Search (2455 results, page 1 of 123)

0.28559428 = sum of:
  0.2651189 = product of:
    0.5302378 = sum of:
      0.20690393 = weight(_text_:3a in 692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.20690393 = score(doc=692,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.44177356 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = 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)
      0.32333383 = weight(_text_:2c in 692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.32333383 = score(doc=692,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.55225664 = queryWeight, product of:
            10.598275 = idf(docFreq=2, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = 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)
  0.020475375 = product of:
    0.04095075 = sum of:
      0.04095075 = weight(_text_:i in 692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04095075 = score(doc=692,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.20836058 = fieldWeight in 692, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=692)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

What is the difference between Piaget's constructivism and Papert's "constructionism"? Beyond the mere play on the words, I think the distinction holds, and that integrating both views can enrich our understanding of how people learn and grow. Piaget's constructivism offers a window into what children are interested in, and able to achieve, at different stages of their development. The theory describes how children's ways of doing and thinking evolve over time, and under which circumstance children are more likely to let go of-or hold onto- their currently held views. Piaget suggests that children have very good reasons not to abandon their worldviews just because someone else, be it an expert, tells them they're wrong. Papert's constructionism, in contrast, focuses more on the art of learning, or 'learning to learn', and on the significance of making things in learning. Papert is interested in how learners engage in a conversation with [their own or other people's] artifacts, and how these conversations boost self-directed learning, and ultimately facilitate the construction of new knowledge. He stresses the importance of tools, media, and context in human development. Integrating both perspectives illuminates the processes by which individuals come to make sense of their experience, gradually optimizing their interactions with the world.

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.

0.111021064 = sum of:
  0.010469419 = product of:
    0.041877676 = sum of:
      0.041877676 = weight(_text_:authors in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041877676 = score(doc=1429,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.17628889 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.10055164 = sum of:
    0.07584187 = weight(_text_:i in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07584187 = score(doc=1429,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.38588926 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
    0.024709776 = weight(_text_:22 in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024709776 = score(doc=1429,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)

Abstract

Pauline Atherton Cochrane has been contributing to library and information science for fifty years. Think of it-from mid-century to the millennium, from ENIAC (practically) to Internet 11 (almost here). What a time to be in our field! Her work an indexing, subject access, and the user-oriented approach had immediate and sustained impact, and she continues to be one of our most heavily cited authors (see, JASIS, 49[4], 327-55) and most beloved personages. This introduction includes a few words about my own experiences with Pauline as well as a short summary of the contributions that make up this tribute. A review of the curriculum vita provided at the end of this publication Shows that Pauline Cochrane has been involved in a wide variety of work. As Marcia Bates points out in her note (See below), Pauline was (and is) a role model, but I will always think of her as simply the best teacher 1 ever had. In 1997, I entered the University of Illinois Graduate School of Library and Information Science as a returning mid-life student; my previous doctorate had not led to a full-time job and I was re-tooling. I was not sure what 1 would find in library school, and the introductory course attended by more than 100 students from widely varied backgrounds had not yet convinced me I was in the right place. Then, one day, Pauline gave a guest lecture an the digital library in my introductory class. I still remember it. She put up some notes-a few words clustered an the blackboard with some circles and directional arrows-and then she gave a free, seemingly extemporaneous, but riveting narrative. She set out a vision for ideal information exchange in the digital environment but noted a host of practical concerns, issues, and potential problems that required (demanded!) continued human intervention. The lecture brought that class and the entire semester's work into focus; it created tremendous excitement for the future of librarianship. 1 saw that librarians and libraries would play an active role. I was in the right place.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.098483294 = sum of:
  0.08083346 = product of:
    0.32333383 = sum of:
      0.32333383 = weight(_text_:2c in 193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.32333383 = score(doc=193,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.55225664 = queryWeight, product of:
            10.598275 = idf(docFreq=2, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = 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)
  0.01764984 = product of:
    0.03529968 = sum of:
      0.03529968 = weight(_text_:22 in 193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03529968 = score(doc=193,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = 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

0.09150052 = product of:
  0.18300104 = sum of:
    0.18300104 = sum of:
      0.09828181 = weight(_text_:i in 1994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09828181 = score(doc=1994,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.50006545 = fieldWeight in 1994, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1994)
      0.08471923 = weight(_text_:22 in 1994) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08471923 = score(doc=1994,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1994, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1994)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Erwiderung auf: Graham, L.R.: Do mathematical equations display social attributes? in: Mathematical intelligencer 22(2000) no.3, S.31-36

0.09150052 = product of:
  0.18300104 = sum of:
    0.18300104 = sum of:
      0.09828181 = weight(_text_:i in 6465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09828181 = score(doc=6465,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.50006545 = fieldWeight in 6465, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6465)
      0.08471923 = weight(_text_:22 in 6465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08471923 = score(doc=6465,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6465, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6465)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

11. 8.2001 17:22:42

0.091206744 = sum of:
  0.014956313 = product of:
    0.059825253 = sum of:
      0.059825253 = weight(_text_:authors in 2737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059825253 = score(doc=2737,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 2737, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2737)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.076250434 = sum of:
    0.04095075 = weight(_text_:i in 2737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04095075 = score(doc=2737,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.20836058 = fieldWeight in 2737, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2737)
    0.03529968 = weight(_text_:22 in 2737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03529968 = score(doc=2737,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2737, 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=2737)

Abstract

To date, there has been little empirical research investigating the specific types of help-seeking situations that arise when people interact with information in new searching environments such as digital libraries. This article reports the results of a project focusing on the identification of different types of help-seeking situations, along with types of factors that precipitate them among searchers of two different digital libraries. Participants (N = 120) representing the general public in Milwaukee and New York City were selected for this study. Based on the analysis of multiple sources of data, the authors identify 15 types of help-seeking situations among this sample of novice digital library users. These situations are related to the searching activities involved in getting started, identifying relevant digital collections, browsing for information, constructing search statements, refining searches, monitoring searches, and evaluating results. Multiple factors that determine the occurrences of each type of help-seeking situation also are identified. The article concludes with a model that represents user, system, task, and interaction outcome as codeterminates in the formation of help-seeking situations, and presents the theoretical and practical implications of the study results.

Date

22. 3.2009 12:49:20

0.08775501 = sum of:
  0.026754666 = product of:
    0.107018664 = sum of:
      0.107018664 = weight(_text_:authors in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.107018664 = score(doc=5171,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.45050737 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.061000347 = sum of:
    0.0327606 = weight(_text_:i in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0327606 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.16668847 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)
    0.028239746 = weight(_text_:22 in 5171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028239746 = score(doc=5171,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5171, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5171)

Abstract

Ahlgren, Jarneving, and. Rousseau review accepted procedures for author co-citation analysis first pointing out that since in the raw data matrix the row and column values are identical i,e, the co-citation count of two authors, there is no clear choice for diagonal values. They suggest the number of times an author has been co-cited with himself excluding self citation rather than the common treatment as zeros or as missing values. When the matrix is converted to a similarity matrix the normal procedure is to create a matrix of Pearson's r coefficients between data vectors. Ranking by r and by co-citation frequency and by intuition can easily yield three different orders. It would seem necessary that the adding of zeros to the matrix will not affect the value or the relative order of similarity measures but it is shown that this is not the case with Pearson's r. Using 913 bibliographic descriptions form the Web of Science of articles form JASIS and Scientometrics, authors names were extracted, edited and 12 information retrieval authors and 12 bibliometric authors each from the top 100 most cited were selected. Co-citation and r value (diagonal elements treated as missing) matrices were constructed, and then reconstructed in expanded form. Adding zeros can both change the r value and the ordering of the authors based upon that value. A chi-squared distance measure would not violate these requirements, nor would the cosine coefficient. It is also argued that co-citation data is ordinal data since there is no assurance of an absolute zero number of co-citations, and thus Pearson is not appropriate. The number of ties in co-citation data make the use of the Spearman rank order coefficient problematic.

Date

9. 7.2006 10:22:35

0.085036054 = sum of:
  0.03589515 = product of:
    0.1435806 = sum of:
      0.1435806 = weight(_text_:authors in 1031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1435806 = score(doc=1031,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.60441905 = fieldWeight in 1031, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1031)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.049140904 = product of:
    0.09828181 = sum of:
      0.09828181 = weight(_text_:i in 1031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09828181 = score(doc=1031,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.50006545 = fieldWeight in 1031, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1031)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Teil eines Themenheftes: OCLC and the Internet: An Historical Overview of Research Activities, 1990-1999 - Part I

0.083250985 = sum of:
  0.062071178 = product of:
    0.24828471 = sum of:
      0.24828471 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.24828471 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.44177356 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = 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)
  0.021179808 = product of:
    0.042359617 = sum of:
      0.042359617 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042359617 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = 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)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

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

0.080054946 = sum of:
  0.014805994 = product of:
    0.059223976 = sum of:
      0.059223976 = weight(_text_:authors in 1475) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.059223976 = score(doc=1475,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.24931014 = fieldWeight in 1475, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1475)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.06524895 = sum of:
    0.040539175 = weight(_text_:i in 1475) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040539175 = score(doc=1475,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.20626646 = fieldWeight in 1475, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1475)
    0.024709776 = weight(_text_:22 in 1475) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024709776 = score(doc=1475,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1475, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1475)

Content

Inhalt: 1. Library Catalogue : Its Nature, Factions, and Importance in a Library System 2. History of Modern Library Catalogues 3. Catalogue Codes: Origin, Growth and Development 4. Principles of Planning and Provision of the Library Catalogue 5.Catalogue Entries and their Functions in Achieving the Objectives of the Library Catalogue 6.Descriptive Cataloguing 7. Physical Forms of the Catalogue-I Manual Catalogues 8. Physical Forms of the Catalogues-II Computerised Cataloges 9. Varieties of Catalogues, their Scope and Functions 10. Subject Cataloguing 11. Cataloguing Department: Organization and Administration. 12. Cost Analysis of Cataloguing Procedures and Suggested Economies 13. Co-operation and Centralization in Cataloguing 14. Union Catalogues and Subject Specialisation 15. Cataloguing of Special Material 16. Arrangement, Filing, Guiding of catalogue and Instructions for its Use 17. Education and Training of Cataloguers 18.Documentation : An Extension of Cataloguing and Classification Applied to Isolates 19.Catalogue Cards, Their Style and Reproduction Methods 20. Work of Personal Authors 21. Choice and Entry of Personal Names 22. Works of Corporate Authors 23. Legal Publications 24. Choice of Headings for Corporate Bodies 25. Works of Unknown Authorship : Entry under Uniform Titles 26. Acces Points to Books and Meta- Books by A-ACR2 27. AACR2 1988 revision : Choice of Access Points to Name Headings and Uniform Titles 28. Added Entries Other Than Subject Entries 29. Subject Entries 30. Analytiacal Entries 31. Series Note and Series Entry 32. Contents, Notes and Annotation 33. References 34. Display of Entries Appendix-I Select Aids and Guides for the Cataloguer Appendix-II Definitions of Terms Commonly used in Cataloguing Appendix-III Cataloguing Examination: Select Questions Appendix-IV Implications of the adoption of A-ACR2

0.07791647 = sum of:
  0.024802241 = product of:
    0.099208966 = sum of:
      0.099208966 = weight(_text_:authors in 1833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.099208966 = score(doc=1833,freq=22.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41763154 = fieldWeight in 1833, product of:
            4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
              22.0 = termFreq=22.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1833)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.053114235 = sum of:
    0.035464395 = weight(_text_:i in 1833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035464395 = score(doc=1833,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.18044558 = fieldWeight in 1833, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1833)
    0.01764984 = weight(_text_:22 in 1833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01764984 = score(doc=1833,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05210816 = queryNorm
        0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 1833, 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=1833)

Content

Inhalt: Chapters 2 to 5: Scopes, Domains, and Display Media (pp. 47-102) Chapters 6 to 8: Documents, Analysis, and Indexing (pp. 103-176) Chapters 9 to 10: Exhaustivity and Specificity (pp. 177-196) Chapters 11 to 13: Displayed/Nondisplayed Indexes, Syntax, and Vocabulary Management (pp. 197-364) Chapters 14 to 16: Surrogation, Locators, and Surrogate Displays (pp. 365-390) Chapters 17 and 18: Arrangement and Size of Displayed Indexes (pp. 391-446) Chapters 19 to 21: Search Interface, Record Format, and Full-Text Display (pp. 447-536) Chapter 22: Implementation and Evaluation (pp. 537-541)

Footnote

Rez. in JASIST 57(2006) no.10, S.1412-1413 (R. W. White): "Information Retrieval Design is a textbook that aims to foster the intelligent user-centered design of databases for Information Retrieval (IR). The book outlines a comprehensive set of 20 factors. chosen based on prior research and the authors' experiences. that need to he considered during the design process. The authors provide designers with information on those factors to help optimize decision making. The book does not cover user-needs assessment, implementation of IR databases, or retries al systems, testing. or evaluation. Most textbooks in IR do not offer a substantive walkthrough of the design factors that need to be considered Mien des eloping IR databases. Instead. they focus on issues such as the implementation of data structures, the explanation of search algorithms, and the role of human-machine interaction in the search process. The book touches on all three, but its focus is on designing databases that can be searched effectively. not the tools to search them. This is an important distinction: despite its title. this book does not describe how to build retrieval systems. Professor Anderson utilizes his wealth of experience in cataloging and classification to bring a unique perspective on IR database design that may be useful for novices. for developers seeking to make sense of the design process, and for students as a text to supplement classroom tuition. The foreword and preface. by Jessica Milstead and James Anderson. respectively, are engaging and worthwhile reading. It is astounding that it has taken some 20 years for anyone to continue the stork of Milstead and write as extensively as Anderson does about such an important issue as IR database design. The remainder of the book is divided into two parts: Introduction and Background Issues and Design Decisions. Part 1 is a reasonable introduction and includes a glossary of the terminology that authors use in the book. It is very helpful to have these definitions early on. but the subject descriptors in the right margin are distracting and do not serve their purpose as access points to the text. The terminology is useful to have. as the authors definitions of concepts do not lit exactly with what is traditionally accepted in IR. For example. they use the term 'message' to icier to what would normally be called .'document" or "information object." and do not do a good job at distinguishing between "messages" and "documentary units". Part 2 describes components and attributes of 1R databases to help designers make design choices. The book provides them with information about the potential ramifications of their decisions and advocates a user-oriented approach to making them. Chapters are arranged in a seemingly sensible order based around these factors. and the authors remind us of the importance of integrating them. The authors are skilled at selecting the important factors in the development of seemingly complex entities, such as IR databases: how es er. the integration of these factors. or the interaction between them. is not handled as well as perhaps should be. Factors are presented in the order in which the authors feel then should be addressed. but there is no chapter describing how the factors interact. The authors miss an opportunity at the beginning of Part 2 where they could illustrate using a figure the interactions between the 20 factors they list in a way that is not possible with the linear structure of the book.
. . . Those interested in using the book to design IR databases can work through the chapters in the order provided and end up with a set of requirements for database design. The steps outlined in this book can be rearranged in numerous orders depending on the particular circumstances. This book would benefit from a discussion of what orders are appropriate for different circumstances and bow the requirements outlined interact. I come away from Information Retrieval Design with mixed, although mainly positive feelings. Even though the aims of this book are made clear from the outset, it was still a disappointment to see issues such as implementation and evaluation covered in only a cursory manner. The book is very well structured. well written, and operates in a part of the space that bas been neglected for too long. The authors whet my appetite with discussion of design, and I would have liked to have heard a bit more about what happens in requirements' elicitation before the design issues base been identified and to impIementation after they have been addressed. Overall, the book is a comprehensive review of previous research supplemented by the authors' views on IR design. This book focuses on breadth of coverage rather than depth of coverage and is therefore potentially of more use to novices in the field. The writing style is clear, and the authors knowledge of the subject area is undoubted. I wouId recommend this book to anyone who wants to learn about IR database design and take advantage of the experience and insights of Anderson, one of tile visionaries it the field."

0.076250434 = product of:
  0.15250087 = sum of:
    0.15250087 = sum of:
      0.0819015 = weight(_text_:i in 198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0819015 = score(doc=198,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 198, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=198)
      0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07059936 = score(doc=198,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 198, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=198)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

4. 3.2006 16:29:22

Source

"Geld ist rund und rollt weg, aber Bildung bleibt": 94. Deutscher Bibliothekartag in Düsseldorf 2006. Hrsg.: D. Lülfing u. I. Siebert

0.076250434 = product of:
  0.15250087 = sum of:
    0.15250087 = sum of:
      0.0819015 = weight(_text_:i in 4950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0819015 = score(doc=4950,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 4950, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4950)
      0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 4950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07059936 = score(doc=4950,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4950, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4950)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30. 3.2003 11:06:22

0.076250434 = product of:
  0.15250087 = sum of:
    0.15250087 = sum of:
      0.0819015 = weight(_text_:i in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0819015 = score(doc=5541,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 5541, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5541)
      0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07059936 = score(doc=5541,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5541, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5541)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

18. 1.1997 12:15:22

0.076250434 = product of:
  0.15250087 = sum of:
    0.15250087 = sum of:
      0.0819015 = weight(_text_:i in 6882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0819015 = score(doc=6882,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 6882, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6882)
      0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 6882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07059936 = score(doc=6882,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 6882, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6882)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

3. 4.1996 15:41:22

Type

i

0.076250434 = product of:
  0.15250087 = sum of:
    0.15250087 = sum of:
      0.0819015 = weight(_text_:i in 891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0819015 = score(doc=891,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 891, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=891)
      0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07059936 = score(doc=891,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 891, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=891)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

1. 4.2002 13:36:22

0.076250434 = product of:
  0.15250087 = sum of:
    0.15250087 = sum of:
      0.0819015 = weight(_text_:i in 1203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0819015 = score(doc=1203,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 1203, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1203)
      0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 1203) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07059936 = score(doc=1203,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1203, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1203)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2004 9:54:37

Type

i

0.076250434 = product of:
  0.15250087 = sum of:
    0.15250087 = sum of:
      0.0819015 = weight(_text_:i in 4962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0819015 = score(doc=4962,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41672117 = fieldWeight in 4962, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4962)
      0.07059936 = weight(_text_:22 in 4962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07059936 = score(doc=4962,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4962, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4962)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

4. 3.2006 16:29:22

Source

"Geld ist rund und rollt weg, aber Bildung bleibt": 94. Deutscher Bibliothekartag in Düsseldorf 2006. Hrsg.: D. Lülfing u. I. Siebert

0.07612101 = product of:
  0.15224202 = sum of:
    0.15224202 = sum of:
      0.1098824 = weight(_text_:i in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1098824 = score(doc=917,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.55909014 = fieldWeight in 917, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=917)
      0.042359617 = weight(_text_:22 in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042359617 = score(doc=917,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1824739 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 917, 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=917)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

I started my professional career in library and information science because of my great interest in knowledge organization. The more experience I gained in the profession, the more I realized how crucial it is to understand which organization would be best for each group of users. This in turn requires an understanding of how users seek information. And so now my focus is an studying information seeking and searching behavior. Throughout the relatively long course of changing my focus, I followed Pauline Cochrane's writings. Now I can say that she has been among the first to have a "user-centered approach" to knowledge organization, and she has used the term three years before it became a mainstream phrase. The following is a short discussion about the usercentered approach which was presented in a workshop in 1997.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.070151165 = sum of:
  0.029611988 = product of:
    0.11844795 = sum of:
      0.11844795 = weight(_text_:authors in 2566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11844795 = score(doc=2566,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.23755142 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.49862027 = fieldWeight in 2566, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2566)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.040539175 = product of:
    0.08107835 = sum of:
      0.08107835 = weight(_text_:i in 2566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08107835 = score(doc=2566,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1965379 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05210816 = queryNorm
          0.41253293 = fieldWeight in 2566, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.7717297 = idf(docFreq=2765, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2566)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We present a bibliometric study of a corpus of 839 bibliographic references about automatic indexing, covering the period 1956-2000. We analyse the distribution of authors and works, the obsolescence and its dispersion, and the distribution of the literature by topic, year, and source type. We conclude that: (i) there has been a constant interest on the part of researchers; (ii) the most studied topics were the techniques and methods employed and the general aspects of automatic indexing; (iii) the productivity of the authors does fit a Lotka distribution (Dmax=0.02 and critical value=0.054); (iv) the annual aging factor is 95%; and (v) the dispersion of the literature is low.