Search (1244 results, page 1 of 63)

0.2928372 = product of:
  0.5856744 = sum of:
    0.1464186 = product of:
      0.43925577 = sum of:
        0.43925577 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.43925577 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.43925577 = weight(_text_:2f in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.43925577 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

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

0.244031 = product of:
  0.488062 = sum of:
    0.1220155 = product of:
      0.3660465 = sum of:
        0.3660465 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3660465 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.3660465 = weight(_text_:2f in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.3660465 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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

0.21862903 = product of:
  0.29150537 = sum of:
    0.06100775 = product of:
      0.18302324 = sum of:
        0.18302324 = weight(_text_:3a in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18302324 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, 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=4997)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.18302324 = weight(_text_:2f in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18302324 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, 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=4997)
    0.047474373 = weight(_text_:communication in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047474373 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.23853138 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)

Content

PhD Dissertation at International Doctorate School in Information and Communication Technology. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fcore.ac.uk%2Fdownload%2Fpdf%2F150083013.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2n-qisNagpyT0lli_6QbAQ.

0.19190502 = product of:
  0.38381004 = sum of:
    0.0732093 = product of:
      0.21962789 = sum of:
        0.21962789 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21962789 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 484, 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=484)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.31060073 = weight(_text_:2f in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.31060073 = score(doc=484,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.7948135 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.univie.ac.at%2Findex.php%2Fvoebm%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F5332%2F5271%2F&usg=AOvVaw2yQdFGHlmOwVls7ANCpTii.

0.17082171 = product of:
  0.34164342 = sum of:
    0.085410856 = product of:
      0.25623256 = sum of:
        0.25623256 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.25623256 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.25623256 = weight(_text_:2f in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.25623256 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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].

0.1464186 = product of:
  0.2928372 = sum of:
    0.0732093 = product of:
      0.21962789 = sum of:
        0.21962789 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21962789 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.21962789 = weight(_text_:2f in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21962789 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, 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=400)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.12793668 = product of:
  0.25587335 = sum of:
    0.0488062 = product of:
      0.1464186 = sum of:
        0.1464186 = weight(_text_:3a in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1464186 = score(doc=5820,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.20706716 = weight(_text_:2f in 5820) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20706716 = score(doc=5820,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.5298757 = fieldWeight in 5820, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5820)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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.

0.1220155 = product of:
  0.244031 = sum of:
    0.06100775 = product of:
      0.18302324 = sum of:
        0.18302324 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18302324 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, 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=4388)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.18302324 = weight(_text_:2f in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18302324 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, 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=4388)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.

0.1220155 = product of:
  0.244031 = sum of:
    0.06100775 = product of:
      0.18302324 = sum of:
        0.18302324 = weight(_text_:3a in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18302324 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, 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=855)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.18302324 = weight(_text_:2f in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18302324 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, 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=855)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

Vgl. auch: New automatic interpreter for complex UDC numbers. Unter: <https%3A%2F%2Fudcc.org%2Ffiles%2FAttilaPiros_EC_36-37_2014-2015.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3kc9CwDDCWP7aArpfjrs5b>

0.11918157 = product of:
  0.23836315 = sum of:
    0.21962789 = weight(_text_:2f in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.21962789 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
    0.018735252 = product of:
      0.037470505 = sum of:
        0.037470505 = weight(_text_:22 in 563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037470505 = score(doc=563,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16141291 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 563, 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=563)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Content

A Thesis presented to The University of Guelph In partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Computer Science. Vgl. Unter: http://www.inf.ufrgs.br%2F~ceramisch%2Fdownload_files%2Fpublications%2F2009%2Fp01.pdf.

Date

10. 1.2013 19:22:47

0.09466152 = product of:
  0.18932304 = sum of:
    0.13292825 = weight(_text_:communication in 4784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13292825 = score(doc=4784,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.66788787 = fieldWeight in 4784, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4784)
    0.05639478 = product of:
      0.11278956 = sum of:
        0.11278956 = weight(_text_:networks in 4784) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11278956 = score(doc=4784,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21802035 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.517335 = fieldWeight in 4784, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4784)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This book constitutes the proceedings of the International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies held in Kochi, Kerala, India in September 2010.

LCSH

Computer Communication Networks

Subject

Computer Communication Networks

0.09180648 = product of:
  0.18361296 = sum of:
    0.1342778 = weight(_text_:communication in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1342778 = score(doc=252,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.6746686 = fieldWeight in 252, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=252)
    0.049335156 = product of:
      0.09867031 = sum of:
        0.09867031 = weight(_text_:networks in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09867031 = score(doc=252,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21802035 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.45257387 = fieldWeight in 252, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=252)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The issue of how teens choose social networks and information communication technologies (ICT's) for personal communication is complex. This study focused on describing how U.S. teens from a highly technological suburban high school select ICT's for personal communication purposes. Two research questions guided the study: (a) What factors influence high school seniors' selection of online social networks and other ICT's for everyday communication? (b) How can social network theory (SNT) help to explain how teens select online social networks and other ICT's for everyday communication purposes? Using focus groups, a purposive sample of 45 teens were asked to discuss (a) their preferred methods for communicating with friends and family and why, (b) the reasons why they chose to engage (or not to engage) in online social networking, (c) how they selected ICT's for social networking and other communication purposes, and (d) how they decided whom to accept as online "friends." Findings indicated that many factors influenced participants' ICT selection practices including six major categories of selection factors: relationship factors, information/communication factors, social factors, systems factors, self-protection factors, and recipient factors. SNT was also helpful in explaining how "friendship" was a major determining factor in their communication media and platform choices.

0.086627655 = product of:
  0.17325531 = sum of:
    0.116287984 = weight(_text_:communication in 2846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.116287984 = score(doc=2846,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.58428013 = fieldWeight in 2846, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2846)
    0.056967326 = product of:
      0.11393465 = sum of:
        0.11393465 = weight(_text_:networks in 2846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11393465 = score(doc=2846,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21802035 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.52258724 = fieldWeight in 2846, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2846)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Online collaborative projects have been utilized in a variety of ways over the past decade, such as bringing people together to build open source software or developing the world's largest free encyclopedia. Personal communication networks as a feature do not exist in all collaborative projects. It is currently unclear if a designer's decision to include a personal communication network in a collaborative project's structure affects outcome quality. In this study, I investigated Wikipedia's personal communication network and analyzed which Wikipedia editors are utilizing it and how they are connected to outcome quality. Evidence suggests that people who utilize these networks are more experienced in editing high quality articles and are more integrated in the community. Additionally, these individuals utilize the personal communication network for coordinating and perhaps mentoring editors who edit lower quality articles. The value of these networks is demonstrated by the characteristics of the users who use them. These findings indicate that designers of online collaborative projects can help improve the quality of outcomes in these projects by deciding to implement a personal communication network in their communities.

0.081400275 = product of:
  0.16280055 = sum of:
    0.056969248 = weight(_text_:communication in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056969248 = score(doc=666,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.28623766 = fieldWeight in 666, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=666)
    0.105831295 = sum of:
      0.06836079 = weight(_text_:networks in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06836079 = score(doc=666,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21802035 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046093877 = queryNorm
          0.31355235 = fieldWeight in 666, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=666)
      0.037470505 = weight(_text_:22 in 666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037470505 = score(doc=666,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16141291 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046093877 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 666, 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=666)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The proliferation of digital knowledge repositories (DKRs) used for distributed and collocated work raises important questions about how to manage these technologies. This study investigates why individuals contribute information to DKRs by applying and extending transactive memory theory. Data from knowledge workers (N = 208) nested in work groups (J = 17) located in Europe and the United States revealed, consistent with transactive memory theory, that perceptions of experts' retrieval of information were positively related to the likelihood of information provision to DKRs. The relationship between experts' perceptions of retrieval and information provision varied from group to group, and cross-level interactions indicated that trust in how the information would be used and the interdependence of tasks within groups could explain that variation. Furthermore, information provision to DKRs was related to communication networks in ways consistent with theorizing regarding the formation of transactive memory systems. Implications for theory and practice are discussed, emphasizing the utility of multilevel approaches for conceptualizing and modeling why individuals provide information to DKRs.

Date

22. 3.2013 19:39:00

0.078498185 = product of:
  0.15699637 = sum of:
    0.08056669 = weight(_text_:communication in 4349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08056669 = score(doc=4349,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.4048012 = fieldWeight in 4349, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4349)
    0.07642969 = product of:
      0.15285937 = sum of:
        0.15285937 = weight(_text_:networks in 4349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15285937 = score(doc=4349,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.21802035 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.70112437 = fieldWeight in 4349, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4349)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Ranking scientific productivity and prestige are often limited to homogeneous networks. These networks are unable to account for the multiple factors that constitute the scholarly communication and reward system. This study proposes a new informetric indicator, P-Rank, for measuring prestige in heterogeneous scholarly networks containing articles, authors, and journals. P-Rank differentiates the weight of each citation based on its citing papers, citing journals, and citing authors. Articles from 16 representative library and information science journals are selected as the dataset. Principle Component Analysis is conducted to examine the relationship between P-Rank and other bibliometric indicators. We also compare the correlation and rank variances between citation counts and P-Rank scores. This work provides a new approach to examining prestige in scholarly communication networks in a more comprehensive and nuanced way.

0.07446374 = product of:
  0.14892748 = sum of:
    0.08056669 = weight(_text_:communication in 2116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08056669 = score(doc=2116,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.4048012 = fieldWeight in 2116, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2116)
    0.06836079 = product of:
      0.13672158 = sum of:
        0.13672158 = weight(_text_:networks in 2116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13672158 = score(doc=2116,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.21802035 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.6271047 = fieldWeight in 2116, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2116)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Instant messaging (IM) has become increasingly prevalent in social life. However, the use of IM at work remains controversial, owing to its unclear benefits to organizations. In this study, we employ media performance theories and the concept model of communicative ecology to examine the impact of an IM tool on shaping guanxi (i.e., interpersonal relationship) networks in the workplace. Specifically, we propose that IM has the potential to enhance guanxi networks by improving communication quality and building interlocutors' mutual trust in the workplace. The conceptual model is validated with 253 survey responses collected from working professionals in China. The data indicate that communication quality and mutual trust contribute to the development of guanxi networks. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

0.07405944 = product of:
  0.14811888 = sum of:
    0.113938496 = weight(_text_:communication in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.113938496 = score(doc=77,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.5724753 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
    0.034180395 = product of:
      0.06836079 = sum of:
        0.06836079 = weight(_text_:networks in 77) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06836079 = score(doc=77,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21802035 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.31355235 = fieldWeight in 77, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=77)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Online communication is an indispensable tool for communication and management. The network structure of communication is considered to affect team and individual performances, but it has not been not empirically tested. In this article, we collected a set of 1-month e-mail logs of a company and conducted an e-mail network analysis. We calculated the network centralities of 72 managerial candidates, and investigated the relationship between positions in the network and leadership performance with partial least squares structural equation modeling. Betweenness and in-degree network centralities of those middle managers are correlated with their leadership performance; on the other hand, for this management group, out-degree has no correlation, and PageRank is a negative indicator of leadership. Leaders with high performance are trusted in their communities as a hub of the information channel of the communication network.

0.0732093 = product of:
  0.2928372 = sum of:
    0.2928372 = weight(_text_:2f in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2928372 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.3907844 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 2188, 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=2188)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Vgl. unter: https://www.leibniz-science20.de%2Fforschung%2Fprojekte%2Faltmetrics-in-verschiedenen-wissenschaftsdisziplinen%2F&ei=2jTgVaaXGcK4Udj1qdgB&usg=AFQjCNFOPdONj4RKBDf9YDJOLuz3lkGYlg&sig2=5YI3KWIGxBmk5_kv0P_8iQ.

0.067319795 = product of:
  0.13463959 = sum of:
    0.10615593 = weight(_text_:communication in 363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10615593 = score(doc=363,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.5333724 = fieldWeight in 363, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=363)
    0.028483663 = product of:
      0.056967326 = sum of:
        0.056967326 = weight(_text_:networks in 363) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056967326 = score(doc=363,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21802035 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.26129362 = fieldWeight in 363, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=363)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Understanding the role of acknowledgments given by researchers in their publications has been a recurrent challenge in the bibliometric field, but relatively unexplored until now. This study presents a general bibliometric analysis on the new "funding acknowledgment" (FA) information available in the Web of Science. All publications covered by the database in 2009 have been analyzed. The presence and length of the FA text, as well as the presence of "peer interactive communication" in the acknowledgments, are related to impact indicators, distribution of papers by fields, countries of the authors, and collaboration level of the papers. It is observed that publications with FAs present a higher impact as compared with publications without them. There are also differences across countries and disciplines in the share of publications with FAs and the acknowledgment of peer interactive communication. China is the country with the highest share of publications acknowledging funding, while the presence of FAs in the humanities and social sciences is very low compared to the more basic disciplines. The presence of peer interactive communication in acknowledgments can be linked to countries that have a strong scientific tradition and are incorporated in scientific networks. Peer interactive communication is also common in the fields of humanities and social sciences and can be linked to lower levels of co-authorship. Observed patterns are explained and topics of future research are proposed.

0.066427015 = product of:
  0.13285403 = sum of:
    0.098673634 = weight(_text_:communication in 4013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.098673634 = score(doc=4013,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046093877 = queryNorm
        0.49577817 = fieldWeight in 4013, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4013)
    0.034180395 = product of:
      0.06836079 = sum of:
        0.06836079 = weight(_text_:networks in 4013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06836079 = score(doc=4013,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21802035 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.31355235 = fieldWeight in 4013, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.72992 = idf(docFreq=1060, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4013)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The information sciences have traditionally been at the center of metadata-focused research. The US National Security Agency (NSA) intelligence documents revealed by Edward Snowden in June of 2013 brought the term "metadata" into the public consciousness. Surprisingly little discussion in the information sciences has since occurred on the nature and importance of metadata within networked communication systems. The collection of digital metadata impacts the ways that people experience social and technical communication. Without such metadata, networked communication cannot exist. The NSA leaks, and numerous recent hacks of corporate and government communications, point to metadata as objects of new scholarly inquiry. If we are to engage in meaningful discussions about our digital traces, or make informed decisions about new policies and technologies, it is essential to develop theoretical and empirical frameworks that account for digital metadata. This opinion paper presents 5 key sociotechnical characteristics of metadata within digital networks that would benefit from stronger engagement by the information sciences.