD-ROM production can take many forms; three will be discussed here

Issue

Beyond book indexing: how to get started in Web indexing, embedded indexing and other computer-based media. Ed. by D. Brenner u. M. Rowland.

1.9904094E-4 = product of:
  0.003582737 = sum of:
    0.003582737 = weight(_text_:in in 265) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003582737 = score(doc=265,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 265, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=265)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Footnote

Vgl. auch: Goldschmitt, R.: Strategien im Infospace: Bericht über die Bielefeld 2002 Conference "Informationsqualität für alle und ihre Kosten". In: Zeitschrift für Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie. 49(2002) H.3, S.154-159.

1.9904094E-4 = product of:
  0.003582737 = sum of:
    0.003582737 = weight(_text_:in in 1108) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003582737 = score(doc=1108,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 1108, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1108)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Abstract

2 vols Index; 17 vols Knowledge in depth (Macropædia); 12 vols Ready reference (Micropædia); 1 vol. Outline of knowledge (Propædia)

1.75929E-4 = product of:
  0.0031667221 = sum of:
    0.0031667221 = weight(_text_:in in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031667221 = score(doc=664,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.10626988 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Abstract

In the case of health information the quality and authenticity of the digital information have always been a matter of major concern for health and information professionals. This paper seeks to explore these concerns from the consumers' perspective. It addresses issues around the consumers' trust of health information. An online questionnaire was used to gather the data. Over a period of three weeks more than 1,300 people responded to the online questionnaire produced by The British Life and Internet Project: 81 per cent or 997 of the respondents were from the UK. A major finding was that half the respondents believed only some or even none of the health information found on the web and 45 per cent said that they had found misleading health information. This was found to be truer for respondents who surfed around. Thus respondents who used five or more sites to inform them were more likely to have found misleading information. Finally, data are presented to show that data collected from another independent study, conducted on behalf of the Department of Health, come to many of the same conclusions.

1.75929E-4 = product of:
  0.0031667221 = sum of:
    0.0031667221 = weight(_text_:in in 2138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0031667221 = score(doc=2138,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.10626988 = fieldWeight in 2138, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2138)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Abstract

The Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia: anyone can contribute to its articles simply by clicking on an "edit'' button. The open nature of the Wikipedia has been key to its success, but has a flip side: if anyone can edit, how can readers know whether to trust its content? To help answer this question, we have developed a reputation system for Wikipedia authors, and a trust system for Wikipedia text. Authors gain reputation when their contributions are long-lived, and they lose reputation when their contributions are undone in short order. Each word in the Wikipedia is assigned a value of trust that depends on the reputation of its author, as well as on the reputation of the authors that subsequently revised the text where the word appears. To validate our algorithms, we show that reputation and trust have good predictive value: higher-reputation authors are more likely to give lasting contributions, and higher-trust text is less likely to be edited. The trust can be visualized via an intuitive coloring of the text background. The coloring provides an effective way of spotting attempts to tamper with Wikipedia information. A trust-colored version of the entire English Wikipedia can be browsed at http://trust.cse.ucsc.edu/

1.4928072E-4 = product of:
  0.0026870528 = sum of:
    0.0026870528 = weight(_text_:in in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0026870528 = score(doc=2889,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 2889, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2889)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Abstract

More than 100 U.S. governmental agencies offer links through FedStats, a centralized Web site that facilitates access to statistical tables, reports, and agencies. This and similar large collections need appropriate interfaces to guide the general public to easily and successfully find information they seek. This paper summarizes the results of 3 empirical studies of alternate organization concepts of the FedStats Topics Web page. Each study had 15 participants. The evolution from 645 alphabetically organized links, to 549 categorically organized links, to 215 categorically organized links tied to portal pages produced a steady rise in successful task completion from 15.6 to 24.4 to 42.2%. User satisfaction also increased. We make recommendations based an these data and our observations of users.

1.244006E-4 = product of:
  0.0022392108 = sum of:
    0.0022392108 = weight(_text_:in in 4508) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0022392108 = score(doc=4508,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.029798867 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.021906832 = queryNorm
        0.07514416 = fieldWeight in 4508, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4508)
  0.055555556 = coord(1/18)

Content

Key Features - Comprehensive and up-to-date (covering electronic sources and important legal developments, including civil procedure and human rights) - Covers the massive expansion of information an the web and online services - Practical and easy-to-use The Author The author has worked at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies and House of Lords Library in London. He currently works at the London Metropolitan University library. Readership The book is aimed at academic and law librarians. Lawyers and students will also find the book invaluable. Contents Introduction General and primary material - statutes, bills, statutory instruments, general law reports, finding tools, general legal journals, general legal web sites and online services Main subject areas (includes established texts and substantial works only; reference to the most important and electronic legal sources) - banking/financial services; civil procedure/courts/legal system; constitutional/ administrative/public law/human rights; criminal law; employment law; environmental law; equity and trusts; European Union law; family law; land law/property law; to rts Reference material - dictionaries, directories, research guides Main legal publishers Indexes-legal and author indexes