Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.032534853 = sum of:
  0.020715743 = product of:
    0.08286297 = sum of:
      0.08286297 = weight(_text_:authors in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08286297 = score(doc=1795,freq=24.0), product of:
          0.2374559 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.34896153 = fieldWeight in 1795, product of:
            4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
              24.0 = termFreq=24.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1795)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.011819109 = product of:
    0.023638219 = sum of:
      0.023638219 = weight(_text_:w in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.023638219 = score(doc=1795,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05208721 = queryNorm
          0.11908768 = fieldWeight in 1795, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
            0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1795)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 55(2004) no.5, S.467-468 (W. Koehler): "Virtual Inequality is an important contribution to the digital divide debate. That debate takes two basic forms. One centers an the divide between the "information rich" developed countries and the "information poor" developing countries. The second is concerned with the rift between information "haves" and "have-nots" within countries. This book addresses the latter domain and is concerned with the digital divide in the United States. This book is the product of a cross-disciplinary collaboration. Mossberger and Tolbert are both members of the Kent State University political science department while Stansbury is an the Library and Information Science faculty. The book is extremely well documented. Perhaps the chapter an the democracy divide and e-government is the best done, reflecting the political science bent of two of the authors. E-government is very well covered. Unfortunately, e-commerce and e-education go virtually unmentioned. If e-government is important to defining the digital divide, then certainly e-commerce and e-education are as well. Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury argue that the digital divide should be described as four different divides: the access divide, the skills divide, the economic opportunity divide, and the democratic divide. Each of these divides is developed in its own chapter. Each chapter draws well an the existing literature. The book is valuable if for no other reason than that it provides an excellent critique of the current state of the understanding of the digital divide in the United States. It is particularly good in its contrast of the approaches taken by the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. Perhaps this is a function of the multidisciplinary strength of the book's authorship, for indeed it shows here. The access divide is defined along "connectivity" lines: who has access to digital technologies. The authors tonfirm the conventional wisdom that age and education are important predictors of in-home access, but they also argue that rate and ethnicity are also factors (pp. 32-33): Asian Americans have greatest access followed by whites, Latinos, and African Americans in that order. Most access the Internet from home or work, followed by friends' computers, libraries, and other access points. The skills divide is defined as technical competence and information literacy (p. 38). Variation was found along technical competence for age, education, affluence, rate, and ethnicity, but not gender (p. 47). The authors conclude that for the most part the skills divide mirrors the access divide (p. 55). While they found no gender difference, they did find a gender preference for skills acquisition: males prefer a more impersonal delivery ("online help and tutorials") while females prefer more personal instruction (p. 56).
The economic opportunity divide is predicated an the hypothesis that there has, indeed, been a major shift in opportunities driven by changes in the information environment. The authors document this paradigm shift well with arguments from the political and economic right and left. This chapter might be described as an "attitudinal" chapter. The authors are concerned here with the perceptions of their respondents of their information skills and skill levels with their economic outlook and opportunities. Technological skills and economic opportunities are correlated, one finds, in the minds of all across all ages, genders, races, ethnicities, and income levels. African Americans in particular are ". . attuned to the use of technology for economic opportunity" (p. 80). The fourth divide is the democratic divide. The Internet may increase political participation, the authors posit, but only among groups predisposed to participate and perhaps among those with the skills necessary to take advantage of the electronic environment (p. 86). Certainly the Web has played an important role in disseminating and distributing political messages and in some cases in political fund raising. But by the analysis here, we must conclude that the message does not reach everyone equally. Thus, the Internet may widen the political participation gap rather than narrow it. The book has one major, perhaps fatal, flaw: its methodology and statistical application. The book draws upon a survey performed for the authors in June and July 2001 by the Kent State University's Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) lab (pp. 7-9). CATI employed a survey protocol provided to the reader as Appendix 2. An examination of the questionnaire reveals that all questions yield either nominal or ordinal responses, including the income variable (pp. 9-10). Nevertheless, Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury performed a series of multiple regression analyses (reported in a series of tables in Appendix 1) utilizing these data. Regression analysis requires interval/ratio data in order to be valid although nominal and ordinal data can be incorporated by building dichotomous dummy variables. Perhaps Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury utilized dummy variables; but 1 do not find that discussed. Moreover, 1 would question a multiple regression made up completely of dichotomous dummy variables. I come away from Virtual Inequality with mixed feelings. It is useful to think of the digital divide as more than one phenomenon. The four divides that Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury offeraccess, skills, economic opportunity, and democratic-are useful as a point of departure and debate. No doubt, other divides will be identified and documented. This book will lead the way. Second, without question, Mossberger, Tolbert, and Stansbury provide us with an extremely well-documented, -written, and -argued work. Third, the authors are to be commended for the multidisciplinarity of their work. Would that we could see more like it. My reservations about their methodological approach, however, hang over this review like a shroud."
Anmerkung des Rezensenten in JASIST 55(2004) no.11, S.1024: "After reflecting an a requestfrom the authors of the reviewed book, 1 find that I did indeed err in my criticism of their methodology. The work's fault lies not with the methodology but rather with the discussion and explanation provided for the methodology. The authors do offer brief methodological explanation and justification in endnotes and appendices but are less clear in the book's text. I apologize to both the readers of the review and the authors for misinterpreting the text. For the authors' part, a methodology chapter would have been welcome. I am pleased to put right this misinterpretation that cast a shadow over an otherwise fine work."

0.012349921 = product of:
  0.024699843 = sum of:
    0.024699843 = product of:
      0.049399685 = sum of:
        0.049399685 = weight(_text_:22 in 3018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.049399685 = score(doc=3018,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18240054 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3018, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3018)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.2008 14:21:53

0.011819109 = product of:
  0.023638219 = sum of:
    0.023638219 = product of:
      0.047276437 = sum of:
        0.047276437 = weight(_text_:w in 584) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047276437 = score(doc=584,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.23817536 = fieldWeight in 584, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=584)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

AUB (W)

GHBS

AUB (W)

0.008864332 = product of:
  0.017728664 = sum of:
    0.017728664 = product of:
      0.035457328 = sum of:
        0.035457328 = weight(_text_:w in 1794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035457328 = score(doc=1794,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19849424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.17863151 = fieldWeight in 1794, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.8108058 = idf(docFreq=2659, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1794)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

AUC (W)

GHBS

AUC (W)

0.0059801196 = product of:
  0.011960239 = sum of:
    0.011960239 = product of:
      0.047840957 = sum of:
        0.047840957 = weight(_text_:authors in 2575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047840957 = score(doc=2575,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.2374559 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.20147301 = fieldWeight in 2575, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2575)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

"British Librarianship and Information Work 1986-1990" continues a series which has run for more than 60 years. It began, in 1928 as the annual "Year's Work in Librarianship", changed from 1951 to "Five Years' Work in Librarianship" and, with the volume for 1966-1970, took on its present title. The series has established itself as an important record of professional activity and thought, through its comprehensive reviews of most aspects of information and library work. It is valuable to those who wish to keep up to date professionally, noting current developments and trends. It will be equally useful for those researchers and students who in the future need to look back historically on the events and achivements of each quinquennium. This issue follows closely the contents and style of its immediate predecessor "British librarianship and information Work 1981-1985", being in two volumes, one covering general libraries and the library information profession, and the other being concerned with special libraries, materials and processes. All the topics in the previous volume are included, except for the chapter on Buildings and Equipment, the contents of which have been incorporated into other chapters. All the contributors were asked to describe the last five years' major events and publications in their fields, and, generally, to limit their contributions to about 7,500 words, with no restriction on the number of bibliographical references. All authors were requested to tackle their subjects thoroughly while conforming to their own personal and individual styles. No attempt has been made to impose an overall editorial style, or to avoid the duplication which results from writers covering specific, but inevitably overlapping, areas of interest. Cross references have not been inserted in the text from chapter to chapter, where duplication occurs, but a detailed subject index provides for readers wishing to approach the review with an interest in any specific area or topic. A separate list of acronyms and abbreviations appears in each volume, representing all such entries identified in both volumes.

0.004228583 = product of:
  0.008457166 = sum of:
    0.008457166 = product of:
      0.033828665 = sum of:
        0.033828665 = weight(_text_:authors in 1929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033828665 = score(doc=1929,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.2374559 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05208721 = queryNorm
            0.14246294 = fieldWeight in 1929, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1929)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 59(2008) no.8, S.1360-1361 (A. Japzon): "This is the first book since The Wired Museum to address the theoretical discourse on cultural heritage and digital media (Jones-Garmil, 1997). The editors, Fiona Cameron, a Research Fellow in Museum and Cultural Heritage Studies at the Centre for Cultural Research at the University of Western Sydney, and Sarah Kenderdine, the Director of Special Projects for the Museum Victoria, bring together 30 authors from the international cultural heritage community to provide a foundation from which to explore and to understand the evolving significance of digital media to cultural heritage. The editors offer the collection of essays as a reference work to be used by professionals, academics, and students working and researching in all fields of cultural heritage including museums, libraries, galleries, archives, and archeology. Further, they recommend the work as a primary or a secondary text for undergraduate and graduate education for these fields. The work succeeds on these counts owing to the range of cultural heritage topics covered and the depth of description on these topics. Additionally, this work would be of value to those individuals working and researching in the fields of human computer interaction and educational technology. The book is divided into three sections: Replicants/Object Morphologies; Knowledge Systems and Management: Shifting Paradigms and Models; and Cultural Heritage and Virtual Systems. Many of the themes in the first section resonate throughout the book providing consistency of language and conceptual understandings, which ultimately offers a shared knowledge base from which to engage in the theoretical discussion on cultural heritage. This review will briefly summarize selected themes and concepts from each of the sections as the work is vast in thought and rich in detail. ...
The major strength of Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage: A Critical Discourse is the balance of theory and practice achieved by its authors through the inclusion of discussion on digital culture exhibits and programs. By describing the work being done at diverse cultural institutions life is given to theoretical discussions. By relating theory to practice, the work becomes accessible to a broader range of readers. Further, these essays provide many examples of how libraries and museums could partner with each other in the realm of digital culture. The field of museum studies is dealing with the same issues as information and library science with regards to data organization, user behavior, object classification, and documentation schemas. Also, the emphasis on the users of digital cultural heritage and how individuals make meaningful connections with art, history, and geography is another asset of the book. Each chapter is well researched resulting in helpful and extensive bibliographies on various aspects of digital culture. Overall, the work is rich in discussion, description and illustrative examples that cover the subject of digital cultural heritage in terms of depth and breadth. The primary weakness of the title is on the focus on museum studies in the discourse on digital cultural heritage. There is much to be shared and discovered across other cultural institutions such as libraries and local historical societies and a more interdisciplinary approach to the essays included would have captured this. The overwhelming emphasis on museums, unfortunately, may cause some researching and studying digital cultural heritage from another perspective to overlook this work; thereby further dividing the efforts and communication of knowledge in this area. This work is highly recommended for collections on museum studies, cultural heritage, art history and documentation, library and information science, and archival science. This work would be most useful to educators and researchers interested in a theoretical understanding of cultural institutions and user interactions in view of the social and political impact of the evolving digital state of cultural heritage rather than in the specific technologies and specific user studies on the digital cultural heritage. Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage is an insightful work that will encourage further discourse and research."