Search (90 results, page 2 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Literaturübersicht"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Priss, U.: Formal concept analysis in information science (2006) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 4305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=4305,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 4305, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4305)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 40(2006), S.xxx-xxx
  2. Foster, J.: Collaborative information seeking and retrieval (2006) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 4321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=4321,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 4321, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4321)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 40(2006), S.xxx-xxx
  3. Case, D.: Information seeking (2006) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 4326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=4326,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 4326, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4326)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 40(2006), S.xxx-xxx
  4. Burke, C.: History of information science (2007) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 4694) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=4694,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 4694, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4694)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
  5. Jones, W.: Personal information management (2007) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 5382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=5382,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 5382, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5382)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
  6. Bearman, D.: Digital libraries (2007) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 5634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=5634,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 5634, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5634)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
    Theme
    Information Gateway
  7. Jacob, E.; Loehrlein, A.: Information architecture (2009) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 5831) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=5831,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 5831, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5831)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 43(2009), S.xxx-xxx
  8. Courtright, C.: Context in information behavior research (2007) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 6090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=6090,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 6090, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6090)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 41(2007), S.xxx-xxx
  9. Wilson, T.D.: Activity theory and information seeking (2008) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 701) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=701,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 701, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=701)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 42(2008), S.xxx-xxx
  10. Fisher, K.; Julien, H.: Information behavior (2009) 0.01
    0.009710376 = product of:
      0.038841505 = sum of:
        0.038841505 = weight(_text_:information in 4122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038841505 = score(doc=4122,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.43886948 = fieldWeight in 4122, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4122)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 43(2009), S.xxx-xxx
  11. Cornelius, I.: Theorizing information for information science (2002) 0.01
    0.009258933 = product of:
      0.037035733 = sum of:
        0.037035733 = weight(_text_:information in 4244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037035733 = score(doc=4244,freq=76.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.4184661 = fieldWeight in 4244, product of:
              8.717798 = tf(freq=76.0), with freq of:
                76.0 = termFreq=76.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4244)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Does information science have a theory of information? There seems to be a tendency within information science to seek a theory of information, but the search is apparently unproductive (Hjoerland, 1998; Saracevic, 1999). This review brings together work from inside and outside the field of information science, showing that other perspectives an information theory could be of assistance. Constructivist claims that emphasize the uniqueness of the individual experience of information, maintaining that there is no information independent of our social practices (Cornelius, 1996a), are also mentioned. Such a position would be echoed in a symbolic interactionist approach. Conventionally, the history of attempts to develop a theory of information date from the publication of Claude Shannon's work in 1948, and his joint publication of that work with an essay by Warren Weaver in 1949 (Shannon & Weaver, 1949/1963). Information science found itself alongside many other disciplines attempting to develop a theory of information (Machlup & Mansfield, 1983). From Weaver's essay stems the claim that the basic concepts of Shannon's mathematical theory of communication, which Shannon later referred to as a theory of information, can be applied in disciplines outside electrical engineering, even in the social sciences.
    Shannon provides a model whereby an information source selects a desired message, out of a set of possible messages, that is then formed into a signal. The signal is sent over the communication channel to a receiver, which then transforms the signal back to a message that is relayed to its destination (Shannon & Weaver, 1949/1963, p. 7). Problems connected with this model have remained with us. Some of the concepts are ambiguous; the identification of information with a process has spancelled the debate; the problems of measuring the amount of information, the relation of information to meaning, and questions about the truth value of information have remained. Balancing attention between the process and the act of receiving information, and deterrnining the character of the receiver, has also been the focus of work and debate. Information science has mined work from other disciplines involving information theory and has also produced its own theory. The desire for theory remains (Hjorland, 1998; Saracevic, 1999), but what theory will deliver is unclear. The distinction between data and information, or communication and information, is not of concern here. The convention that data, at some point of use, become information, and that information is transferred in a process of communication suffices for this discussion. Substitution of any of these terms is not a problem. More problematic is the relationship between information and knowledge. It seems accepted that at some point the data by perception, or selection, become information, which feeds and alters knowledge structures in a human recipient. What that process of alteration is, and its implications, remain problematic. This review considers the following questions: 1. What can be gleaned from the history of reviews of information in information science? 2. What current maps, guides, and surveys are available to elaborate our understanding of the issues? 3. Is there a parallel development of work outside information science an information theory of use to us? 4. Is there a dominant view of information within information science? 5. What can we say about issues like measurement, meaning, and misinformation? 6. Is there other current work of relevance that can assist attempts, in information science, to develop a theory of information?
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 36(2002), S.393-426
    Theme
    Information
  12. Vakkari, P.: Task-based information searching (2002) 0.01
    0.008539819 = product of:
      0.034159277 = sum of:
        0.034159277 = weight(_text_:information in 4288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034159277 = score(doc=4288,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.38596505 = fieldWeight in 4288, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4288)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The rationale for using information systems is to find information that helps us in our daily activities, be they tasks or interests. Systems are expected to support us in searching for and identifying useful information. Although the activities and tasks performed by humans generate information needs and searching, they have attracted little attention in studies of information searching. Such studies have concentrated an search tasks rather than the activities that trigger them. It is obvious that our understanding of information searching is only partial, if we are not able to connect aspects of searching to the related task. The expected contribution of information to the task is reflected in relevance assessments of the information items found, and in the search tactics and use of the system in general. Taking the task into account seems to be a necessary condition for understanding and explaining information searching, and, by extension, for effective systems design.
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.413-464
  13. Solomon, S.: Discovering information in context (2002) 0.01
    0.008539819 = product of:
      0.034159277 = sum of:
        0.034159277 = weight(_text_:information in 4294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034159277 = score(doc=4294,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.38596505 = fieldWeight in 4294, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4294)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter has three purposes: to illuminate the ways in which people discover, shape, or create information as part of their lives and work; to consider how the resources and rules of people's situations facilitate or limit discovery of information; and to introduce the idea of a sociotechnical systems design science that is founded in part an understanding the discovery of information in context. In addressing these purposes the chapter focuses an both theoretical and research works in information studies and related fields that shed light on information as something that is embedded in the fabric of people's lives and work. Thus, the discovery of information view presented here characterizes information as being constructed through involvement in life's activities, problems, tasks, and social and technological structures, as opposed to being independent and context free. Given this process view, discovering information entails engagement, reflection, learning, and action-all the behaviors that research subjects often speak of as making sense-above and beyond the traditional focus of the information studies field: seeking without consideration of connections across time.
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 36(2002), S.229-264
  14. Perez-Carballo, J.; Strzalkowski, T.: Natural language information retrieval : progress report (2000) 0.01
    0.00849658 = product of:
      0.03398632 = sum of:
        0.03398632 = weight(_text_:information in 6421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03398632 = score(doc=6421,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.3840108 = fieldWeight in 6421, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6421)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Information processing and management. 36(2000) no.1, S.155-205
  15. Rader, H.B.: Information literacy 1973-2002 : a selected literature review (2002) 0.01
    0.0083103 = product of:
      0.0332412 = sum of:
        0.0332412 = weight(_text_:information in 43) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0332412 = score(doc=43,freq=30.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.37559175 = fieldWeight in 43, product of:
              5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
                30.0 = termFreq=30.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=43)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    More than 5000 publications related to library user instruction and information literacy have been published and reviewed in the past thirty years. New developments in education and technology during the last two decades have affected user instruction and have led to the emergence of information literacy. Based on needs related to the rapid development of information technology and the evolving information society, librarians have begun teaching information skills to all types of users to ensure that they gain information fluency so they can become productive and effective information users both in the education environment and in the work environment. The number of publications related to user instruction and information literacy, like the field itself, show phenomenal growth during the past three decades as demonstrated by the fact that in 1973 twenty-eight publications were reviewed, and in 2002 more than 300 publications dealing with the topic of information literacy will be issued. It is noteworthy that in the last decade there has been a tremendous growth in publications related to information literacy globally. During the 1970s, publications indicate that user instruction activities were of concern primarily to librarians in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand. At the present time, publications indicate a major concern with information literacy not only in the countries mentioned above but also in China, Germany, Mexico, Scandinavia, Singapore, South Africa, South America, Spain, and others. On an annual hasis, the majority of the publications have addressed information literacy in academic libraries (60 percent) followed by publications related to information literacy instruction in school media centers (20 percent).
    Footnote
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft: Teaching and assessing information skills in the twenty-first century
  16. Lievrouw, A.A.; Farb, S.E.: Information and equity (2002) 0.01
    0.007724557 = product of:
      0.030898228 = sum of:
        0.030898228 = weight(_text_:information in 4243) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030898228 = score(doc=4243,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.34911853 = fieldWeight in 4243, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4243)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Inequities in information creation, production, distribution, and use are nothing new. Throughout human history some people have been more educated, better connected, more widely traveled, or more wellinformed than others. Until recently, relatively few have enjoyed the benefits of literacy, and even fewer could afford to own books. In the age of mass media, societies and social groups have varied dramatically in terms of their access to and uses of print, radio, television, film, telephone, and telegraph. What is new, however, is the growing attention being given to informational inequities in an increasingly information-driven global economy. Across disciplinary, national, and cultural boundaries, the widespread agreement is that the use of newer information and communication technologies (ICTs), particularly the Internet, has accelerated the production, circulation, and consumption of information in every form. But also a growing sense has arisen that ICTs have helped to exacerbate existing differences in information access and use, and may even have fostered new types of barriers. As Hess and Ostrom (2001, p. 45) point out, "Distributed digital technologies have the dual capacity to increase as well as restrict access to information."
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.499-540
    Theme
    Information
  17. Capurro, R.; Hjoerland, B.: ¬The concept of information (2002) 0.01
    0.007724557 = product of:
      0.030898228 = sum of:
        0.030898228 = weight(_text_:information in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030898228 = score(doc=5079,freq=72.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.34911853 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
              8.485281 = tf(freq=72.0), with freq of:
                72.0 = termFreq=72.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    The concept of information as we use it in everyday English, in the sense of knowledge communicated, plays a central role in contemporary society. The development and widespread use of computer networks since the end of World War II, and the emergence of information science as a discipline in the 1950s, are evidence of this focus. Although knowledge and its communication are basic phenomena of every human society, it is the rise of information technology and its global impacts that characterize ours as an information society. It is commonplace to consider information as a basic condition for economic development together with capital, labor, and raw material; but what makes information especially significant at present is its digital nature. The impact of information technology an the natural and social sciences in particular has made this everyday notion a highly controversial concept. Claude Shannon's (1948) "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" is a landmark work, referring to the common use of information with its semantic and pragmatic dimensions, while at the same time redefining the concept within an engineering framework. The fact that the concept of knowledge communication has been designated by the word information seems, prima facie, a linguistic happenstance. For a science like information science (IS), it is of course important how fundamental terms are defined; and in IS, as in other fields, the question of how to define information is often raised. This chapter is an attempt to review the status of the concept of information in IS, with reference also to interdisciplinary trends. In scientific discourse, theoretical concepts are not true or false elements or glimpses of some element of reality; rather, they are constructions designed to do a job in the best possible way. Different conceptions of fundamental terms like information are thus more or less fruitful, depending an the theories (and in the end, the practical actions) they are expected to support. In the opening section, we discuss the problem of defining terms from the perspective of the philosophy of science. The history of a word provides us with anecdotes that are tangential to the concept itself. But in our case, the use of the word information points to a specific perspective from which the concept of knowledge communication has been defined. This perspective includes such characteristics as novelty and relevante; i.e., it refers to the process of knowledge transformation, and particularly to selection and interpretation within a specific context. The discussion leads to the questions of why and when this meaning was designated with the word information. We will explore this history, and we believe that our results may help readers better understand the complexity of the concept with regard to its scientific definitions.
    Discussions about the concept of information in other disciplines are very important for IS because many theories and approaches in IS have their origins elsewhere (see the section "Information as an Interdisciplinary Concept" in this chapter). The epistemological concept of information brings into play nonhuman information processes, particularly in physics and biology. And vice versa: the psychic and sociological processes of selection and interpretation may be considered using objective parameters, leaving aside the semantic dimension, or more precisely, by considering objective or situational parameters of interpretation. This concept can be illustrated also in physical terms with regard to release mechanisms, as we suggest. Our overview of the concept of information in the natural sciences as well as in the humanities and social sciences cannot hope to be comprehensive. In most cases, we can refer only to fragments of theories. However, the reader may wish to follow the leads provided in the bibliography. Readers interested primarily in information science may derive most benefit from the section an "Information in Information Science," in which we offer a detailed explanation of diverse views and theories of information within our field; supplementing the recent ARIST chapter by Cornelius (2002). We show that the introduction of the concept of information circa 1950 to the domain of special librarianship and documentation has in itself had serious consequences for the types of knowledge and theories developed in our field. The important question is not only what meaning we give the term in IS, but also how it relates to other basic terms, such as documents, texts, and knowledge. Starting with an objectivist view from the world of information theory and cybernetics, information science has turned to the phenomena of relevance and interpretation as basic aspects of the concept of information. This change is in no way a turn to a subjectivist theory, but an appraisal of different perspectives that may determine in a particular context what is being considered as informative, be it a "thing" (Buckland, 1991b) or a document. Different concepts of information within information science reflect tensions between a subjective and an objective approach. The concept of interpretation or selection may be considered to be the bridge between these two poles. It is important, however, to consider the different professions involved with the interpretation and selection of knowledge. The most important thing in IS (as in information policy) is to consider information as a constitutive forte in society and, thus, recognize the teleological nature of information systems and services (Braman, 1989).
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.343-411
    Theme
    Information
  18. Bath, P.A.: Data mining in health and medical information (2003) 0.01
    0.0076767267 = product of:
      0.030706907 = sum of:
        0.030706907 = weight(_text_:information in 4263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030706907 = score(doc=4263,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.3469568 = fieldWeight in 4263, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4263)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Data mining (DM) is part of a process by which information can be extracted from data or databases and used to inform decision making in a variety of contexts (Benoit, 2002; Michalski, Bratka & Kubat, 1997). DM includes a range of tools and methods for extractiog information; their use in the commercial sector for knowledge extraction and discovery has been one of the main driving forces in their development (Adriaans & Zantinge, 1996; Benoit, 2002). DM has been developed and applied in numerous areas. This review describes its use in analyzing health and medical information.
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 38(2004), S.331-370
  19. Annual review of information science and technology (2001) 0.01
    0.0072827823 = product of:
      0.02913113 = sum of:
        0.02913113 = weight(_text_:information in 4686) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02913113 = score(doc=4686,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 4686, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4686)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Imprint
    Medford, NJ : Information Today
  20. Marsh, S.; Dibben, M.R.: ¬The role of trust in information science and technology (2002) 0.01
    0.0072827823 = product of:
      0.02913113 = sum of:
        0.02913113 = weight(_text_:information in 4289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02913113 = score(doc=4289,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.3291521 = fieldWeight in 4289, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4289)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter discusses the notion of trust as it relates to information science and technology, specifically user interfaces, autonomous agents, and information systems. We first present an in-depth discussion of the concept of trust in and of itself, moving an to applications and considerations of trust in relation to information technologies. We consider trust from a "soft" perspective-thus, although security concepts such as cryptography, virus protection, authentication, and so forth reinforce (or damage) the feelings of trust we may have in a system, they are not themselves constitutive of "trust." We discuss information technology from a human-centric viewpoint, where trust is a less well-structured but much more powerful phenomenon. With the proliferation of electronic commerce (e-commerce) and the World Wide Web (WWW, or Web), much has been made of the ability of individuals to explore the vast quantities of information available to them, to purchase goods (as diverse as vacations and cars) online, and to publish information an their personal Web sites.
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.465-498

Languages

  • e 89
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 86
  • b 7
  • m 3
  • el 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…