Search (213 results, page 1 of 11)

0.17383508 = product of:
  0.34767017 = sum of:
    0.08691754 = product of:
      0.26075262 = sum of:
        0.26075262 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26075262 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.39767802 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.26075262 = weight(_text_:2f in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.26075262 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.39767802 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

0.12416791 = product of:
  0.24833582 = sum of:
    0.062083956 = product of:
      0.18625186 = sum of:
        0.18625186 = weight(_text_:3a in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18625186 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.39767802 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.18625186 = weight(_text_:2f in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18625186 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.39767802 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Politische Meinung. 381(2001) Nr.1, S.65-74 [https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dgfe.de%2Ffileadmin%2FOrdnerRedakteure%2FSektionen%2FSek02_AEW%2FKWF%2FPublikationen_Reihe_1989-2003%2FBand_17%2FBd_17_1994_355-406_A.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2KcbRsHy5UQ9QRIUyuOLNi]

0.12416791 = product of:
  0.24833582 = sum of:
    0.062083956 = product of:
      0.18625186 = sum of:
        0.18625186 = weight(_text_:3a in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18625186 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.39767802 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.18625186 = weight(_text_:2f in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.18625186 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.39767802 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

http%3A%2F%2Fcogprints.org%2F1380%2F1%2FvdM_correlation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0g7DvZbQPb2U7dYb49b9v_

0.05574449 = product of:
  0.11148898 = sum of:
    0.06985526 = weight(_text_:services in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06985526 = score(doc=2277,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.405633 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
    0.04163372 = product of:
      0.08326744 = sum of:
        0.08326744 = weight(_text_:management in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08326744 = score(doc=2277,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.5266582 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Source

Information management for information services - economic challenge for the 90's: Proceedings of a Workshop for Participants from Countries in Central and Eastern Europe and Developing Countries, Berlin, 13.-19. Oct. 1991. Ed.: B.G. Goedegebuure u. K.A. Stroetmann

0.042851016 = product of:
  0.17140406 = sum of:
    0.17140406 = sum of:
      0.08243056 = weight(_text_:management in 5772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08243056 = score(doc=5772,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.521365 = fieldWeight in 5772, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5772)
      0.0889735 = weight(_text_:22 in 5772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0889735 = score(doc=5772,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 5772, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5772)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 22(1986) no.5, S.373-383

0.039717898 = product of:
  0.079435796 = sum of:
    0.05588421 = weight(_text_:services in 5087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05588421 = score(doc=5087,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.3245064 = fieldWeight in 5087, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5087)
    0.023551589 = product of:
      0.047103178 = sum of:
        0.047103178 = weight(_text_:management in 5087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047103178 = score(doc=5087,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 5087, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5087)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The value of information can be studied from 4 perspectives: the economic perspective; the organizational and resource management perspective; the costing, pricing and evaluation of information services; and the social value of information. Constructs a pragmatic framework for information value assessment consisting of 4 levels to determine information value in specific contexts, namely identification of the specific situation, specific determinants of the situation, techniques that can be applied to measure value, and the action that needs to be taken as well as the evaluation of the success of the process

0.036704987 = product of:
  0.14681995 = sum of:
    0.14681995 = sum of:
      0.08326744 = weight(_text_:management in 5735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08326744 = score(doc=5735,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.5266582 = fieldWeight in 5735, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5735)
      0.0635525 = weight(_text_:22 in 5735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0635525 = score(doc=5735,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5735, 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=5735)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Discusses information in the context of information resources management arguing that it is an essential resource for every organization but one that needs to be managed better. Examines information as a resource, as an asset, as a commodity, as a rubbish

Source

Managing information. 3(1996) no.6, S.22-23

Theme

Information Resources Management

0.036704987 = product of:
  0.14681995 = sum of:
    0.14681995 = sum of:
      0.08326744 = weight(_text_:management in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08326744 = score(doc=2277,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.5266582 = fieldWeight in 2277, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2277)
      0.0635525 = weight(_text_:22 in 2277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0635525 = score(doc=2277,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2277, 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=2277)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

31. 7.2001 20:22:57

Footnote

Thematisierung der Verschiebung des Verständnisses von Wissensmanagement; vgl. auch: Day, R.E.: Totality and representation: a history of knowledge management ... in: JASIS 52(2001) no.9, S.725-735

0.036262088 = product of:
  0.14504835 = sum of:
    0.14504835 = sum of:
      0.094206356 = weight(_text_:management in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.094206356 = score(doc=668,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 668, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=668)
      0.050842002 = weight(_text_:22 in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.050842002 = score(doc=668,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 668, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=668)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

While knowledge management is seen to be the biggest thing to hit the information profession since the Internet, the concept is surrounded by confusion. Traces the progress of knowledge on the information continuum which extends from data to informed decision. The reason for which knowledge management has suddenly become inluential is that its principal proponents now are not information professionals but management consultants seeking to retain their intellectual capital. Explains the reasons for this, the practical meaning of knowledge management and what information professionals should be doing to take advantage of the vogue

Source

Information world review. 1997, no.130, S.22

0.034753162 = product of:
  0.069506325 = sum of:
    0.048898686 = weight(_text_:services in 3976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048898686 = score(doc=3976,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.28394312 = fieldWeight in 3976, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3976)
    0.02060764 = product of:
      0.04121528 = sum of:
        0.04121528 = weight(_text_:management in 3976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04121528 = score(doc=3976,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 3976, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3976)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Library and information science (LIS) is a discipline based on communication. Research questions in LIS include those focusing on the retrieval use of information, information services, and information technology. Moreover, the questions asked and the thought relevant to the study of information are communicated formally within the profession primarily through the literature. This sensitivity to communication suggests that discourse analysis has the advantage of being able to address questions regarding both spoken and written communications and so can be applied to matters of articulations of purpose in the field. 2 key elements of language form the heart of discourse analysis: form and function. Applications of discourse analysis to information include investigations of the social, political, and technical uses of the word information as they have implications for theory and practice

Source

Information processing and management. 32(1996) no.2, S.217-226

0.03451311 = product of:
  0.13805243 = sum of:
    0.13805243 = sum of:
      0.099920936 = weight(_text_:management in 909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.099920936 = score(doc=909,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.63198984 = fieldWeight in 909, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=909)
      0.038131498 = weight(_text_:22 in 909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.038131498 = score(doc=909,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 909, 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=909)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The emergence of Knowledge Management (KM) over the last decade has triggered the question how or even whether this new management discipline can be distinguished from the established field of Information Management (IM). In this paper we critically examine this demarcation issue from two angles. First we will investigate to what extent the difference between IM and KM can be anchored an a conceptual distinction between their respective objects: information and knowledge. After having shown that this widely adopted strategy promises little success, we will shift our attention to an examination of the fundamental objectives or guiding principles behind both disciplines. Seen from this angle we argue that KM in order to foster organizational learning, innovation and strategy flexibility, should adopt a postmodern epistemological perspective that is geared to the management of incommensurability and difference within and between organizations.

Series

Advances in knowledge management; vol.1

Source

Knowledge management: organization competence and methodolgy. Proceedings of the Fourth International ISMICK Symposium, 21-22 October 1996, Netherlands. Ed.: J.F. Schreinemakers

Theme

Information Resources Management

0.024449343 = product of:
  0.09779737 = sum of:
    0.09779737 = weight(_text_:services in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09779737 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.56788623 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.024449343 = product of:
  0.09779737 = sum of:
    0.09779737 = weight(_text_:services in 3246) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09779737 = score(doc=3246,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.56788623 = fieldWeight in 3246, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3246)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.021425508 = product of:
  0.08570203 = sum of:
    0.08570203 = sum of:
      0.04121528 = weight(_text_:management in 6964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04121528 = score(doc=6964,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 6964, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6964)
      0.04448675 = weight(_text_:22 in 6964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04448675 = score(doc=6964,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6964, 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=6964)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

25.12.2001 13:22:30

Series

The McGraw-Hill information systems, management and strategy series

0.020777594 = product of:
  0.08311038 = sum of:
    0.08311038 = sum of:
      0.057689376 = weight(_text_:management in 2596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.057689376 = score(doc=2596,freq=12.0), product of:
          0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.3648795 = fieldWeight in 2596, product of:
            3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
              12.0 = termFreq=12.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2596)
      0.025421001 = weight(_text_:22 in 2596) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025421001 = score(doc=2596,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2596, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2596)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose In contrast to the interest of describing and managing the social processes of knowing, information science and information and knowledge management research have put less emphasis on discussing how particular information becomes usable and how it is used in different contexts and situations. The purpose of this paper is to address this major gap, and introduce and discuss the applicability of the notion of situational appropriation of information for shedding light on this particular process in the context of daily information work practices of professionals. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on the analysis of 25 qualitative interviews of archives, library and museum professionals conducted in two Nordic countries. Findings The study presents examples of how individuals appropriate different tangible and intangible assets as information on the basis of the situation in hand. Research limitations/implications The study proposes a new conceptual tool for articulating and conducting research on the process how information becomes useful in the situation in hand. Practical implications The situational appropriation of information perspective redefines the role of information management to incorporate a comprehensive awareness of the situations when information is useful and is being used. A better understanding how information becomes useful in diverse situations helps to discern the active role of contextual and situational effects and to exploit and take them into account as a part of the management of information and knowledge processes. Originality/value In contrast to orthodoxies of information science and information and knowledge management research, the notion of situational appropriation of information represents an alternative approach to the conceptualisation of information utilisation. It helps to frame particular types of instances of information use that are not necessarily addressed within the objectivistic, information seeker or learning oriented paradigms of information and knowledge management.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 67(2015) no.5, S.492-504

0.019858949 = product of:
  0.039717898 = sum of:
    0.027942104 = weight(_text_:services in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.027942104 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.1622532 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
    0.011775794 = product of:
      0.023551589 = sum of:
        0.023551589 = weight(_text_:management in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023551589 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.14896142 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to point out that past models of information ownership may not carry over to the age of digital information. The fact that public ownership of information (for example, by means of national and public library collections) created social benefits in the past does not mean that a greater degree of private sector involvement in information provision in the knowledge society of today is synonymous with an abandonment of past ideals of social information provision. Design/methodology/approach - A brief review of recent issues in digital preservation and national electronic heritage management, with an examination of the public-private sector characteristics of each issue. Findings - Private companies and philanthropic endeavours focussing on the business of digital information provision have done some things - which in the past we have associated with the public domain - remarkably well. It is probably fair to say that this has occurred against the pattern of expectation of the library profession. Research limitations/implications - The premise of this paper is that LIS research aimed at predicting future patterns of problem solving in information work should avoid the narrow use of patterns of public-private relationships inherited from a previous, print-based information order. Practical implications - This paper suggests practical ways in which the library and information profession can improve digital library services by looking to form creative partnerships with private sector problem solvers. Originality/value - This paper argues that the LIS profession should not take a doctrinaire approach to commercial company involvement in "our" information world. Librarians should facilitate collaboration between all parties, both public and private, to create original solutions to contemporary information provision problems. In this way we can help create pragmatic, non-doctrinaire solutions that really do work for the citizens of our contemporary information society.

0.01836472 = product of:
  0.07345888 = sum of:
    0.07345888 = sum of:
      0.035327382 = weight(_text_:management in 479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035327382 = score(doc=479,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 479, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=479)
      0.038131498 = weight(_text_:22 in 479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.038131498 = score(doc=479,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046906993 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 479, 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=479)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Anthropological inquiry suggests that all societies classify animals and plants in similar ways. Paradoxically, in the same cultures that have seen large advances in biological science, citizenry's practical knowledge of nature has dramatically diminished. Here we describe historical, cross-cultural and developmental research on how people ordinarily conceptualize organic nature (folkbiology), concentrating on cognitive consequences associated with knowledge devolution. We show that results on psychological studies of categorization and reasoning from "standard populations" fail to generalize to humanity at large. Usual populations (Euro-American college students) have impoverished experience with nature, which yields misleading results about knowledge acquisition and the ontogenetic relationship between folkbiology and folkpsychology. We also show that groups living in the same habitat can manifest strikingly distinct behaviors, cognitions and social relations relative to it. This has novel implications for environmental decision making and management, including commons problems.

Date

23. 1.2022 10:22:18

0.017975362 = product of:
  0.07190145 = sum of:
    0.07190145 = product of:
      0.1438029 = sum of:
        0.1438029 = weight(_text_:22 in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1438029 = score(doc=4042,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1642603 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.8754574 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

22. 7.2000 19:01:22

0.017288294 = product of:
  0.069153175 = sum of:
    0.069153175 = weight(_text_:services in 504) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.069153175 = score(doc=504,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17221296 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046906993 = queryNorm
        0.40155616 = fieldWeight in 504, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.6713707 = idf(docFreq=3057, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=504)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Technological changes are occuring rapidly and students entering colleges are bringing very disparate computer skills and attitudes. Some students are reluctant to embrace new technologies, others demand electronic resources for all assignments. By considering the computer access and Internet resources available to elementary school students today, it is possible to imagine what tomorrow's users will expect from libraries. Although college students may arrive at libraries with increased computer skills, their knowledge of electronic information may be lacking. Defines information literacy with an overview of information literacy skills. The Digital Information Literacy programme at Texas University at Austin serves as a case study for integrating information literacy skills into traditional services and partnerships

Source

Internet reference services quarterly. 2(1997) nos.2/3, S.93-111

0.014571802 = product of:
  0.058287207 = sum of:
    0.058287207 = product of:
      0.116574414 = sum of:
        0.116574414 = weight(_text_:management in 3420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.116574414 = score(doc=3420,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15810528 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046906993 = queryNorm
            0.73732144 = fieldWeight in 3420, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3420)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Theme

Information Resources Management