Search (1395 results, page 1 of 70)

0.11220181 = sum of:
  0.04464445 = product of:
    0.1785778 = sum of:
      0.1785778 = weight(_text_:author's in 5491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.1785778 = score(doc=5491,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.34014043 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.52501196 = fieldWeight in 5491, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5491)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.067557365 = sum of:
    0.033269208 = weight(_text_:c in 5491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033269208 = score(doc=5491,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05061498 = queryNorm
        0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 5491, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5491)
    0.034288157 = weight(_text_:22 in 5491) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034288157 = score(doc=5491,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05061498 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5491, 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=5491)

Abstract

RDS are usually cross-disciplinary, centralised services, which are increasingly provided at a university by the academic library and in collaboration with other RDM stakeholders, such as the Research Office. At research-intensive universities, research data is generated in a wide range of disciplines and sub-disciplines. This paper will discuss how providing discipline-specific RDM support is approached by such universities and academic libraries, and the advantages and disadvantages of these central and discipline-specific approaches. A descriptive case study on the author's experiences of collaborating with a central RDS at the University of Cambridge, as a subject librarian embedded in an academic department, is a major component of this paper. The case study describes how centralised RDM services offered by the Office of Scholarly Communication (OSC) have been adapted to meet discipline-specific needs in the Department of Chemistry. It will introduce the department and the OSC, and describe the author's role in delivering RDM training, as well as the Data Champions programme, and their membership of the RDM Project Group. It will describe the outcomes of this collaboration for the Department of Chemistry, and for the centralised service. Centralised and discipline-specific approaches to RDS provision have their own advantages and disadvantages. Supporting the discipline-specific RDM needs of researchers is proving particularly challenging for universities to address sustainably: it requires adequate financial resources and staff skilled (or re-skilled) in RDM. A mixed approach is the most desirable, cost-effective way of providing RDS, but this still has constraints.

Date

7. 9.2019 21:30:22

0.093629695 = sum of:
  0.07034125 = product of:
    0.281365 = sum of:
      0.281365 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.281365 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.42911434 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, 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=5955)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.023288446 = product of:
    0.04657689 = sum of:
      0.04657689 = weight(_text_:c in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04657689 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.2667763 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

0.09191212 = product of:
  0.18382424 = sum of:
    0.18382424 = sum of:
      0.115247935 = weight(_text_:c in 2991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.115247935 = score(doc=2991,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.6601002 = fieldWeight in 2991, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2991)
      0.06857631 = weight(_text_:22 in 2991) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06857631 = score(doc=2991,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2991, 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=2991)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

6. 6.2016 18:42:22

Source

Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff

0.08133793 = product of:
  0.16267586 = sum of:
    0.16267586 = sum of:
      0.094099544 = weight(_text_:c in 1838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.094099544 = score(doc=1838,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.5389696 = fieldWeight in 1838, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1838)
      0.06857631 = weight(_text_:22 in 1838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06857631 = score(doc=1838,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1838, 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=1838)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

6.12.2015 17:22:08

0.067557365 = product of:
  0.13511473 = sum of:
    0.13511473 = sum of:
      0.066538416 = weight(_text_:c in 5865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.066538416 = score(doc=5865,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.381109 = fieldWeight in 5865, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5865)
      0.06857631 = weight(_text_:22 in 5865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06857631 = score(doc=5865,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5865, 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=5865)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.2017 12:51:57

0.0602925 = product of:
  0.120585 = sum of:
    0.120585 = product of:
      0.48234 = sum of:
        0.48234 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.48234 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42911434 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05061498 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.

0.058454964 = sum of:
  0.03788207 = product of:
    0.15152828 = sum of:
      0.15152828 = weight(_text_:author's in 2360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15152828 = score(doc=2360,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34014043 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 2360, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2360)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.020572893 = product of:
    0.041145787 = sum of:
      0.041145787 = weight(_text_:22 in 2360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041145787 = score(doc=2360,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2360, 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=2360)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article reports the author's recent research in developing a holistic model for various levels of digital library (DL) evaluation in which perceived important criteria from heterogeneous stakeholder groups are organized and presented. To develop such a model, the author applied a three-stage research approach: exploration, confirmation, and verification. During the exploration stage, a literature review was conducted followed by an interview, along with a card sorting technique, to collect important criteria perceived by DL experts. Then the criteria identified were used for developing an online survey during the confirmation stage. Survey respondents (431 in total) from 22 countries rated the importance of the criteria. A holistic DL evaluation model was constructed using statistical techniques. Eventually, the verification stage was devised to test the reliability of the model in the context of searching and evaluating an operational DL. The proposed model fills two lacunae in the DL domain: (a) the lack of a comprehensive and flexible framework to guide and benchmark evaluations, and (b) the uncertainty about what divergence exists among heterogeneous DL stakeholders, including general users.

0.058454964 = sum of:
  0.03788207 = product of:
    0.15152828 = sum of:
      0.15152828 = weight(_text_:author's in 4359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15152828 = score(doc=4359,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34014043 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 4359, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4359)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.020572893 = product of:
    0.041145787 = sum of:
      0.041145787 = weight(_text_:22 in 4359) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041145787 = score(doc=4359,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4359, 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=4359)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A recent study in information science (IS), raises important issues concerning the value of human indexing and basic theories of indexing and information retrieval, as well as the use of quantitative and qualitative approaches in IS and the underlying theories of knowledge informing the field. The present article uses L&E as the point of departure for demonstrating in what way more social and interpretative understandings may provide fruitful improvements for research in indexing, knowledge organization, and information retrieval. The artcle is motivated by the observation that philosophical contributions tend to be ignored in IS if they are not directly formed as criticisms or invitations to dialogs. It is part of the author's ongoing publication of articles about philosophical issues in IS and it is intended to be followed by analyzes of other examples of contributions to core issues in IS. Although it is formulated as a criticism of a specific paper, it should be seen as part of a general discussion of the philosophical foundation of IS and as a support to the emerging social paradigm in this field.

Date

17. 3.2011 19:22:55

0.057843596 = sum of:
  0.03788207 = product of:
    0.15152828 = sum of:
      0.15152828 = weight(_text_:author's in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15152828 = score(doc=320,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34014043 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 320, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=320)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.019961527 = product of:
    0.039923053 = sum of:
      0.039923053 = weight(_text_:c in 320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039923053 = score(doc=320,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 320, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=320)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article argues that authorial stance should be taken into account in the indexing of scientific documents. Authorial stance has been widely studied in linguistics and is a typical feature of scientific writing that reveals the uniqueness of each author's perspective, their scientific contribution, and their thinking. We argue that authorial stance guides the reading of scientific documents and that it can be used to characterize the knowledge contained in such documents. Our research has previously shown that people reading dissertations are interested both in a topic and in a document's authorial stance. Now, we would like to propose a two-tiered indexing system. Dissertations would first be divided into paragraphs; then, each information unit would be defined by topic and by the markers of authorial stance present in the document.

0.057843596 = sum of:
  0.03788207 = product of:
    0.15152828 = sum of:
      0.15152828 = weight(_text_:author's in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.15152828 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34014043 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.44548744 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.019961527 = product of:
    0.039923053 = sum of:
      0.039923053 = weight(_text_:c in 4011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039923053 = score(doc=4011,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 4011, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4011)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Scientific collaboration is essential in solving problems and breeding innovation. Coauthor network analysis has been utilized to study scholars' collaborations for a long time, but these studies have not simultaneously taken different collaboration features into consideration. In this paper, we present a systematic approach to analyze the differences in possibilities that two authors will cooperate as seen from the effects of homophily, transitivity, and preferential attachment. Exponential random graph models (ERGMs) are applied in this research. We find that different types of publications one author has written play diverse roles in his/her collaborations. An author's tendency to form new collaborations with her/his coauthors' collaborators is strong, where the more coauthors one author had before, the more new collaborators he/she will attract. We demonstrate that considering the authors' attributes and homophily effects as well as the transitivity and preferential attachment effects of the coauthorship network in which they are embedded helps us gain a comprehensive understanding of scientific collaboration.

0.05514727 = product of:
  0.11029454 = sum of:
    0.11029454 = sum of:
      0.06914876 = weight(_text_:c in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06914876 = score(doc=1352,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.3960601 = fieldWeight in 1352, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1352)
      0.041145787 = weight(_text_:22 in 1352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041145787 = score(doc=1352,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1352, 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=1352)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 8.2014 17:11:29

0.054045893 = product of:
  0.10809179 = sum of:
    0.10809179 = sum of:
      0.053230736 = weight(_text_:c in 1742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.053230736 = score(doc=1742,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.3048872 = fieldWeight in 1742, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1742)
      0.05486105 = weight(_text_:22 in 1742) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05486105 = score(doc=1742,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1742, 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=1742)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

21. 3.2015 18:13:22

0.053502683 = sum of:
  0.040195 = product of:
    0.16078 = sum of:
      0.16078 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16078 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.42911434 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.013307684 = product of:
    0.026615368 = sum of:
      0.026615368 = weight(_text_:c in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.026615368 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.1524436 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Language and Information Technologies. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cs.cmu.edu%2F~cx%2Fpapers%2Fknowledge_based_text_representation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0SaTSvhWLTh__Uz_HtOtl3.

0.050243754 = product of:
  0.10048751 = sum of:
    0.10048751 = product of:
      0.40195003 = sum of:
        0.40195003 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.40195003 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42911434 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05061498 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.048802756 = product of:
  0.09760551 = sum of:
    0.09760551 = sum of:
      0.05645972 = weight(_text_:c in 93) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05645972 = score(doc=93,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.32338172 = fieldWeight in 93, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=93)
      0.041145787 = weight(_text_:22 in 93) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041145787 = score(doc=93,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 93, 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=93)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

17. 4.2012 14:25:22

Source

Next generation search engines: advanced models for information retrieval. Eds.: C. Jouis, u.a

0.048802756 = product of:
  0.09760551 = sum of:
    0.09760551 = sum of:
      0.05645972 = weight(_text_:c in 105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05645972 = score(doc=105,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.32338172 = fieldWeight in 105, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=105)
      0.041145787 = weight(_text_:22 in 105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041145787 = score(doc=105,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 105, 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=105)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

17. 4.2012 15:22:11

Source

Next generation search engines: advanced models for information retrieval. Eds.: C. Jouis, u.a

0.048802756 = product of:
  0.09760551 = sum of:
    0.09760551 = sum of:
      0.05645972 = weight(_text_:c in 4144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05645972 = score(doc=4144,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.32338172 = fieldWeight in 4144, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4144)
      0.041145787 = weight(_text_:22 in 4144) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041145787 = score(doc=4144,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4144, 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=4144)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Beitrag eines Special Issue: ISKO-Italy: 8' Incontro ISKO Italia, Università di Bologna, 22 maggio 2017, Bologna, Italia.

0.048802756 = product of:
  0.09760551 = sum of:
    0.09760551 = sum of:
      0.05645972 = weight(_text_:c in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05645972 = score(doc=5272,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.32338172 = fieldWeight in 5272, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
      0.041145787 = weight(_text_:22 in 5272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041145787 = score(doc=5272,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17724504 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = 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)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5272)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30. 5.2019 19:22:49

0.048203 = sum of:
  0.031568393 = product of:
    0.12627357 = sum of:
      0.12627357 = weight(_text_:author's in 3989) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12627357 = score(doc=3989,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34014043 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.3712395 = fieldWeight in 3989, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3989)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.016634604 = product of:
    0.033269208 = sum of:
      0.033269208 = weight(_text_:c in 3989) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033269208 = score(doc=3989,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 3989, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3989)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study investigated factors that motivate or impede faculty participation in self-archiving practices-the placement of research work in various open access (OA) venues, ranging from personal Web pages to OA archives. The author's research design involves triangulation of survey and interview data from 17 Carnegie doctorate universities with DSpace institutional repositories. The analysis of survey responses from 684 professors and 41 telephone interviews identified seven significant factors: (a) altruism-the idea of providing OA benefits for users; (b) perceived self-archiving culture; (c) copyright concerns; (d) technical skills; (e) age; (f) perception of no harmful impact of self-archiving on tenure and promotion; and (g) concerns about additional time and effort. The factors are listed in descending order of their effect size. Age, copyright concerns, and additional time and effort are negatively associated with self-archiving, whereas remaining factors are positively related to it. Faculty are motivated by OA advantages to users, disciplinary norms, and no negative influence on academic reward. However, barriers to self-archiving-concerns about copyright, extra time and effort, technical ability, and age-imply that the provision of services to assist faculty with copyright management, and with technical and logistical issues, could encourage higher rates of self-archiving.

0.048203 = sum of:
  0.031568393 = product of:
    0.12627357 = sum of:
      0.12627357 = weight(_text_:author's in 319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12627357 = score(doc=319,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.34014043 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.3712395 = fieldWeight in 319, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.7201533 = idf(docFreq=144, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=319)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.016634604 = product of:
    0.033269208 = sum of:
      0.033269208 = weight(_text_:c in 319) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033269208 = score(doc=319,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17459157 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05061498 = queryNorm
          0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 319, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=319)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

This paper is derived from the author's doctoral dissertation "Usefulness of Social Tagging in Organizing and Providing Access An Analysis of Indexing Consistency and Quality." The author is deeply grateful to her dissertation committee-Dr. Linda C. Smith chairperson, Drs. Allen Renear, Miles Efron and John Unsworth. Vgl.: http://www.ergon-verlag.de/isko_ko/downloads/ko_39_2012_4_a.pdf.