Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Hartley, J."
  • × theme_ss:"Referieren"
  1. Hartley, J.; Betts, L.: Common weaknesses in traditional abstracts in the social sciences (2009) 0.01 
    0.009748395 = product of:
  0.01949679 = sum of:
    0.01949679 = product of:
      0.03899358 = sum of:
        0.03899358 = weight(_text_:p in 3115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03899358 = score(doc=3115,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16359726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.23835106 = fieldWeight in 3115, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5955126 = idf(docFreq=3298, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3115)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Detailed checklists and questionnaires have been used in the past to assess the quality of structured abstracts in the medical sciences. The aim of this article is to report the findings when a simpler checklist was used to evaluate the quality of 100 traditional abstracts published in 53 different social science journals. Most of these abstracts contained information about the aims, methods, and results of the studies. However, many did not report details about the sample sizes, ages, or sexes of the participants, or where the research was carried out. The correlation between the lengths of the abstracts and the amount of information present was 0.37 (p < .001), suggesting that word limits for abstracts may restrict the presence of key information to some extent. We conclude that authors can improve the quality of information in traditional abstracts in the social sciences by using the simple checklist provided in this article.
  2. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996) 0.01 
    0.009247013 = product of:
  0.018494027 = sum of:
    0.018494027 = product of:
      0.036988053 = sum of:
        0.036988053 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036988053 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
  3. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996) 0.01 
    0.007705845 = product of:
  0.01541169 = sum of:
    0.01541169 = product of:
      0.03082338 = sum of:
        0.03082338 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03082338 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15933464 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045500398 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, 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=7673)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356

Authors

Years