Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

0.013203094 = product of:
  0.03960928 = sum of:
    0.03960928 = product of:
      0.07921856 = sum of:
        0.07921856 = weight(_text_:group in 4433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07921856 = score(doc=4433,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.36161837 = fieldWeight in 4433, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4433)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Examines statistically the public's use and attitudes towards interactive and personal health services via an online questionnaire survey and enhances these data with an expert assessment of a number of consumer health sites and their services. Over a period of three weeks more than 1,300 people responded to an online questionnaire produced by The British Life and Internet Project. Of the respondents, 81 per cent were British. The likely potential uptake figure for support group participation among Internet health users is about 20 per cent while around 11 to 13 per cent will go online to describe a medical condition. Those in poor heath were approximately ten to 13 times more likely to have participated in an online support group. Those aged over 65 were four times as likely to e-mail their doctor. More positive health outcomes were associated with those respondents that participated in online support groups and the least number of health outcomes were associated with those people that maintained e-mail contact with a doctor or surgery.

0.011203195 = product of:
  0.033609584 = sum of:
    0.033609584 = product of:
      0.06721917 = sum of:
        0.06721917 = weight(_text_:group in 1745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06721917 = score(doc=1745,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.30684334 = fieldWeight in 1745, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1745)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This work tackles one of the fundamental problems of information management - how to get the right information to the right person at the right time. It provides a practical framework to enable information services to gather information from users in order to aid information system design, and to monitor the effectiveness of an information service. This new edition has been fully revised and now has increased coverage of the Internet. The Web raises many problems when it comes to meeting information needs - authority and overload, for example - and these problems make an effective information needs analysis even more crucial. There is a new methodology section on Web log analysis and focus group interviews. Practical advice is given concerning interview technique and an interview schedule is included.

0.010687098 = product of:
  0.032061294 = sum of:
    0.032061294 = product of:
      0.06412259 = sum of:
        0.06412259 = weight(_text_:22 in 5941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06412259 = score(doc=5941,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5941, 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=5941)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

26. 2.2008 19:22:51

0.010562475 = product of:
  0.031687424 = sum of:
    0.031687424 = product of:
      0.06337485 = sum of:
        0.06337485 = weight(_text_:group in 5832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06337485 = score(doc=5832,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.2892947 = fieldWeight in 5832, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5832)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The study set out to determine: (1) what were the searching characteristics of end-users in a non-academic environment and explain this in the light of their information needs; (2) whether these characteristics were those that were ascribed to end users in the professional literature; (3) whether they differed materially from those of information professionals working in the same fields. Searching characteristics were interpreted in their widest sense to include: command utilisation/knowledge; search success a satisfaction; volume of searching; searching style / approach; duration of searches; file selection; willingness to delegate and levels of training. These issues were explored in relation to 2 practitioner groups - journalists from he Guardian newspaper, and politicians from The House of Commons. Comparative data were also sought from information professionals in these 2 organisations. A mixture of social and statistical methods was used to monitor end-user and professional searching, though transactional log analysis was strongly featured. Altogether the searching behaviour of 170 end users was evaluated in the light of the searching behaviour of 70 librarians. The principal findings were that: in some respects end users did conform to the picture that information professionals have of them: they did seartch with a limited range of commands; more of their searches produced no results, and search statements were simplly constructed. But in other respects they confounded their image - they could be very quick and economical searchers, and they did not display meters of print-out. However, there were variations between individual end users, and it was often possible to find an end-user group that matched an information professional group on one aspect of online searching or another. The online behaviour of end users was very much related to their general information seeking behaviour; and to the fact that they were not trained

0.009335997 = product of:
  0.028007988 = sum of:
    0.028007988 = product of:
      0.056015976 = sum of:
        0.056015976 = weight(_text_:group in 961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056015976 = score(doc=961,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.2557028 = fieldWeight in 961, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=961)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

According to estimates the mobile device will soon be the main platform for searching the web, and yet our knowledge of how mobile consumers use information, and how that differs from desktops/laptops users, is imperfect. The paper sets out to correct this through an analysis of the logs of a major cultural website, Europeana. The behavior of nearly 70,000 mobile users was examined over a period of more than a year and compared with that for PC users of the same site and for the same period. The analyses conducted include: size and growth of use, time patterns of use; geographical location of users, digital collections used; comparative information-seeking behavior using dashboard metrics, clustering of users according to their information seeking, and user satisfaction. The main findings were that mobile users were the fastest-growing group and will rise rapidly to a million by December 2012 and that their visits were very different in the aggregate from those arising from fixed platforms. Mobile visits could be described as being information "lite": typically shorter, less interactive, and less content viewed per visit. Use took a social rather than office pattern, with mobile use peaking at nights and weekends. The variation between different mobile devices was large, with information seeking on the iPad similar to that for PCs and laptops and that for smartphones very different indeed. The research further confirms that information-seeking behavior is platform-specific and the latest platforms are changing it all again. Websites will have to adapt.

0.007468797 = product of:
  0.02240639 = sum of:
    0.02240639 = product of:
      0.04481278 = sum of:
        0.04481278 = weight(_text_:group in 662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04481278 = score(doc=662,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21906674 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.20456223 = fieldWeight in 662, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.628715 = idf(docFreq=1173, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=662)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The CIBER group at University College London are currently evaluating a distance education initiative funded by the Department of Health, providing in-service training to NHS staff via DiTV and satellite to PC systems. This paper aims to provide the context for the project by outlining a short history of distance education, describing the media used in providing remote education, and to review research literature on achievement, attitude, barriers to learning and learner characteristics. Design/methodology/approach - Literature review, with particular, although not exclusive, emphasis on health. Findings - The literature shows little difference in achievement between distance and traditional learners, although using a variety of media, both to deliver pedagogic material and to facilitate communication, does seem to enhance learning. Similarly, attitudinal studies appear to show that the greater number of channels offered, the more positive students are about their experiences. With regard to barriers to completing courses, the main problems appear to be family or work obligations. Research limitations/implications - The research work this review seeks to consider is examining "on-demand" showing of filmed lectures via a DiTV system. The literature on DiTV applications research, however, is dominated by studies of simultaneous viewing by on-site and remote students, rather than "on-demand". Practical implications - Current research being carried out by the authors should enhance the findings accrued by the literature, by exploring the impact of "on-demand" video material, delivered by DiTV - something no previous research appears to have examined. Originality/value - Discusses different electronic systems and their exploitation for distance education, and cross-references these with several aspects evaluated in the literature: achievement, attitude, barriers to take-up or success, to provide a holistic picture hitherto missing from the literature.

0.0064122584 = product of:
  0.019236775 = sum of:
    0.019236775 = product of:
      0.03847355 = sum of:
        0.03847355 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03847355 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2680, 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=2680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

23. 2.2009 17:22:41

0.005343549 = product of:
  0.016030647 = sum of:
    0.016030647 = product of:
      0.032061294 = sum of:
        0.032061294 = weight(_text_:22 in 228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032061294 = score(doc=228,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16573377 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047327764 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 228, 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=228)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22