Search (36 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Referieren"
  • × year_i:[1990 TO 2000}
  1. Scholz, M.: Qualitätssicherung von Datenbanken : eine gemeinsame Aufgabe von Autor, Schriftleitung und Dokumentar (1994) 0.02 
    0.019095764 = product of:
  0.05728729 = sum of:
    0.0071393843 = weight(_text_:in in 8971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071393843 = score(doc=8971,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 8971, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8971)
    0.050147906 = weight(_text_:und in 8971) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050147906 = score(doc=8971,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.51830536 = fieldWeight in 8971, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8971)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Die Gestaltung von Publikationen in Zeitschriften, Schriftenreihen und anderem Schrifttum des Agrarbereiches erfüllt oft nicht die Normen (DIN 1422 und DIN 1426). Titel, Kurzreferat (abstract) und zusätzliche Stichworte werden Bestandteile der Datenbank und tragen wesentlich zur erfolgreichen Wiederauffindung von Veröffentlichungen bei. Beispiele verdeutlichen die Notwendigkeit einer Initiative von ZADI und GBDL im FIS-ELF
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Bibliothekswesen und Dokumentation des Landbaues. 1994, H.50, S.24-27d
  2. Neumann-Duscha, I.: Über die Qualität von Referaten (1990) 0.02 
    0.017855775 = product of:
  0.053567324 = sum of:
    0.0071393843 = weight(_text_:in in 8593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071393843 = score(doc=8593,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 8593, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8593)
    0.04642794 = weight(_text_:und in 8593) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04642794 = score(doc=8593,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.47985753 = fieldWeight in 8593, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8593)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Die Qualität der Dokumentenanlyse entscheidet über die Wirksamkeit eines Dokumentationsvorhabens, denn Auswahl und Darstellung von Informationselementen bilden die Grundlage zum Wiederfinden des dokumentierten Wissens. Kurzreferate informieren über den Inhalt einer Veröffentlichung. Verschiedene Typen von Inhaltsangaben werden entsprechend der DIN 1426 vorgestellt, Vorschriften und Anweisungen an Referate werden analysiert und die Bewertung der Qualität von Kurzreferaten diskutiert. Das zunehmende Wissen über den Aufbau und das Information Retrieval von Faktendatenbanken führt zu der Schlußfolgerung, daß über die verbale Kurzdarstellung des Dokumenteninhalts hinaus Fakten extrahiert und in speziellen Datenbanken gespeichert werden sollten
    Source
    Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Bibliothekswesen und Dokumentation des Landbaus. 1990, H.46, S.53-70
  3. Ruda, S.: Abstracting: eine Auswahlbibliographie (1992) 0.02 
    0.017148167 = product of:
  0.0514445 = sum of:
    0.010820055 = weight(_text_:in in 6603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010820055 = score(doc=6603,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 6603, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6603)
    0.040624447 = weight(_text_:und in 6603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040624447 = score(doc=6603,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.41987535 = fieldWeight in 6603, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6603)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Die vorliegende Auswahlbibliographie ist in 9 Themenbereiche unterteilt. Der erste Abschnitt enthält Literatur, in der auf Abstracts und Abstracting-Verfahren allgemein eingegangen und ein Überblick über den Stand der Forschung gegeben wird. Im nächsten Abschnitt werden solche Aufsätze referiert, die die historische Entwicklung des Abstracting beschreiben. Im dritten Teil sind Abstracting-Richtlinien verschiedener Institutionen aufgelistet. Lexikalische, syntaktische und semantische Textkondensierungsverfahren sind das Thema der in Abschnitt 4 präsentierten Arbeiten. Textstrukturen von Abstracts werden unter Punkt 5 betrachtet, und die Arbeiten des nächsten Themenbereiches befassen sich mit dem Problem des Schreibens von Abstracts. Der siebte Abschnitt listet sog. 'maschinelle' und maschinen-unterstützte Abstracting-Methoden auf. Anschließend werden 'maschinelle' und maschinenunterstützte Abstracting-Verfahren, Abstracts im Vergleich zu ihren Primärtexten sowie Abstracts im allgemeien bewertet. Den Abschluß bilden Bibliographien
  4. Kuhlen, R.: Abstracts, abstracting : intellektuelle und maschinelle Verfahren (1997) 0.02 
    0.016972285 = product of:
  0.050916854 = sum of:
    0.010709076 = weight(_text_:in in 7800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010709076 = score(doc=7800,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 7800, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7800)
    0.040207777 = weight(_text_:und in 7800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040207777 = score(doc=7800,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.41556883 = fieldWeight in 7800, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=7800)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation: ein Handbuch zur Einführung in die fachliche Informationsarbeit. 4. Aufl. Hrsg.: M. Buder u.a
  5. Endres-Niggemeyer, B.: ¬An empirical process model of abstracting (1992) 0.01 
    0.013046755 = product of:
  0.039140265 = sum of:
    0.010709076 = weight(_text_:in in 8834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010709076 = score(doc=8834,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 8834, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8834)
    0.02843119 = weight(_text_:und in 8834) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02843119 = score(doc=8834,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.29385152 = fieldWeight in 8834, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=8834)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Source
    Mensch und Maschine: Informationelle Schnittstellen der Kommunikation. Proc. des 3. Int. Symposiums für Informationswissenschaft (ISI'92), 5.-7.11.1992 in Saarbrücken. Hrsg.: H.H. Zimmermann, H.-D. Luckhardt u. A. Schulz
  6. Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995) 0.01 
    0.012832299 = product of:
  0.038496897 = sum of:
    0.008924231 = weight(_text_:in in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008924231 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
    0.029572664 = product of:
      0.059145328 = sum of:
        0.059145328 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059145328 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15286934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, 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=3061)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Discusses briefly the application of hypertext in library user training with particular reference to a specific hypertext based tutorial designed to teach library school students the basics knowledge of abstracts and abstracting process
    Date
    27. 1.1996 18:22:06
  7. Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996) 0.01 
    0.00990557 = product of:
  0.02971671 = sum of:
    0.011973113 = weight(_text_:in in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011973113 = score(doc=7244,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 7244, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7244)
    0.017743597 = product of:
      0.035487194 = sum of:
        0.035487194 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035487194 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15286934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7244, 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=7244)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Considers the principles of indexing and the intellectual skills involved in order to determine what automatic indexing systems would be required in order to supplant or complement the human indexer. Good indexing requires: considerable prior knowledge of the literature; judgement as to what to index and what depth to index; reading skills; abstracting skills; and classification skills, Illustrates these features with a detailed description of abstracting and indexing processes involved in generating entries for the mechanical engineering database POWERLINK. Briefly assesses the possibility of replacing human indexers with specialist indexing software, with particular reference to the Object Analyzer from the InTEXT automatic indexing system and using the criteria described for human indexers. At present, it is unlikely that the automatic indexer will replace the human indexer, but when more primary texts are available in electronic form, it may be a useful productivity tool for dealing with large quantities of low grade texts (should they be wanted in the database)
    Date
    9. 2.1997 18:44:22
  8. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996) 0.01 
    0.009484224 = product of:
  0.028452672 = sum of:
    0.010709076 = weight(_text_:in in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010709076 = score(doc=4411,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 4411, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4411)
    0.017743597 = product of:
      0.035487194 = sum of:
        0.035487194 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035487194 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15286934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Structured abstracts are abstracts which include subheadings such as: background, aims, participants methods and results. These are rapidly replacing traditional abstracts in medical periodicals, but the number and detail of the subheadings used varies, and there is a range of different typographic settings. Reviews a number of studies designed to investigate readers' preferences for different typographic settings and layout. Over 400 readers took part in the study: students; postgraduates; research workers and academics in the social sciences. The most preferred version emerged from the last of 3 studies and 2 additional studies were then carried out to determine preferences for the overall position and layout of this most preferred version on a A4 page. The most preferred version for the setting of the subheadings are printed in bold capital letters
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
  9. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996) 0.01 
    0.0091357 = product of:
  0.027407099 = sum of:
    0.012620768 = weight(_text_:in in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012620768 = score(doc=7673,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
    0.014786332 = product of:
      0.029572664 = sum of:
        0.029572664 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029572664 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15286934 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043654136 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
    Abstract
    Reports results of 2 studies to determine if structured abstracts offer any advantage to users in terms of whether they are easier to search. In study 1, using a specially prepared electronic database of abstracts in either their original format or the structured format, 52 users were asked to find the answers to 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts in traditional format followed by 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts set in the structured format. Time and error data were recorded automatically. In study 2, using a printed database, 56 users were asked to to find 5 abstracts that reprted a particular kind of study and then find 5 more references that reported another kind of study. In study 1 users performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts but there were some unexplainable practice effects. In study 2, the users again performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts. However, there were asymmetrical transfer effects: users who responded first to the structured abstracts responded more quickly to the following traditional abstracts than did those users who responded first to the traditional abstracts. Nevertheless, the overall findings support the hypothesis that it is easier for user to search structured abstracts than it is to search traditional abstracts
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356
  10. Kuhlen, R.: Abstracts, abstracting : intellektuelle und maschinelle Verfahren (1990) 0.01 
    0.007818179 = product of:
  0.04690907 = sum of:
    0.04690907 = weight(_text_:und in 2333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04690907 = score(doc=2333,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.09675359 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.4848303 = fieldWeight in 2333, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2333)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Source
    Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation. 3. Aufl. Hrsg.: M. Buder u.a. Bd.1
  11. Hartley, J.: Is it appropriate to use structured abstracts in non-medical science journals? (1998) 0.00 
    0.0026606917 = product of:
  0.01596415 = sum of:
    0.01596415 = weight(_text_:in in 2999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01596415 = score(doc=2999,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.26884392 = fieldWeight in 2999, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2999)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Reports results of a study to consider whether or not structured abstracts can be used efectively in non medical science periodicals. Reviews a selection of studies on structured abstracts from the medical and psychological literature, presents examples of structured abstracts published in non medical science periodicals and considers how original abstracts might be written in a structured form for these periodicals. Concludes that, in light of these example studies, editors of these periodicals should consider the value of adopting structured abstracts
  12. Rothkegel, A.: Abstracting from the perspective of text production (1995) 0.00 
    0.0023281053 = product of:
  0.013968632 = sum of:
    0.013968632 = weight(_text_:in in 3740) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013968632 = score(doc=3740,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 3740, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3740)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    An abstract itself is a text which is subjected to general and specific conditions of text production. The goal - namely the forming of the abstract as a text - controls the whole process of abstracting. This goal oriented view contrasts to most approaches in this domain which are source text oriented. Production strategies are described in terms of text structure building processes which are reconstructed with methods of modelling in the area of text linguistics and computational linguistics. This leads to a close relationship between thr representation of the model and the resulting text. Gives examples in which authentic material of abstracts is analyzed according to the model. The model itself integrates 3 text levels which are combined and represented in terms of the writer's activities
  13. McIntosh, N.: Structured abstracts and information transfer (1994) 0.00 
    0.0021859813 = product of:
  0.013115887 = sum of:
    0.013115887 = weight(_text_:in in 728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013115887 = score(doc=728,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 728, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=728)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Reports results of a study, conducted by the European Society of Paediatric Research (ESPR), to determine whether the information content of structured medical abstracts is greater than abstracts with traditional format and whether the efficacy of peer review is improved by the use of structured medical abstracts. The sample studied comprised the abstracts of papers submitted for the ESPR annual meeting and each abstract was assessed by a research worker by a research worker for information content by referring to a list of criteria. The words in each abstract were counted to obtain the information density of each and the abstracts were evaluated according to whether they were in an unstructured format, a semistructured format, or a more fully structured format. Although there was no significant difference in the scientific score of the scientific information density of the different formats there was significantly more information in the fully structured format. When the abstracts were resubmitted in structured format, there was always a highly significant increase in the information content
  14. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Structured abstracts in the social sciences : presentation, readability and recall (1995) 0.00 
    0.0021859813 = product of:
  0.013115887 = sum of:
    0.013115887 = weight(_text_:in in 2383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013115887 = score(doc=2383,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.22087781 = fieldWeight in 2383, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2383)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Reports results of a study to explore the possibilities of extending the use of structured abstracts (which use subheadings such as background, aims, participants method, results, conclusions) of the type often found in biomedical periodicals; to test whether or not such structured abstracts are more easily searched, comprehended and recalled than abstracts set in the traditional manner; and to examine readers' preferences for different typographic settings for structured abstracts. Results indicated: that it is possible to produce structured abstracts for periodical articles in the social sciences; and that such abstracts may be easier to read, search and recall than abstracts presented in the traditional manner. Suggests that abstracts use 6 subheadings (background, aims, method, results, conclusions, and, optionally, comment) and recommends that these subheadings are conveyed in bold capital letters and, ideally, set apart from the main text by printer's rules
  15. Busch-Lauer, I.-A.: Abstracts in German medical journals : a linguistic analysis (1995) 0.00 
    0.0020823204 = product of:
  0.012493922 = sum of:
    0.012493922 = weight(_text_:in in 3677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012493922 = score(doc=3677,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 3677, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3677)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Compares formats and linguistic devices of German abstracts and their English equivalents, written by German medical scholars to English native speakers. The source is 20 abstracts taken from German medical journals representing different degrees of specialism. The analysis includes: the overall length of articles/abstracts; the representation/arrangement of sections; the linguistic devices. Results show no correlation between the length of articles and the length of abstracts. In contrast to native speaking author abstracts, 'background information' predominated in the structure of the studied German non-native speaker abstracts, whereas 'purpose of study' and 'conclusions' were not clearly stated. In linguistic terms, the German abstracts frequently contained lexical hegdes, complex and enumerating sentence structure; passive voice and post tense as well as various types of linking structures
  16. Spiteri, L.F.: Library and information science vs business : a comparison of approaches to abstracting (1997) 0.00 
    0.0020823204 = product of:
  0.012493922 = sum of:
    0.012493922 = weight(_text_:in in 3699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012493922 = score(doc=3699,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 3699, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3699)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    The library and information science (LIS) literature on abstracting makes little mention about abstracting conducted in the corporate / business environment, whereas the business literature suggests that abstarcting is a very important component of business writing. Examines a variety of publications from LIS and business in order to compare and contrast their approaches to the following aspects of abstracting: definitions of abstracts; types of abstracts; purpose of abstracts; and writing of abstracts. Summarises the results of the examination which revealed a number of similarities, differences, and inadequacies in the ways in which both fields approach abstracting. Concludes that both fields need to develop more detailed guidelines concerning the cognitive process of abstracting and suggests improvements to the training af absractors based on these findings
  17. Pinto, M.; Lancaster, F.W.: Abstracts and abstracting in knowledge discovery (1999) 0.00 
    0.0020823204 = product of:
  0.012493922 = sum of:
    0.012493922 = weight(_text_:in in 6233) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012493922 = score(doc=6233,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 6233, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6233)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  18. Lancaster, F.W.: Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice (1991) 0.00 
    0.0020823204 = product of:
  0.012493922 = sum of:
    0.012493922 = weight(_text_:in in 752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012493922 = score(doc=752,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 752, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=752)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Content
    Enthält folgende Kapitel: Pre-coordinate indexes; consistency of indexing: quality of indexing; abstracts: types and functions, writing the abstract, natural language in information retrieval, automatic indexing. There are exercises in both indexing and abstracting procedures
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Library and information science resaerch 14(1992) no.1, S.117-118 (C. Tenopir); International classification 19(1992) no.4, S.227-228 (R. Fugmann); Journal of the American Society for Information Science 43(1992) no.6, S.456 (B.R. Boyce); Cataloging & classification quarterly 15(1992) no.1, S.245-247 (E.M. Rasmussen) Journal of academic librarianship 18(1992) no.1, S.39 (G.A. Crawford) // Winner of the 1992 ASIS best information science book award
  19. Hartley, J.: Is it appropriate to use structured abstracts in social science journals? (1997) 0.00 
    0.0020609628 = product of:
  0.012365777 = sum of:
    0.012365777 = weight(_text_:in in 2749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012365777 = score(doc=2749,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 2749, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2749)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Structured abstracts have now become widespread in medical research journals. Considers whether or not such structured abstracts can be used effectively in social science journals. Reviews a a selection of studies to see if structured abstracts written for social science journals are more informative, easier to read and easier to search than their traditional equivalents. Results suggest that structured abstracts are appropriate for social science journals. Editors of social science journals should consider adopting structured abstracts
  20. O'Rourke, A.J.: Structured abstracts in information retrieval from biomedical databases : a literature survey (1997) 0.00 
    0.0018033426 = product of:
  0.010820055 = sum of:
    0.010820055 = weight(_text_:in in 85) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010820055 = score(doc=85,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 85, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=85)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    Abstract
    Clear guidelines have been provided for structuring the abstracts of original research and review articles and, in the past 10 years, several major medical periodicals have adopted the policy of including such abstracts with all their articles. A review of the literature reveals that proponents claim that structured abstracts enhance peer review, improve information retrieval, and ease critical appraisal. However, some periodicals have not adopted structured abstracts and their opponents claim that they make articles longer and harder to read and restrict author originality. Concludes that previous research on structured abstracts focused on how closely they followed prescribed structure and include salient points of the full text, rather than their role in increasing the usefulness of the article

Authors

Languages

  • e 30
  • d 6

Types

Themes

Subjects

Classifications