Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"He, D."
  • × language_ss:"e"
  1. Xie, B.; He, D.; Mercer, T.; Wang, Y.; Wu, D.; Fleischmann, K.R.; Zhang, Y.; Yoder, L.H.; Stephens, K.K.; Mackert, M.; Lee, M.K.: Global health crises are also information crises : a call to action (2020) 0.02
    0.015623381 = product of:
      0.031246763 = sum of:
        0.031246763 = product of:
          0.062493525 = sum of:
            0.062493525 = weight(_text_:b in 32) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.062493525 = score(doc=32,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.3875115 = fieldWeight in 32, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=32)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In this opinion paper, we argue that global health crises are also information crises. Using as an example the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic, we (a) examine challenges associated with what we term "global information crises"; (b) recommend changes needed for the field of information science to play a leading role in such crises; and (c) propose actionable items for short- and long-term research, education, and practice in information science.
  2. Jeng, W.; He, D.; Jiang, J.: User participation in an academic social networking service : a survey of open group users on Mendeley (2015) 0.01
    0.007890998 = product of:
      0.015781997 = sum of:
        0.015781997 = product of:
          0.031563994 = sum of:
            0.031563994 = weight(_text_:b in 1815) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031563994 = score(doc=1815,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.19572285 = fieldWeight in 1815, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1815)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Although there are a number of social networking services that specifically target scholars, little has been published about the actual practices and the usage of these so-called academic social networking services (ASNSs). To fill this gap, we explore the populations of academics who engage in social activities using an ASNS; as an indicator of further engagement, we also determine their various motivations for joining a group in ASNSs. Using groups and their members in Mendeley as the platform for our case study, we obtained 146 participant responses from our online survey about users' common activities, usage habits, and motivations for joining groups. Our results show that (a) participants did not engage with social-based features as frequently and actively as they engaged with research-based features, and (b) users who joined more groups seemed to have a stronger motivation to increase their professional visibility and to contribute the research articles that they had read to the group reading list. Our results generate interesting insights into Mendeley's user populations, their activities, and their motivations relative to the social features of Mendeley. We also argue that further design of ASNSs is needed to take greater account of disciplinary differences in scholarly communication and to establish incentive mechanisms for encouraging user participation.
  3. Li, L.; He, D.; Zhang, C.; Geng, L.; Zhang, K.: Characterizing peer-judged answer quality on academic Q&A sites : a cross-disciplinary case study on ResearchGate (2018) 0.01
    0.0077088396 = product of:
      0.015417679 = sum of:
        0.015417679 = product of:
          0.030835358 = sum of:
            0.030835358 = weight(_text_:22 in 4637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030835358 = score(doc=4637,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4637, 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=4637)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    20. 1.2015 18:30:22
  4. Chi, Y.; He, D.; Jeng, W.: Laypeople's source selection in online health information-seeking process (2020) 0.01
    0.0077088396 = product of:
      0.015417679 = sum of:
        0.015417679 = product of:
          0.030835358 = sum of:
            0.030835358 = weight(_text_:22 in 34) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030835358 = score(doc=34,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15939656 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 34, 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=34)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    12.11.2020 13:22:09
  5. Lin, Y,-l.; Trattner, C.; Brusilovsky, P.; He, D.: ¬The impact of image descriptions on user tagging behavior : a study of the nature and functionality of crowdsourced tags (2015) 0.01
    0.0063127987 = product of:
      0.012625597 = sum of:
        0.012625597 = product of:
          0.025251195 = sum of:
            0.025251195 = weight(_text_:b in 2159) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.025251195 = score(doc=2159,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16126883 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045518078 = queryNorm
                0.15657827 = fieldWeight in 2159, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.542962 = idf(docFreq=3476, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2159)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Crowdsourcing has emerged as a way to harvest social wisdom from thousands of volunteers to perform a series of tasks online. However, little research has been devoted to exploring the impact of various factors such as the content of a resource or crowdsourcing interface design on user tagging behavior. Although images' titles and descriptions are frequently available in image digital libraries, it is not clear whether they should be displayed to crowdworkers engaged in tagging. This paper focuses on offering insight to the curators of digital image libraries who face this dilemma by examining (i) how descriptions influence the user in his/her tagging behavior and (ii) how this relates to the (a) nature of the tags, (b) the emergent folksonomy, and (c) the findability of the images in the tagging system. We compared two different methods for collecting image tags from Amazon's Mechanical Turk's crowdworkers-with and without image descriptions. Several properties of generated tags were examined from different perspectives: diversity, specificity, reusability, quality, similarity, descriptiveness, and so on. In addition, the study was carried out to examine the impact of image description on supporting users' information seeking with a tag cloud interface. The results showed that the properties of tags are affected by the crowdsourcing approach. Tags from the "with description" condition are more diverse and more specific than tags from the "without description" condition, while the latter has a higher tag reuse rate. A user study also revealed that different tag sets provided different support for search. Tags produced "with description" shortened the path to the target results, whereas tags produced without description increased user success in the search task.