Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Hartley, J."
  1. Hartley, J.: Designing electronic text : the role of print-based research (1987) 0.04
    0.0379795 = product of:
      0.151918 = sum of:
        0.151918 = weight(_text_:communication in 7756) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.151918 = score(doc=7756,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.7633004 = fieldWeight in 7756, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7756)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Educational communication and technology. 35(1987), S.3-17
  2. Kozak, M.; Hartley, J.: Publication fees for open access journals : different disciplines-different methods (2013) 0.03
    0.026855562 = product of:
      0.10742225 = sum of:
        0.10742225 = weight(_text_:communication in 1140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10742225 = score(doc=1140,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.5397349 = fieldWeight in 1140, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1140)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Many authors appear to think that most open access (OA) journals charge authors for their publications. This brief communication examines the basis for such beliefs and finds it wanting. Indeed, in this study of over 9,000 OA journals included in the Directory of Open Access Journals, only 28% charged authors for publishing in their journals. This figure, however, was highest in various disciplines in medicine (47%) and the sciences (43%) and lowest in the humanities (4%) and the arts (0%).
    Series
    Brief communication
  3. Hartley, J.; Cabanac, G.; Kozak, M.; Hubert, G.: Research on tables and graphs in academic articles : pitfalls and promises (2015) 0.03
    0.026855562 = product of:
      0.10742225 = sum of:
        0.10742225 = weight(_text_:communication in 1637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10742225 = score(doc=1637,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.5397349 = fieldWeight in 1637, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1637)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Many papers have appeared recently assessing the effects of using tables and graphs in scientific publications. In this brief communication, we assess some of the methodological difficulties that have arisen in this context. These difficulties encompass issues of data availability, suitability of indicators, nature and purpose of tables and graphs, and the role of supplementary information.
    Series
    Brief communication
  4. Cabanac, G.; Hartley, J.: Issues of work-life balance among JASIST authors and editors (2013) 0.02
    0.020141672 = product of:
      0.08056669 = sum of:
        0.08056669 = weight(_text_:communication in 996) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08056669 = score(doc=996,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.4048012 = fieldWeight in 996, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=996)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Many dedicated scientists reject the concept of maintaining a "work-life balance." They argue that work is actually a huge part of life. In the mind-set of these scientists, weekdays and weekends are equally appropriate for working on their research. Although we all have encountered such people, we may wonder how widespread this condition is with other scientists in our field. This brief communication probes work-life balance issues among JASIST authors and editors. We collected and examined the publication histories for 1,533 of the 2,402 articles published in JASIST between 2001 and 2012. Although there is no rush to submit, revise, or accept papers, we found that 11% of these events happened during weekends and that this trend has been increasing since 2005. Our findings suggest that working during the weekend may be one of the ways that scientists cope with the highly demanding era of "publish or perish." We hope that our findings will raise an awareness of the steady increases in work among scientists before it affects our work-life balance even more.
    Series
    Brief communication
  5. Tartanus, M.; Wnuk, A.; Kozak, M.; Hartley, J.: Graphs and prestige in agricultural journals (2013) 0.02
    0.016616032 = product of:
      0.066464126 = sum of:
        0.066464126 = weight(_text_:communication in 1051) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.066464126 = score(doc=1051,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19902779 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046093877 = queryNorm
            0.33394393 = fieldWeight in 1051, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.317879 = idf(docFreq=1601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1051)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Series
    Brief communication
  6. Hartley, J.: Applying psychology to text design : a case history (1997) 0.01
    0.0078063556 = product of:
      0.031225422 = sum of:
        0.031225422 = product of:
          0.062450845 = sum of:
            0.062450845 = weight(_text_:22 in 616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.062450845 = score(doc=616,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16141291 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046093877 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 616, 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=616)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    International forum on information and documentation. 22(1997) no.1, S.3-10
  7. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996) 0.00
    0.004683813 = product of:
      0.018735252 = sum of:
        0.018735252 = product of:
          0.037470505 = sum of:
            0.037470505 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037470505 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16141291 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046093877 = 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)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
  8. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996) 0.00
    0.0039031778 = product of:
      0.015612711 = sum of:
        0.015612711 = product of:
          0.031225422 = sum of:
            0.031225422 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.031225422 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16141291 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046093877 = 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)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356