Search (1327 results, page 1 of 67)

0.13052413 = product of:
  0.26104826 = sum of:
    0.26104826 = sum of:
      0.20416525 = weight(_text_:mass in 208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.20416525 = score(doc=208,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.58639413 = fieldWeight in 208, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=208)
      0.056883022 = weight(_text_:22 in 208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.056883022 = score(doc=208,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18377763 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 208, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=208)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Libraries must learn to accommodate themselves to Google, and complement its mass digitization efforts with niche digitization of our own. We need to plan for what our activities and services will look like when our primary activity is no longer the storage and circulation of widely-available print materials, and once the printed book is no longer the only major vehicle for scholarly communication.

Pages

S.5-22

0.11420862 = product of:
  0.22841723 = sum of:
    0.22841723 = sum of:
      0.17864458 = weight(_text_:mass in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.17864458 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.51309484 = fieldWeight in 114, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=114)
      0.049772646 = weight(_text_:22 in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049772646 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18377763 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 114, 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=114)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper explores cataloging in the Age of Google. It considers what the technologies now being adopted mean for cataloging in the future. The author begins by exploring how digital-era students do research-they find using Google easier than using libraries. Mass digitization projects now are bringing into question the role that library cataloging has traditionally performed. The author asks readers to consider if the detailed attention librarians have been paying to descriptive cataloging can still be justified, and if cost-effective means for access should be considered.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.108005084 = product of:
  0.21601017 = sum of:
    0.21601017 = sum of:
      0.18045828 = weight(_text_:mass in 510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.18045828 = score(doc=510,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.51830405 = fieldWeight in 510, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=510)
      0.03555189 = weight(_text_:22 in 510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03555189 = score(doc=510,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18377763 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 510, 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=510)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

12. 2.2022 17:28:22

LCSH

Mass media / Psychological aspects

Subject

Mass media / Psychological aspects

0.10468402 = sum of:
  0.083352886 = product of:
    0.25005865 = sum of:
      0.25005865 = weight(_text_:3a in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.25005865 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.44492993 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = 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)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.021331133 = product of:
    0.042662267 = sum of:
      0.042662267 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042662267 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18377763 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = 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

0.081577584 = product of:
  0.16315517 = sum of:
    0.16315517 = sum of:
      0.12760328 = weight(_text_:mass in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12760328 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.36649632 = fieldWeight in 5272, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
      0.03555189 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03555189 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18377763 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5272, 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=5272)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article describes the latest development of a generic approach to detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. The work makes substantial theoretical and methodological contributions to progressive knowledge domain visualization. A specialty is conceptualized and visualized as a time-variant duality between two fundamental concepts in information science: research fronts and intellectual bases. A research front is defined as an emergent and transient grouping of concepts and underlying research issues. The intellectual base of a research front is its citation and co-citation footprint in scientific literature - an evolving network of scientific publications cited by research-front concepts. Kleinberg's (2002) burst-detection algorithm is adapted to identify emergent research-front concepts. Freeman's (1979) betweenness centrality metric is used to highlight potential pivotal points of paradigm shift over time. Two complementary visualization views are designed and implemented: cluster views and time-zone views. The contributions of the approach are that (a) the nature of an intellectual base is algorithmically and temporally identified by emergent research-front terms, (b) the value of a co-citation cluster is explicitly interpreted in terms of research-front concepts, and (c) visually prominent and algorithmically detected pivotal points substantially reduce the complexity of a visualized network. The modeling and visualization process is implemented in CiteSpace II, a Java application, and applied to the analysis of two research fields: mass extinction (1981-2004) and terrorism (1990-2003). Prominent trends and pivotal points in visualized networks were verified in collaboration with domain experts, who are the authors of pivotal-point articles. Practical implications of the work are discussed. A number of challenges and opportunities for future studies are identified.

Date

22. 7.2006 16:11:05

0.07739069 = sum of:
  0.02844414 = product of:
    0.085332416 = sum of:
      0.085332416 = weight(_text_:object's in 4344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.085332416 = score(doc=4344,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.51982564 = queryWeight, product of:
            9.905128 = idf(docFreq=5, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.16415584 = fieldWeight in 4344, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            9.905128 = idf(docFreq=5, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01171875 = fieldNorm(doc=4344)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.048946552 = sum of:
    0.038280986 = weight(_text_:mass in 4344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038280986 = score(doc=4344,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05248046 = queryNorm
        0.1099489 = fieldWeight in 4344, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01171875 = fieldNorm(doc=4344)
    0.010665567 = weight(_text_:22 in 4344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010665567 = score(doc=4344,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18377763 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05248046 = queryNorm
        0.058035173 = fieldWeight in 4344, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01171875 = fieldNorm(doc=4344)

Footnote

Chapter 2 (Technology and People) focuses an several theories of technological acceptance and diffusion. Unfortunately, Bruce's presentation is somewhat confusing as he moves from one theory to next, never quite connecting them into a logical sequence or coherent whole. Two theories are of particular interest to Bruce: the Theory of Diffusion of Innovations and the Theory of Planned Behavior. The Theory of Diffusion of Innovations is an "information-centric view of technology acceptance" in which technology adopters are placed in the information flows of society from which they learn about innovations and "drive innovation adoption decisions" (p. 20). The Theory of Planned Behavior maintains that the "performance of a behavior is a joint function of intentions and perceived behavioral control" (i.e., how muck control a person thinks they have) (pp. 22-23). Bruce combines these two theories to form the basis for the Technology Acceptance Model. This model posits that "an individual's acceptance of information technology is based an beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and behaviors" (p. 24). In all these theories and models echoes a recurring theme: "individual perceptions of the innovation or technology are critical" in terms of both its characteristics and its use (pp. 24-25). From these, in turn, Bruce derives a predictive theory of the role personal perceptions play in technology adoption: Personal Innovativeness of Information Technology Adoption (PIITA). Personal inventiveness is defined as "the willingness of an individual to try out any new information technology" (p. 26). In general, the PIITA theory predicts that information technology will be adopted by individuals that have a greater exposure to mass media, rely less an the evaluation of information technology by others, exhibit a greater ability to cope with uncertainty and take risks, and requires a less positive perception of an information technology prior to its adoption. Chapter 3 (A Focus an Usings) introduces the User-Centered Paradigm (UCP). The UCP is characteristic of the shift of emphasis from technology to users as the driving force behind technology and research agendas for Internet development [for a dissenting view, see Andrew Dillion's (2003) challenge to the utility of user-centerness for design guidance]. It entails the "broad acceptance of the user-oriented perspective across a range of disciplines and professional fields," such as business, education, cognitive engineering, and information science (p. 34).
The UCP's effect an business practices is focused mainly in the management and marketing areas. Marketing experienced a shift from "product-oriented operations" with its focus an "selling the products' features" and customer contact only at the point of sale toward more service-Centered business practice ("customer Jemand orientation") and the development of one-to-one customer relationships (pp. 35-36). For management, the adoption of the UCP caused a shift from "mechanistic, bureaucratic, top-down organizational structures" to "flatter, inclusive, and participative" ones (p. 37). In education, practice shifted from the teachercentered model where the "teacher is responsible for and makes all the decisions related to the learning environment" to a learnercentered model where the student is "responsible for his or her own learning" and the teacher focuses an "matching learning events to the individual skills, aptitudes, and interests of the individual learner" (pp. 38-39). Cognitive engineering saw the rise of "user-Centered design" and human factors that were concerned with applying "scientific knowledge of humans to the design of man-machine interface systems" (p. 44). The UCP had a great effect an Information Science in the "design of information systems" (p. 47). Previous to UCP's explicit proposed by Brenda Dervin and M. Nilan in 1986, systems design was dominated by the "physical of system oriented paradigm" (p. 48). The physical paradigm held a positivistic and materialistic view of technology and (passive) human interaction as exemplified by the 1953 Cranfield tests of information retrieval mechanisms. Instead, the UCP focuses an "users rather than systems" by making the perceptions of individual information users the "centerpiece consideration for information service and system design" (pp. 47-48). Bruce briefly touches an the various schools of thought within user-oriented paradigm, such as the cognitive/self studies approach with its emphasis is an an individual's knowledge structures or model of the world [e.g., Belkin (1990)], the cognitve/context studies approach that focuses an "context in explaining variations in information behavior" [e.g., Savolainen (1995) and Dervin's (1999) sensemaking], and the social constructionism/discourse analytic theory with its focus an that language, not mental/knowledge constructs, as the primary shaper of the world as a system of intersubjective meanings [e.g., Talja 1996], (pp. 53-54). Drawing from the rich tradition of user oriented research, Bruce attempts to gain a metatheoretical understanding of the Internet as a phenomena by combining Dervin's (1996) "micromoments of human usings" with the French philosopher Bruno Latour's (1999) "conception of Circulating reference" to form what 1 term the Metatheory of Circulating Usings (pp. ix, 56, 60). According to Bruce, Latour's concept is designed to bridge "the gap between mind and object" by engaging in a "succession of finely grained transformations that construct and transfer truth about the object" through a chain of "microtranslations" from "matter to form," thereby connecting mind and object (p. 56). The connection works as long as the chain remains unbroken. The nature of this chain of "information producing translations" are such that as one moves away from the object, one experiences a "reduction" of the object's "locality, particularity, materiality, multiplicity and continuity," while simultaneously gaining the "amplification" of its "compatibility, standardization, text, calculation, circulation, and relative universality" (p. 57).

0.06480306 = product of:
  0.12960611 = sum of:
    0.12960611 = sum of:
      0.108274974 = weight(_text_:mass in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.108274974 = score(doc=1184,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.31098244 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
      0.021331133 = weight(_text_:22 in 1184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021331133 = score(doc=1184,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18377763 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 1184, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1184)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Google's December 2004 announcement of its intention to collaborate with five major research libraries - Harvard University, the University of Michigan, Stanford University, the University of Oxford, and the New York Public Library - to digitize and surface their print book collections in the Google searching universe has, predictably, stirred conflicting opinion, with some viewing the project as a welcome opportunity to enhance the visibility of library collections in new environments, and others wary of Google's prospective role as gateway to these collections. The project has been vigorously debated on discussion lists and blogs, with the participating libraries commonly referred to as "the Google 5". One point most observers seem to concede is that the questions raised by this initiative are both timely and significant. The Google Print Library Project (GPLP) has galvanized a long overdue, multi-faceted discussion about library print book collections. The print book is core to library identity and practice, but in an era of zero-sum budgeting, it is almost inevitable that print book budgets will decline as budgets for serials, digital resources, and other materials expand. As libraries re-allocate resources to accommodate changing patterns of user needs, print book budgets may be adversely impacted. Of course, the degree of impact will depend on a library's perceived mission. A public library may expect books to justify their shelf-space, with de-accession the consequence of minimal use. A national library, on the other hand, has a responsibility to the scholarly and cultural record and may seek to collect comprehensively within particular areas, with the attendant obligation to secure the long-term retention of its print book collections. The combination of limited budgets, changing user needs, and differences in library collection strategies underscores the need to think about a collective, or system-wide, print book collection - in particular, how can an inter-institutional system be organized to achieve goals that would be difficult, and/or prohibitively expensive, for any one library to undertake individually [4]? Mass digitization programs like GPLP cast new light on these and other issues surrounding the future of library print book collections, but at this early stage, it is light that illuminates only dimly. It will be some time before GPLP's implications for libraries and library print book collections can be fully appreciated and evaluated. But the strong interest and lively debate generated by this initiative suggest that some preliminary analysis - premature though it may be - would be useful, if only to undertake a rough mapping of the terrain over which GPLP potentially will extend. At the least, some early perspective helps shape interesting questions for the future, when the boundaries of GPLP become settled, workflows for producing and managing the digitized materials become systematized, and usage patterns within the GPLP framework begin to emerge.
This article offers some perspectives on GPLP in light of what is known about library print book collections in general, and those of the Google 5 in particular, from information in OCLC's WorldCat bibliographic database and holdings file. Questions addressed include: * Coverage: What proportion of the system-wide print book collection will GPLP potentially cover? What is the degree of holdings overlap across the print book collections of the five participating libraries? * Language: What is the distribution of languages associated with the print books held by the GPLP libraries? Which languages are predominant? * Copyright: What proportion of the GPLP libraries' print book holdings are out of copyright? * Works: How many distinct works are represented in the holdings of the GPLP libraries? How does a focus on works impact coverage and holdings overlap? * Convergence: What are the effects on coverage of using a different set of five libraries? What are the effects of adding the holdings of additional libraries to those of the GPLP libraries, and how do these effects vary by library type? These questions certainly do not exhaust the analytical possibilities presented by GPLP. More in-depth analysis might look at Google 5 coverage in particular subject areas; it also would be interesting to see how many books covered by the GPLP have already been digitized in other contexts. However, these questions are left to future studies. The purpose here is to explore a few basic questions raised by GPLP, and in doing so, provide an empirical context for the debate that is sure to continue for some time to come. A secondary objective is to lay some groundwork for a general set of questions that could be used to explore the implications of any mass digitization initiative. A suggested list of questions is provided in the conclusion of the article.

Date

26.12.2011 14:08:22

0.06480306 = product of:
  0.12960611 = sum of:
    0.12960611 = sum of:
      0.108274974 = weight(_text_:mass in 1833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.108274974 = score(doc=1833,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.31098244 = fieldWeight in 1833, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1833)
      0.021331133 = weight(_text_:22 in 1833) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021331133 = score(doc=1833,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18377763 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05248046 = queryNorm
          0.116070345 = 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)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1833)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

11. 5.2008 19:49:22

LCSH

Mass media / Archival resources / Congresses

Subject

Mass media / Archival resources / Congresses

0.063160405 = product of:
  0.12632081 = sum of:
    0.12632081 = product of:
      0.25264162 = sum of:
        0.25264162 = weight(_text_:mass in 2541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.25264162 = score(doc=2541,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.7256257 = fieldWeight in 2541, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2541)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the OPAC integration in the University of Michigan's local implementation of materials digitized in the partnership with Google. Design/methodology/approach - The paper provides a discussion of different strategies used in integrating metadata with digital resources and presenting the digital objects to the user in the OPAC. Findings - The paper finds that methods that had served in smaller digitization projects require more automation and error reduction processes in an undertaking of this scale. Increased integration with the OPAC is one approach. Originality/value - Michigan is the first of the Google partners to mount their materials themselves and others involved in mass digitization may be interested in the experience.

0.05556859 = product of:
  0.11113718 = sum of:
    0.11113718 = product of:
      0.33341154 = sum of:
        0.33341154 = weight(_text_:3a in 140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.33341154 = score(doc=140,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.44492993 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 140, 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=140)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl. auch: https://studylibde.com/doc/13053640/richard-schrodt. Vgl. auch: http%3A%2F%2Fwww.univie.ac.at%2FGermanistik%2Fschrodt%2Fvorlesung%2Fwissenschaftssprache.doc&usg=AOvVaw1lDLDR6NFf1W0-oC9mEUJf.

0.054137487 = product of:
  0.108274974 = sum of:
    0.108274974 = product of:
      0.21654995 = sum of:
        0.21654995 = weight(_text_:mass in 1394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21654995 = score(doc=1394,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.6219649 = fieldWeight in 1394, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1394)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

LCSH

Mass media and culture / Congresses

Subject

Mass media and culture / Congresses

0.051041313 = product of:
  0.102082625 = sum of:
    0.102082625 = product of:
      0.20416525 = sum of:
        0.20416525 = weight(_text_:mass in 679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20416525 = score(doc=679,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.58639413 = fieldWeight in 679, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=679)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The paper reports on the early lessons learned in the process of forming an online community for librarians from different organisations and sectors to discuss knowledge management. Time, critical mass, diversity of membership, focus, information and communication technology, incentives, concepts of membership, services and leadership were all factors in the slow coalescing of the group as an active self-sustaining network.

0.051041313 = product of:
  0.102082625 = sum of:
    0.102082625 = product of:
      0.20416525 = sum of:
        0.20416525 = weight(_text_:mass in 3797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20416525 = score(doc=3797,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.58639413 = fieldWeight in 3797, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3797)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Information crises are failures of sense-making in organizations, i.e., failures to attribute a meaning and interpretation that can lead to a corrective action. Challenging the hierarchy of data, information, and knowledge, this entry argues that information crises cannot be resolved through normalization and normative prescriptions, but rather by the reinstallment of behavioral-involvement mechanisms, that have been lost in electronic mass-intermediation of postindustrial organizations.

0.051041313 = product of:
  0.102082625 = sum of:
    0.102082625 = product of:
      0.20416525 = sum of:
        0.20416525 = weight(_text_:mass in 1711) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20416525 = score(doc=1711,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.58639413 = fieldWeight in 1711, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1711)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

LCSH

War in mass media / Germany / Cologne (Electorate) / History / 16th century.
Mass media and war / Germany / Cologne (Electorate) / History / 16th century.

Subject

War in mass media / Germany / Cologne (Electorate) / History / 16th century.
Mass media and war / Germany / Cologne (Electorate) / History / 16th century.

0.04862252 = product of:
  0.09724504 = sum of:
    0.09724504 = product of:
      0.2917351 = sum of:
        0.2917351 = weight(_text_:3a in 306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2917351 = score(doc=306,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.44492993 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 306, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=306)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5386707&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5386707.

0.047406897 = product of:
  0.094813794 = sum of:
    0.094813794 = product of:
      0.28444138 = sum of:
        0.28444138 = weight(_text_:object's in 194) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.28444138 = score(doc=194,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.51982564 = queryWeight, product of:
              9.905128 = idf(docFreq=5, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.54718614 = fieldWeight in 194, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              9.905128 = idf(docFreq=5, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=194)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In the first part of this article the author defines the n-overlap vector whose coordinates consist of the fraction of the objects (e.g., books, N-grams, etc.) that belong to 1, 2, , n sets (more generally: families) (e.g., libraries, databases, etc.). With the aid of the Lorenz concentration theory, a theory of n-overlap similarity is conceived together with corresponding measures, such as the generalized Jaccard index (generalizing the well-known Jaccard index in case n 5 2). Next, the distributional form of the n-overlap vector is determined assuming certain distributions of the object's and of the set (family) sizes. In this section the decreasing power law and decreasing exponential distribution is explained for the n-overlap vector. Both item (token) n-overlap and source (type) n-overlap are studied. The n-overlap properties of objects indexed by a hierarchical system (e.g., books indexed by numbers from a UDC or Dewey system or by N-grams) are presented in the final section. The author shows how the results given in the previous section can be applied as well as how the Lorenz order of the n-overlap vector is respected by an increase or a decrease of the level of refinement in the hierarchical system (e.g., the value N in N-grams).

0.04511457 = product of:
  0.09022914 = sum of:
    0.09022914 = product of:
      0.18045828 = sum of:
        0.18045828 = weight(_text_:mass in 5585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18045828 = score(doc=5585,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.51830405 = fieldWeight in 5585, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5585)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Most on-line news sources are electronic versions of "ink-on-paper" newspapers. These are versions that have been filtered, from the mass of news produced each day, by an editorial board with a given community profile in mind. As readers, we choose the filter rather than choose the stories. New technology, however, provides the potential for personalized versions to be filtered automatically from this mass of news on the basis of user profiles. People read the news for many reasons: to find out "what's going on," to be knowledgeable members of a community, and because the activity itself is pleasurable. Given this, we ask the question, "How much filtering is acceptable to readers?" In this study, an evaluation of user preference for personal editions versus community editions of on-line news was performed. A personalized edition of a local newspaper was created for each subject based on an elliptical model that combined the user profile and community profile as represented by the full edition of the local newspaper. The amount of emphasis given the user profile and the community profile was varied to test the subjects' reactions to different amounts of personalized filtering. The task was simply, "read the news," rather than any subject specific information retrieval task. The results indicate that users prefer the coarse-grained community filters to fine-grained personalized filters

0.04511457 = product of:
  0.09022914 = sum of:
    0.09022914 = product of:
      0.18045828 = sum of:
        0.18045828 = weight(_text_:mass in 379) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18045828 = score(doc=379,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.51830405 = fieldWeight in 379, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=379)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The political economy of communication focuses critically on what structural issues in mass media - ownership, labour practices, professional ethics, and so on - mean for products of those mass media and thus for society more generally. In the case of new media, recent political economic studies have looked at the technical infrastructure of the Internet and also at Internet usage. However, political economic studies of internet content are only beginning. Recent studies on the phenomenology of the Web, that is, the way the Web is experienced from an individual user's perspective, highlight the centrality of the search engine to most users' experiences of the Web, particularly when they venture beyond familiar Web sites. Search engines are therefore an obvi ous place to begin the analysis of Web content. An important assumption of this chapter is that internet search engines are media businesses and that the tools developed in media studies can be profitably brought to bear on them. This focus on search engine as industry comes from the critical tradition of the political economy of communications in rejecting the notion that the market alone should be the arbiter of the structure of the media industry, as might be appropriate for other types of products.

0.04511457 = product of:
  0.09022914 = sum of:
    0.09022914 = product of:
      0.18045828 = sum of:
        0.18045828 = weight(_text_:mass in 3767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18045828 = score(doc=3767,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.51830405 = fieldWeight in 3767, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3767)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The focal purpose of this entry is to lay out the contours, within historical contexts, of the structural arrangements and intellectual foci of the various areas of study and emphases in institutions of higher education generally clustered under the much used and abused term "communication." Because communication studies has been a presence in the academy for less than 60 years, and because it has evolved in the midst of an exploding and rapidly changing communication environment, there are necessarily multiple and competing stories to be told. This entry attempts to focus both on convergences and divergences. The entry reviews in turn: different meanings for the word "communication" and how and when the term came into popular usage; the two primary historical lineages out of which communication studies has emerged-speech communication and mass communication; the forces leading to institutionalization, including the exploding emergence of mass media. The entry examines the phases in which communication studies became institutionalized and how supporting structures of organizations and journals have handled seemingly overwhelming diversity. The entry concludes with a discussion of how communication studies necessarily holds within its core a series of contradictions that are in essence symptom and cause of both centralities and dispersions, struggles and successes.

0.044661146 = product of:
  0.08932229 = sum of:
    0.08932229 = product of:
      0.17864458 = sum of:
        0.17864458 = weight(_text_:mass in 1969) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17864458 = score(doc=1969,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3481707 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05248046 = queryNorm
            0.51309484 = fieldWeight in 1969, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.634292 = idf(docFreq=157, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1969)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

New mass publishing genres, such as blogs and personal home pages provide a rich source of social data that is yet to be fully exploited by the social sciences and humanities. Information-centered research (ICR) not only provides a genuinely new and useful information science research model for this type of data, but can also contribute to the emerging e-research infrastructure. Nevertheless, ICR should not be conducted on a purely abstract level, but should relate to potentially relevant problems.