-
Ackermann, E.: Piaget's constructivism, Papert's constructionism : what's the difference? (2001)
0.26
0.26499715 = sum of:
0.26085937 = product of:
0.52171874 = sum of:
0.20357975 = weight(_text_:3a in 692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.20357975 = score(doc=692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.4346759 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 692, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=692)
0.31813902 = weight(_text_:2c in 692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.31813902 = score(doc=692,freq=2.0), product of:
0.5433839 = queryWeight, product of:
10.598275 = idf(docFreq=2, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.5854775 = fieldWeight in 692, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
10.598275 = idf(docFreq=2, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=692)
0.5 = coord(2/4)
0.0041377926 = product of:
0.008275585 = sum of:
0.008275585 = weight(_text_:e in 692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008275585 = score(doc=692,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.112294525 = fieldWeight in 692, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=692)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Vgl.: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Piaget-%E2%80%99-s-Constructivism-%2C-Papert-%E2%80%99-s-%3A-What-%E2%80%99-s-Ackermann/89cbcc1e740a4591443ff4765a6ae8df0fdf5554. Darunter weitere Hinweise auf verwandte Beiträge. Auch unter: Learning Group Publication 5(2001) no.3, S.438.
- Language
- e
-
McFadden, T.: Editors on indexes (1993)
0.14
0.1393521 = sum of:
0.12764865 = product of:
0.5105946 = sum of:
0.5105946 = weight(_text_:editors in 7633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.5105946 = score(doc=7633,freq=2.0), product of:
0.34419647 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
1.4834394 = fieldWeight in 7633, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=7633)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.011703446 = product of:
0.023406891 = sum of:
0.023406891 = weight(_text_:e in 7633) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023406891 = score(doc=7633,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.31761688 = fieldWeight in 7633, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=7633)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
-
Frame, A.: Indexers and publishers : their views on indexers and indexing (1996)
0.12
0.12230051 = sum of:
0.11820431 = product of:
0.47281724 = sum of:
0.47281724 = weight(_text_:editors in 3736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.47281724 = score(doc=3736,freq=14.0), product of:
0.34419647 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
1.3736842 = fieldWeight in 3736, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3736)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.004096206 = product of:
0.008192412 = sum of:
0.008192412 = weight(_text_:e in 3736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008192412 = score(doc=3736,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.1111659 = fieldWeight in 3736, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3736)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Presents a summary of the results of a 1995 questionnaire survey of UK indexers and editors, focusing on work practices, relations between editors and indexers, editors' and editors' expectations, and the value placed on various characteristics of indexers and indexing. Data from 146 indexers and 123 editors was analysed on the following topics: subject area covered, number of years working as indexers, hours spent on indexing, ages of indexers, reasons why indexers index, payment for indexing, how editors find and choose indexers and how indexers find work, the relationship between editors and the Society of Indexers, indexers' qualifications and training, qualitites that make a good indexer, editor's opinions of indexers and indexing, important elements in producing a good index, and indexers and computers. discusses areas worthy of further investigation as highlighted by the survey results
- Language
- e
-
Frame, A.: Indexers and publishers : their views on indexers and indexing (1996)
0.12
0.118394814 = sum of:
0.11488378 = product of:
0.45953512 = sum of:
0.45953512 = weight(_text_:editors in 3737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.45953512 = score(doc=3737,freq=18.0), product of:
0.34419647 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
1.3350954 = fieldWeight in 3737, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3737)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0035110335 = product of:
0.007022067 = sum of:
0.007022067 = weight(_text_:e in 3737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007022067 = score(doc=3737,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 3737, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3737)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Second of 2 articles reporting the results of a 1995 questionnaire survey of UK indexers and editors, focusing on work practices, relations between editors and indexers, editors' and editors' expectations, and the value placed on various characteristics of indexers and indexing. Data from 146 indexers and 123 editors was analysed on the following topics: complexity of the index and satisfaction with the index produced; instruction given to indexers; problems with the index; editors' judgement of the acceptability of the index; why the index was remembered; and whether editors would use the indexers again. While a high level of satisfaction with the indexes produced on the part of both editors and indexers was reported, results would seem to indicate that sending written instructions to indexers before the proofs are sent gives the lowest percentage of problems with the finished index. Suggests taht editors should consistently tell indexers of any problems to enable indexers to correct what goes wrong
- Language
- e
-
Hotho, A.; Bloehdorn, S.: Data Mining 2004 : Text classification by boosting weak learners based on terms and concepts (2004)
0.11
0.10977505 = sum of:
0.061073925 = product of:
0.2442957 = sum of:
0.2442957 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.2442957 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.4346759 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.048701126 = sum of:
0.007022067 = weight(_text_:e in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007022067 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
0.04167906 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04167906 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
- Content
- Vgl.: http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CEAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.91.4940%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ei=dOXrUMeIDYHDtQahsIGACg&usg=AFQjCNHFWVh6gNPvnOrOS9R3rkrXCNVD-A&sig2=5I2F5evRfMnsttSgFF9g7Q&bvm=bv.1357316858,d.Yms.
- Date
- 8. 1.2013 10:22:32
- Language
- e
-
McIlwaine, I.C.: UDC: the present state and future prospects (1995)
0.10
0.10149501 = sum of:
0.044677034 = product of:
0.17870814 = sum of:
0.17870814 = weight(_text_:editors in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17870814 = score(doc=1899,freq=2.0), product of:
0.34419647 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.51920384 = fieldWeight in 1899, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1899)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.05681798 = sum of:
0.008192412 = weight(_text_:e in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008192412 = score(doc=1899,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.1111659 = fieldWeight in 1899, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1899)
0.048625566 = weight(_text_:22 in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048625566 = score(doc=1899,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1899, 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=1899)
- Abstract
- Survey on the activities going to develop the UDC into a fully faceted classification system according to the Recommendations of the UDC Management Board. A Master Reference File (MRF) has been created from which any publisher or insitution may develop its own versions according to the requests of its clientele. The UDC Technical Director at the FID Headquarters in The Hague maintains the file. An Editorial Board and an Editor in Chief was appointed. Extensions and Corrections are being published. Examples are given on ongoing revision work in the classes for Astronomy, Linguistics and Philology as well as in Medicine. Cooperation with the Editors of the Bliss Classification and the DDC exists
- Language
- e
- Source
- Knowledge organization. 22(1995) no.2, S.64-69
-
Gödert, W.; Hubrich, J.; Boteram, F.: Thematische Recherche und Interoperabilität : Wege zur Optimierung des Zugriffs auf heterogen erschlossene Dokumente (2009)
0.10
0.09690103 = sum of:
0.079534754 = product of:
0.31813902 = sum of:
0.31813902 = weight(_text_:2c in 193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.31813902 = score(doc=193,freq=2.0), product of:
0.5433839 = queryWeight, product of:
10.598275 = idf(docFreq=2, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.5854775 = fieldWeight in 193, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
10.598275 = idf(docFreq=2, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=193)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.017366275 = product of:
0.03473255 = sum of:
0.03473255 = weight(_text_:22 in 193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03473255 = score(doc=193,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 193, 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=193)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-bib-info/frontdoor/index/index/searchtype/authorsearch/author/%22Hubrich%2C+Jessica%22/docId/703/start/0/rows/20
-
Garcia-Barriocanal, E.; Sicilia, M.A.; Sanchez-Alonso, S.: Usability evaluation of ontology editors (2005)
0.09
0.09059467 = sum of:
0.08562932 = product of:
0.3425173 = sum of:
0.3425173 = weight(_text_:editors in 3084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.3425173 = score(doc=3084,freq=10.0), product of:
0.34419647 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.9951215 = fieldWeight in 3084, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3084)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0049653514 = product of:
0.009930703 = sum of:
0.009930703 = weight(_text_:e in 3084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009930703 = score(doc=3084,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.13475344 = fieldWeight in 3084, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3084)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Ontology editors are software tools that allow the creation and maintenance of ontologies through a graphical user interface. As the semantic web effort grows, a larger community of users for this kind of tool is expected. New users include people not specifically skilled in the use of ontology formalisms. In consequence, the usability of ontology editors can be viewed as a key adoption precondition for semantic web technologies. In this paper, the usability evaluation of several representative ontology editors is described. This evaluation is carried out by combining a heuristic pre-assessment with a subsequent usertesting phase. The target population is comprised of people with no specific ontology-creation skills that have a general knowledge about domain modelling. For this kind of user, current editors are adequate for the creation and maintenance of simple ontologies. Also, there is room for improvement, especially in browsing mechanisms, help systems, and visualization metaphors.
- Language
- e
-
Jascó, P.: Searching for images by similarity online (1998)
0.09
0.087953545 = product of:
0.17590709 = sum of:
0.17590709 = sum of:
0.018725513 = weight(_text_:e in 393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018725513 = score(doc=393,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.2540935 = fieldWeight in 393, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=393)
0.15718158 = weight(_text_:22 in 393) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15718158 = score(doc=393,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.8754574 = fieldWeight in 393, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=393)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 29.11.2004 13:03:22
- Language
- e
- Source
- Online. 22(1998) no.6, S.99-102
-
Hawking, D.; Robertson, S.: On collection size and retrieval effectiveness (2003)
0.09
0.087953545 = product of:
0.17590709 = sum of:
0.17590709 = sum of:
0.018725513 = weight(_text_:e in 4109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018725513 = score(doc=4109,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.2540935 = fieldWeight in 4109, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4109)
0.15718158 = weight(_text_:22 in 4109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.15718158 = score(doc=4109,freq=4.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.8754574 = fieldWeight in 4109, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4109)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 14. 8.2005 14:22:22
- Language
- e
-
Campanario, J.M.: Have referees rejected some of the most-cited articles of all times? (1996)
0.09
0.08699572 = sum of:
0.0382946 = product of:
0.1531784 = sum of:
0.1531784 = weight(_text_:editors in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1531784 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.34419647 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.44503185 = fieldWeight in 4215, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4215)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.048701126 = sum of:
0.007022067 = weight(_text_:e in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007022067 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 4215, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4215)
0.04167906 = weight(_text_:22 in 4215) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04167906 = score(doc=4215,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4215, 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=4215)
- Abstract
- In this article a quantitative study is reported on the resistance that scientists may encounter when they do innovative work or when they attempt to publish articles that later become highly cited. A set of 205 commentaries by authors of some of the most-cited papers of all times have been examined in order to identify those articles whose authors encountered difficulty in getting his or her work published. There are 22 commentaries (10,7%) in which authors mention some difficulty or resistance in doing or publishing the research reported in the article. Three of the articles which had problems in being published are the most cited from their respective journals. According the authors' commentaries, although sometimes referees' negative evaluations can help improve the articles, in other instances referees and editors wrongly rejected the highly cited articles
- Language
- e
-
Pepermans, G.; Rousseau, S.: ¬The decision to submit to a journal : another example of a valence-consistent shift? (2016)
0.09
0.08699572 = sum of:
0.0382946 = product of:
0.1531784 = sum of:
0.1531784 = weight(_text_:editors in 2925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1531784 = score(doc=2925,freq=2.0), product of:
0.34419647 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.44503185 = fieldWeight in 2925, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2925)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.048701126 = sum of:
0.007022067 = weight(_text_:e in 2925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007022067 = score(doc=2925,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 2925, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2925)
0.04167906 = weight(_text_:22 in 2925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04167906 = score(doc=2925,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2925, 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=2925)
- Abstract
- In this article we use a stated choice experiment to study researcher preferences in the information sciences and to investigate the relative importance of different journal characteristics in convincing potential authors to submit to a particular journal. The analysis distinguishes high quality from standard quality articles and focuses on the question whether communicating acceptance rates rather than rejection rates leads to other submission decisions. Our results show that a positive framing effect might be present when authors decide on submitting a high quality article. No evidence of a framing effect is found when authors consider a standard quality article. From a journal marketing perspective, this is important information for editors. Communicating acceptance rates rather than rejection rates might help to convince researchers to submit to their journal.
- Date
- 7. 5.2016 20:02:22
- Language
- e
-
Popper, K.R.: Three worlds : the Tanner lecture on human values. Deliverd at the University of Michigan, April 7, 1978 (1978)
0.09
0.08611328 = sum of:
0.0814319 = product of:
0.3257276 = sum of:
0.3257276 = weight(_text_:3a in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.3257276 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
0.4346759 = queryWeight, product of:
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.004681378 = product of:
0.009362756 = sum of:
0.009362756 = weight(_text_:e in 230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009362756 = score(doc=230,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.12704675 = fieldWeight in 230, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=230)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
- Source
- https%3A%2F%2Ftannerlectures.utah.edu%2F_documents%2Fa-to-z%2Fp%2Fpopper80.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3f4QRTEH-OEBmoYr2J_c7H
-
Dahlberg, I.: Conceptual definitions for INTERCONCEPT (1981)
0.08
0.08116855 = product of:
0.1623371 = sum of:
0.1623371 = sum of:
0.023406891 = weight(_text_:e in 1630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023406891 = score(doc=1630,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.31761688 = fieldWeight in 1630, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=1630)
0.1389302 = weight(_text_:22 in 1630) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1389302 = score(doc=1630,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 1630, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=1630)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
- Source
- International classification. 8(1981), S.16-22
-
Pietris, M.K.D.: LCSH update (1988)
0.08
0.08116855 = product of:
0.1623371 = sum of:
0.1623371 = sum of:
0.023406891 = weight(_text_:e in 2798) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023406891 = score(doc=2798,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.31761688 = fieldWeight in 2798, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=2798)
0.1389302 = weight(_text_:22 in 2798) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1389302 = score(doc=2798,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 2798, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=2798)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
- Source
- Cataloguing Australia. 13(1988), S.19-22
-
Woods, W.A.: What's important about knowledge representation? (1983)
0.08
0.08116855 = product of:
0.1623371 = sum of:
0.1623371 = sum of:
0.023406891 = weight(_text_:e in 6143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023406891 = score(doc=6143,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.31761688 = fieldWeight in 6143, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=6143)
0.1389302 = weight(_text_:22 in 6143) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1389302 = score(doc=6143,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 6143, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=6143)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
- Source
- Computer. 16(1983) no.10, S.22-27
-
Smith, G.: Newspapers on CD-ROM (1992)
0.08
0.08116855 = product of:
0.1623371 = sum of:
0.1623371 = sum of:
0.023406891 = weight(_text_:e in 6396) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023406891 = score(doc=6396,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.31761688 = fieldWeight in 6396, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=6396)
0.1389302 = weight(_text_:22 in 6396) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1389302 = score(doc=6396,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.77380234 = fieldWeight in 6396, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=6396)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Language
- e
- Source
- Serials. 5(1992) no.3, S.17-22
-
García, J.A.; Rodriguez-Sánchez, R.; Fdez-Valdivia, J.: Bias and effort in peer review (2015)
0.08
0.08010023 = sum of:
0.0765892 = product of:
0.3063568 = sum of:
0.3063568 = weight(_text_:editors in 2121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.3063568 = score(doc=2121,freq=8.0), product of:
0.34419647 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.8900637 = fieldWeight in 2121, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2121)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0035110335 = product of:
0.007022067 = sum of:
0.007022067 = weight(_text_:e in 2121) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007022067 = score(doc=2121,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.09528506 = fieldWeight in 2121, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2121)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Here, we develop a theory of the relationship between the reviewer's effort and bias in peer review. From this theory, it follows that journal editors might employ biased reviewers because they shirk less. This creates an incentive for the editor to use monitoring mechanisms (e.g., associate editors supervising the peer review process) that mitigate the resulting bias in the reviewers' recommendations. The supervision of associate editors could encourage journal editors to employ more extreme reviewers. This theory helps to explain the presence of bias in peer review. To mitigate shirking by a reviewer, the journal editor may assign biased referees to generate information about the manuscript's quality and subject the reviewer's recommendations to supervision by a more aligned associate editor.
- Language
- e
-
Buzydlowski, J.W.; White, H.D.; Lin, X.: Term Co-occurrence Analysis as an Interface for Digital Libraries (2002)
0.08
0.079212315 = product of:
0.15842463 = sum of:
0.15842463 = sum of:
0.014044134 = weight(_text_:e in 1339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014044134 = score(doc=1339,freq=2.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.19057012 = fieldWeight in 1339, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1339)
0.1443805 = weight(_text_:22 in 1339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1443805 = score(doc=1339,freq=6.0), product of:
0.17954223 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.804159 = fieldWeight in 1339, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1339)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 2.2003 17:25:39
22. 2.2003 18:16:22
- Language
- e
-
Garfield, E.: When to cite (1996)
0.08
0.07882945 = sum of:
0.072208986 = product of:
0.28883594 = sum of:
0.28883594 = weight(_text_:editors in 7080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.28883594 = score(doc=7080,freq=4.0), product of:
0.34419647 = queryWeight, product of:
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.8391601 = fieldWeight in 7080, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
6.7132807 = idf(docFreq=145, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7080)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.0066204686 = product of:
0.013240937 = sum of:
0.013240937 = weight(_text_:e in 7080) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013240937 = score(doc=7080,freq=4.0), product of:
0.07369536 = queryWeight, product of:
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.051270977 = queryNorm
0.17967124 = fieldWeight in 7080, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.43737 = idf(docFreq=28552, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7080)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In spite of numerous studies of citation behaviour and the wide recognition by journal editors of the need to acknowledge intellectual debts, authors and referees need explicit reminders as to when formal refrences or acknowledgements are appropriate. Notes a 3 year experiment involving graduate students which demonstrated the varying perceptions of the need for documentation off terminology, ideas and methods. Suggests a tentative tutorial for journal editors that should be modified in each scholarly context
- Language
- e
