Search (1316 results, page 1 of 66)

  • × theme_ss:"Information"
  1. Crawford, M.: Information as a commodity (1989) 0.14 
    0.14343107 = product of:
  0.23905176 = sum of:
    0.15336542 = weight(_text_:section in 2839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15336542 = score(doc=2839,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.58301973 = fieldWeight in 2839, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2839)
    0.037679087 = weight(_text_:on in 2839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037679087 = score(doc=2839,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.3436586 = fieldWeight in 2839, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2839)
    0.048007242 = weight(_text_:information in 2839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048007242 = score(doc=2839,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.54858685 = fieldWeight in 2839, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2839)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Contribution to a special section on library and information management. Discusses the concept of information as an object of trade and the role of information workers in dealing with this commodity as being authorities on the quality and the value of information itself.
    Source
    Aslib information. 17(1989) no.2, S.42-43
    Theme
    Information Resources Management
    Information
  2. ¬The value and impact of information (1994) 0.11 
    0.106360346 = product of:
  0.17726724 = sum of:
    0.12269233 = weight(_text_:section in 3276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12269233 = score(doc=3276,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.46641576 = fieldWeight in 3276, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3276)
    0.02131451 = weight(_text_:on in 3276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02131451 = score(doc=3276,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 3276, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3276)
    0.033260394 = weight(_text_:information in 3276) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033260394 = score(doc=3276,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.38007212 = fieldWeight in 3276, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3276)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Based on the first 8 of a series of information policy briefings, organised by the Information Policy Research Section of the British Library Research and Development Department, covering discussions of the value and impact of information
    Series
    British Library research information policy issues
    Theme
    Information
  3. Worrall, A.; Cappello, A.; Osolen, R.: ¬The importance of socio-emotional considerations in online communities, social informatics, and information science (2021) 0.10 
    0.102142714 = product of:
  0.1276784 = sum of:
    0.07668271 = weight(_text_:section in 354) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07668271 = score(doc=354,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.29150987 = fieldWeight in 354, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=354)
    0.013321568 = weight(_text_:on in 354) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013321568 = score(doc=354,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 354, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=354)
    0.025459683 = weight(_text_:information in 354) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025459683 = score(doc=354,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.2909321 = fieldWeight in 354, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=354)
    0.012214432 = product of:
      0.024428863 = sum of:
        0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 354) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024428863 = score(doc=354,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 354, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=354)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.8 = coord(4/5)
    Abstract
    Alongside cognitive and social phenomena, many scholars have examined emotional and affective considerations in information science, but a potential emotional or affective paradigm has not coalesced to the extent of the social or cognitive paradigms. We argue information science research should integrate the social paradigm, as offered by social informatics, with affective and emotional considerations: a socio-emotional paradigm. A review of existing literature and findings from users' motivations to participate on the Academia section of the Stack Exchange social questioning-and-answering site make our case. We uncovered tensions between the intended information-centric focus of the community and users who believed social, emotional, and affective considerations needed to be foregrounded, speaking to online communities acting as boundary objects, with the "fit" for one user or community not always the same as for another. An integrated socio-emotional paradigm shows much strength for social informatics and information science research, including uncovering hidden concerns and differences in values, as in our study. Affective and emotional research, often bubbling under in information science, should rise to the surface is not so much a paradigm shift but an integration of social, emotional, and affective considerations into a socio-emotional paradigm.
    Series
    Special issue: Paradigm shift in the field of information
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 72(2021) no.10, S.1247-1260
    Theme
    Information
  4. Fallis, D.: Social epistemology and information science (2006) 0.09 
    0.09330946 = product of:
  0.23327366 = sum of:
    0.047037303 = weight(_text_:information in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047037303 = score(doc=4368,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.5375032 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
    0.18623635 = sum of:
      0.07817236 = weight(_text_:technology in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07817236 = score(doc=4368,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
      0.108063996 = weight(_text_:22 in 4368) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.108063996 = score(doc=4368,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4368, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4368)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    13. 7.2008 19:22:28
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 40(2006), S.xxx-xxx
    Theme
    Information
  5. Badia, A.: Data, information, knowledge : an information science analysis (2014) 0.08 
    0.07893797 = product of:
  0.13156328 = sum of:
    0.018650195 = weight(_text_:on in 1296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018650195 = score(doc=1296,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 1296, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1296)
    0.031434666 = weight(_text_:information in 1296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031434666 = score(doc=1296,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.3592092 = fieldWeight in 1296, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1296)
    0.08147841 = sum of:
      0.03420041 = weight(_text_:technology in 1296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03420041 = score(doc=1296,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.23034787 = fieldWeight in 1296, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1296)
      0.047278 = weight(_text_:22 in 1296) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047278 = score(doc=1296,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1296, 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=1296)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    I analyze the text of an article that appeared in this journal in 2007 that published the results of a questionnaire in which a number of experts were asked to define the concepts of data, information, and knowledge. I apply standard information retrieval techniques to build a list of the most frequent terms in each set of definitions. I then apply information extraction techniques to analyze how the top terms are used in the definitions. As a result, I draw data-driven conclusions about the aggregate opinion of the experts. I contrast this with the original analysis of the data to provide readers with an alternative viewpoint on what the data tell us.
    Date
    16. 6.2014 19:22:57
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.6, S.1279-1287
    Theme
    Information
  6. Malheiro da Silva, A.; Ribeiro, F.: Documentation / Information and their paradigms : characterization and importance in research, education, and professional practice (2012) 0.08 
    0.07702373 = product of:
  0.12837288 = sum of:
    0.092019245 = weight(_text_:section in 84) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.092019245 = score(doc=84,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.34981182 = fieldWeight in 84, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=84)
    0.015985882 = weight(_text_:on in 84) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015985882 = score(doc=84,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 84, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=84)
    0.020367749 = weight(_text_:information in 84) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020367749 = score(doc=84,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 84, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=84)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Since 2004, the authors have designed a proposal of paradigms for the Documentation-Information field, which starts from a comprehensive meaning of the concept and is based on identifying the presence of a custodial, cultural, historicist- and-humanist, and technicist paradigm that has shaped the professional activity, education, and public policies of the archival, librarian, and museologist universe from the early 1800s to the mid-20th century. It also includes pointin out the emergence of a new post-custodial, informational, and scientific paradigm, generated by the profound changes taking place worldwide and that are summarized in strong, yet too generic, expressions such as "information era" or "globalization." This paper characterizes the two paradigms proposed, highlighting their dominant traits and showing their operational relevance at the level of education, research, and professional practice.
    Footnote
    Beitrag im Rahmen einer Special Section: Papers from the 10th ISKO Spanish Chapter Conference (X Congreso Capítulo Español de ISKO), Ferrol, Spain, 30 June-1 July, 2011.
    Theme
    Information
  7. Capurro, R.; Hjoerland, B.: ¬The concept of information (2002) 0.07 
    0.07376175 = product of:
  0.12293624 = sum of:
    0.07969101 = weight(_text_:section in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07969101 = score(doc=5079,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.30294594 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
    0.030551622 = weight(_text_:information in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030551622 = score(doc=5079,freq=72.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.34911853 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
          8.485281 = tf(freq=72.0), with freq of:
            72.0 = termFreq=72.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
    0.012693611 = product of:
      0.025387222 = sum of:
        0.025387222 = weight(_text_:technology in 5079) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025387222 = score(doc=5079,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.17098896 = fieldWeight in 5079, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=5079)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    The concept of information as we use it in everyday English, in the sense of knowledge communicated, plays a central role in contemporary society. The development and widespread use of computer networks since the end of World War II, and the emergence of information science as a discipline in the 1950s, are evidence of this focus. Although knowledge and its communication are basic phenomena of every human society, it is the rise of information technology and its global impacts that characterize ours as an information society. It is commonplace to consider information as a basic condition for economic development together with capital, labor, and raw material; but what makes information especially significant at present is its digital nature. The impact of information technology an the natural and social sciences in particular has made this everyday notion a highly controversial concept. Claude Shannon's (1948) "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" is a landmark work, referring to the common use of information with its semantic and pragmatic dimensions, while at the same time redefining the concept within an engineering framework. The fact that the concept of knowledge communication has been designated by the word information seems, prima facie, a linguistic happenstance. For a science like information science (IS), it is of course important how fundamental terms are defined; and in IS, as in other fields, the question of how to define information is often raised. This chapter is an attempt to review the status of the concept of information in IS, with reference also to interdisciplinary trends. In scientific discourse, theoretical concepts are not true or false elements or glimpses of some element of reality; rather, they are constructions designed to do a job in the best possible way. Different conceptions of fundamental terms like information are thus more or less fruitful, depending an the theories (and in the end, the practical actions) they are expected to support. In the opening section, we discuss the problem of defining terms from the perspective of the philosophy of science. The history of a word provides us with anecdotes that are tangential to the concept itself. But in our case, the use of the word information points to a specific perspective from which the concept of knowledge communication has been defined. This perspective includes such characteristics as novelty and relevante; i.e., it refers to the process of knowledge transformation, and particularly to selection and interpretation within a specific context. The discussion leads to the questions of why and when this meaning was designated with the word information. We will explore this history, and we believe that our results may help readers better understand the complexity of the concept with regard to its scientific definitions.
    Discussions about the concept of information in other disciplines are very important for IS because many theories and approaches in IS have their origins elsewhere (see the section "Information as an Interdisciplinary Concept" in this chapter). The epistemological concept of information brings into play nonhuman information processes, particularly in physics and biology. And vice versa: the psychic and sociological processes of selection and interpretation may be considered using objective parameters, leaving aside the semantic dimension, or more precisely, by considering objective or situational parameters of interpretation. This concept can be illustrated also in physical terms with regard to release mechanisms, as we suggest. Our overview of the concept of information in the natural sciences as well as in the humanities and social sciences cannot hope to be comprehensive. In most cases, we can refer only to fragments of theories. However, the reader may wish to follow the leads provided in the bibliography. Readers interested primarily in information science may derive most benefit from the section an "Information in Information Science," in which we offer a detailed explanation of diverse views and theories of information within our field; supplementing the recent ARIST chapter by Cornelius (2002). We show that the introduction of the concept of information circa 1950 to the domain of special librarianship and documentation has in itself had serious consequences for the types of knowledge and theories developed in our field. The important question is not only what meaning we give the term in IS, but also how it relates to other basic terms, such as documents, texts, and knowledge. Starting with an objectivist view from the world of information theory and cybernetics, information science has turned to the phenomena of relevance and interpretation as basic aspects of the concept of information. This change is in no way a turn to a subjectivist theory, but an appraisal of different perspectives that may determine in a particular context what is being considered as informative, be it a "thing" (Buckland, 1991b) or a document. Different concepts of information within information science reflect tensions between a subjective and an objective approach. The concept of interpretation or selection may be considered to be the bridge between these two poles. It is important, however, to consider the different professions involved with the interpretation and selection of knowledge. The most important thing in IS (as in information policy) is to consider information as a constitutive forte in society and, thus, recognize the teleological nature of information systems and services (Braman, 1989).
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 37(2003), S.343-411
    Theme
    Information
  8. Floridi, L.: Open problems in the philosophy of information (2004) 0.07 
    0.07135647 = product of:
  0.17839116 = sum of:
    0.15182401 = weight(_text_:section in 2635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15182401 = score(doc=2635,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.26305357 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.57716006 = fieldWeight in 2635, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.276892 = idf(docFreq=613, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2635)
    0.02656714 = weight(_text_:information in 2635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02656714 = score(doc=2635,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.3035872 = fieldWeight in 2635, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2635)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    The philosophy of information (PI) is a new area of research with its own field of investigation and methodology. This article, based an the Herbert A. Simon Lecture of Computing and Philosophy I gave at Carnegie Mellon University in 2001, analyses the eighteen principal open problems in PI. Section 1 introduces the analysis by outlining Herbert Simon's approach to PI. Section 2 discusses some methodological considerations about what counts as a good philosophical problem. The discussion centers an Hilbert's famous analysis of the central problems in mathematics. The rest of the article is devoted to the eighteen problems. These are organized into five sections: problems in the analysis of the concept of information, in semantics, in the study of intelligence, in the relation between information and nature, and in the investigation of values.
    Theme
    Information
  9. Martin, W.J.: ¬The information society (1995) 0.07 
    0.0712843 = product of:
  0.17821075 = sum of:
    0.04157549 = weight(_text_:information in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04157549 = score(doc=1201,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.47509015 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
    0.13663526 = sum of:
      0.06909526 = weight(_text_:technology in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06909526 = score(doc=1201,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.46537298 = fieldWeight in 1201, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1201)
      0.06754 = weight(_text_:22 in 1201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06754 = score(doc=1201,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1201, 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=1201)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    15. 7.2002 14:22:55
    LCSH
    Technology / Social aspects
    Information storage and retrieval systems / Social aspects
    PRECIS
    Society / Effects of technological development in information systems
    Subject
    Technology / Social aspects
    Information storage and retrieval systems / Social aspects
    Society / Effects of technological development in information systems
    Theme
    Information
  10. Spitzer, K.L.; Eisenberg, M.B.; Lowe, C.A.: Information literacy : essential skills for the information age (1998) 0.07 
    0.068498656 = product of:
  0.11416443 = sum of:
    0.031971764 = weight(_text_:on in 3682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031971764 = score(doc=3682,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.29160398 = fieldWeight in 3682, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3682)
    0.040735498 = weight(_text_:information in 3682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040735498 = score(doc=3682,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.46549138 = fieldWeight in 3682, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3682)
    0.04145716 = product of:
      0.08291432 = sum of:
        0.08291432 = weight(_text_:technology in 3682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08291432 = score(doc=3682,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.5584476 = fieldWeight in 3682, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3682)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Imprint
    Syracuse, NY : ERIC Clearinghouse on Information & Technology, Center for Science and Technology, Syracuse University
    Theme
    Information
  11. Raban, D.R.; Rafaeli, S.: ¬The effect of source nature and status on the subjective value of information (2006) 0.06 
    0.06458229 = product of:
  0.10763714 = sum of:
    0.018839544 = weight(_text_:on in 5268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018839544 = score(doc=5268,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 5268, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5268)
    0.030598734 = weight(_text_:information in 5268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030598734 = score(doc=5268,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.34965688 = fieldWeight in 5268, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5268)
    0.05819886 = sum of:
      0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 5268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024428863 = score(doc=5268,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 5268, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5268)
      0.03377 = weight(_text_:22 in 5268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03377 = score(doc=5268,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5268, 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=5268)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This is an empirical, experimental investigation of the value of information, as perceived through the willingness to purchase information (WTP) and the willingness to sell it (accept payment, WTA). We examined the effects of source nature: expertise versus content, and source status: copy versus exclusive original of information on the WTA-WTP ratio. In an animated computer simulation of a business game, players could maximize their profits by making choices regarding inventory and prices. Participants were offered the chance to bid for buying or selling information regarding the weather that may affect demand. We find, as hypothesized, that the subjective value of information does indeed follow the predictions of endowment effect theory. The ratio of willingness to accept to willingness to purchase (WTA-WTP) recorded for the 294 subjects resembles the ratio common for private goods, rather than the intuitively expected unity. The WTA-WTP ratios diverged from unity more often and in a more pronounced manner for information traded in the original form rather than as a copy of the original, although even for copies the WTA-WTP ratio is still double. The results yield a value of about three for the WTA-WTP ratio for original information whether the source is content or expertise. Copy information received a subjective value that was significantly different (lower) than original information. The implications for both online trading and online sharing of information are discussed.
    Date
    22. 7.2006 15:09:35
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.3, S.321-329
    Theme
    Information
  12. Brown, S.D.; Lightfoot, G.M.: Insistent emplacement : Heidegger on the technologies of informaing (1998) 0.06 
    0.06414494 = product of:
  0.10690823 = sum of:
    0.026643137 = weight(_text_:on in 3830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026643137 = score(doc=3830,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.24300331 = fieldWeight in 3830, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3830)
    0.037953056 = weight(_text_:information in 3830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037953056 = score(doc=3830,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.43369597 = fieldWeight in 3830, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3830)
    0.042312037 = product of:
      0.084624074 = sum of:
        0.084624074 = weight(_text_:technology in 3830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.084624074 = score(doc=3830,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.5699632 = fieldWeight in 3830, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3830)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Explores how the work of Martin Heidegger may be applied to contemporary understanding of information technology. Considers the view of information as degraded knowledge, a position refuted by Heidegger's account of truth as correctness
    Footnote
    Article included in an issue devoted to the theme: Martin Heidegger and information technology
    Source
    Information technology and people. 11(1998) no.4, S.290-304
    Theme
    Information
  13. Bates, M.J.: Fundamental forms of information (2006) 0.06 
    0.06387328 = product of:
  0.1596832 = sum of:
    0.044455327 = weight(_text_:information in 2746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044455327 = score(doc=2746,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.5079985 = fieldWeight in 2746, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2746)
    0.11522788 = sum of:
      0.048366684 = weight(_text_:technology in 2746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048366684 = score(doc=2746,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.32576108 = fieldWeight in 2746, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2746)
      0.06686119 = weight(_text_:22 in 2746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06686119 = score(doc=2746,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 2746, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2746)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Fundamental forms of information, as well as the term information itself, are defined and developed for the purposes of information science/studies. Concepts of natural and represented information (taking an unconventional sense of representation), encoded and embodied information, as well as experienced, enacted, expressed, embedded, recorded, and trace information are elaborated. The utility of these terms for the discipline is illustrated with examples from the study of information-seeking behavior and of information genres. Distinctions between the information and curatorial sciences with respect to their social (and informational) objects of study are briefly outlined.
    Content
    Vgl. Erwiderung: Hjoerland, B.: The controversy over the concept of information: a rejoinder to Professor Bates. In: Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.643.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 18:15:22
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.8, S.1033-1045
    Theme
    Information
  14. Houston, R.D.; Harmon, E.G.: Re-envisioning the information concept : systematic definitions (2002) 0.06 
    0.060820796 = product of:
  0.10136799 = sum of:
    0.02131451 = weight(_text_:on in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02131451 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
    0.033260394 = weight(_text_:information in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033260394 = score(doc=136,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.38007212 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
    0.046793085 = product of:
      0.09358617 = sum of:
        0.09358617 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09358617 = score(doc=136,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.536106 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This paper suggests a framework and systematic definitions for 6 words commonly used in dthe field of information science: data, information, knowledge, wisdom, inspiration, and intelligence. We intend these definitions to lead to a quantification of information science, a quantification that will enable their measurement, manipulastion, and prediction.
    Date
    22. 2.2007 18:56:23
    22. 2.2007 19:22:13
    Source
    Emerging frameworks and methods: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on the Conceptions of Library and Information Science (CoLIS4), Seattle, WA, July 21 - 25, 2002. Eds.: Fidel, R., H. Bruce, P. Ingwersen u. P. Vakkari
    Theme
    Information
  15. Zhang, P.; Soergel, D.: Towards a comprehensive model of the cognitive process and mechanisms of individual sensemaking (2014) 0.06 
    0.057608962 = product of:
  0.09601493 = sum of:
    0.018839544 = weight(_text_:on in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018839544 = score(doc=1344,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 1344, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1344)
    0.018976528 = weight(_text_:information in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018976528 = score(doc=1344,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 1344, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1344)
    0.05819886 = sum of:
      0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024428863 = score(doc=1344,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 1344, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1344)
      0.03377 = weight(_text_:22 in 1344) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03377 = score(doc=1344,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1344, 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=1344)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    This review introduces a comprehensive model of the cognitive process and mechanisms of individual sensemaking to provide a theoretical basis for: - empirical studies that improve our understanding of the cognitive process and mechanisms of sensemaking and integration of results of such studies; - education in critical thinking and sensemaking skills; - the design of sensemaking assistant tools that support and guide users. The paper reviews and extends existing sensemaking models with ideas from learning and cognition. It reviews literature on sensemaking models in human-computer interaction (HCI), cognitive system engineering, organizational communication, and library and information sciences (LIS), learning theories, cognitive psychology, and task-based information seeking. The model resulting from this synthesis moves to a stronger basis for explaining sensemaking behaviors and conceptual changes. The model illustrates the iterative processes of sensemaking, extends existing models that focus on activities by integrating cognitive mechanisms and the creation of instantiated structure elements of knowledge, and different types of conceptual change to show a complete picture of the cognitive processes of sensemaking. The processes and cognitive mechanisms identified provide better foundations for knowledge creation, organization, and sharing practices and a stronger basis for design of sensemaking assistant systems and tools.
    Date
    22. 8.2014 16:55:39
    Series
    Advances in information science
    Source
    Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.9, S.1733-1756
    Theme
    Information
  16. Kelton, K.; Fleischmann, K.R.; Wallace, W.A.: Trust in digital information (2008) 0.06 
    0.05505125 = product of:
  0.091752075 = sum of:
    0.03574552 = weight(_text_:on in 1365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03574552 = score(doc=1365,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.32602316 = fieldWeight in 1365, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1365)
    0.035277974 = weight(_text_:information in 1365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035277974 = score(doc=1365,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.40312737 = fieldWeight in 1365, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1365)
    0.02072858 = product of:
      0.04145716 = sum of:
        0.04145716 = weight(_text_:technology in 1365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04145716 = score(doc=1365,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 1365, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1365)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Trust in information is developing into a vitally important topic as the Internet becomes increasingly ubiquitous within society. Although many discussions of trust in this environment focus on issues like security, technical reliability, or e-commerce, few address the problem of trust in the information obtained from the Internet. The authors assert that there is a strong need for theoretical and empirical research on trust within the field of information science. As an initial step, the present study develops a model of trust in digital information by integrating the research on trust from the behavioral and social sciences with the research on information quality and human- computer interaction. The model positions trust as a key mediating variable between information quality and information usage, with important consequences for both the producers and consumers of digital information. The authors close by outlining important directions for future research on trust in information science and technology.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.3, S.363-374
    Theme
    Information
  17. Infield, N.: Capitalising on knowledge : if knowledge is power, why don't librarians rule the world? (1997) 0.05 
    0.0542518 = product of:
  0.090419665 = sum of:
    0.03014327 = weight(_text_:on in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03014327 = score(doc=668,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 668, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=668)
    0.033260394 = weight(_text_:information in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033260394 = score(doc=668,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.38007212 = fieldWeight in 668, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=668)
    0.027015999 = product of:
      0.054031998 = sum of:
        0.054031998 = weight(_text_:22 in 668) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054031998 = score(doc=668,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    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
    Theme
    Information
  18. ¬The information future (1995) 0.05 
    0.052878194 = product of:
  0.08813032 = sum of:
    0.02637536 = weight(_text_:on in 4003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02637536 = score(doc=4003,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 4003, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4003)
    0.037571613 = weight(_text_:information in 4003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037571613 = score(doc=4003,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.42933714 = fieldWeight in 4003, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4003)
    0.024183342 = product of:
      0.048366684 = sum of:
        0.048366684 = weight(_text_:technology in 4003) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048366684 = score(doc=4003,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = queryNorm
            0.32576108 = fieldWeight in 4003, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4003)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: WOLF, M.T. u. R.B. MILLER: The information future: data, data, everywhere!; WOLFE, G.: Libraries on the superhighway: rest stop or roadkill?; AGRE, P.E.: Institutional circuity: thinking about the forms and uses of information; LYRIS, S.O.: Multiply and conquer; MASON, L.: The elephant and the net cruiser: regulating communication on the net; BRIN, D.: The Internet as a commons; MARTIN, M.S.: Problems in information transfer in the age of the computer; BARNES, J.: Information and unfictionable science; STARRS, P.F. u. HUNTSINGER, L.: The matrix, cyberpunk literature, and the apocalyptic landscapes of information technology; PRANSKY, J.: Robots: our future information intermediaries; CHISLENKO, A.: Intelligent information filters and enhanced reality; BARNES, S.: The impossible dream
    Source
    Information technology and libraries. 14(1995) no.4, S.219-269
    Theme
    Information
  19. Malsburg, C. von der: ¬The correlation theory of brain function (1981) 0.05 
    0.052672468 = product of:
  0.08778744 = sum of:
    0.06597931 = product of:
      0.19793792 = sum of:
        0.19793792 = weight(_text_:3a in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19793792 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42262965 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049850095 = 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)
    0.013321568 = weight(_text_:on in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013321568 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
    0.0084865615 = weight(_text_:information in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0084865615 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    A summary of brain theory is given so far as it is contained within the framework of Localization Theory. Difficulties of this "conventional theory" are traced back to a specific deficiency: there is no way to express relations between active cells (as for instance their representing parts of the same object). A new theory is proposed to cure this deficiency. It introduces a new kind of dynamical control, termed synaptic modulation, according to which synapses switch between a conducting and a non- conducting state. The dynamics of this variable is controlled on a fast time scale by correlations in the temporal fine structure of cellular signals. Furthermore, conventional synaptic plasticity is replaced by a refined version. Synaptic modulation and plasticity form the basis for short-term and long-term memory, respectively. Signal correlations, shaped by the variable network, express structure and relationships within objects. In particular, the figure-ground problem may be solved in this way. Synaptic modulation introduces exibility into cerebral networks which is necessary to solve the invariance problem. Since momentarily useless connections are deactivated, interference between di erent memory traces can be reduced, and memory capacity increased, in comparison with conventional associative memory
    Source
    http%3A%2F%2Fcogprints.org%2F1380%2F1%2FvdM_correlation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0g7DvZbQPb2U7dYb49b9v_
    Theme
    Information
  20. Hjoerland, B.: ¬The controversy over the concept of information : a rejoinder to Professor Bates (2009) 0.05 
    0.052440863 = product of:
  0.087401435 = sum of:
    0.01762278 = weight(_text_:on in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01762278 = score(doc=2748,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.109641045 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.1607316 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
    0.02846479 = weight(_text_:information in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02846479 = score(doc=2748,freq=90.0), product of:
        0.08751074 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049850095 = queryNorm
        0.32527196 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
          9.486833 = tf(freq=90.0), with freq of:
            90.0 = termFreq=90.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
    0.041313864 = sum of:
      0.024428863 = weight(_text_:technology in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024428863 = score(doc=2748,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.14847288 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
      0.016885 = weight(_text_:22 in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.016885 = score(doc=2748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17456654 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049850095 = queryNorm
          0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Content
    "This letter considers some main arguments in Professor Bates' article (2008), which is part of our former debate (Bates, 2005,2006; Hjoerland, 2007). Bates (2008) does not write much to restate or enlarge on her theoretical position but is mostly arguing about what she claims Hjorland (2007) ignored or misinterpreted in her two articles. Bates (2008, p. 842) wrote that my arguments did not reflect "a standard of coherence, consistency, and logic that is expected of an argument presented in a scientific journal." My argumentation below will refute this statement. This controversy is whether information should be understood as a subjective phenomenon (alone), as an objective phenomenon (alone), or as a combined objective and a subjective phenomenon ("having it both ways"). Bates (2006) defined "information" (sometimes, e.g., termed "information 1," p. 1042) as an objective phenomenon and "information 2" as a subjective phenomenon. However, sometimes the term "information" is also used as a synonym for "information 2," e.g., "the term information is understood to refer to one or both senses" (p. 1042). Thus, Professor Bates is not consistent in using the terminology that she herself introduces, and confusion in this controversy may be caused by Professor Bates' ambiguity in her use of the term "information." Bates (2006, p. 1033) defined information as an objective phenomenon by joining a definition by Edwin Parker: "Information is the pattern of organization of matter and energy." The argument in Hjoerland (2007) is, by contrast, that information should be understood as a subjective phenomenon all the way down: That neither the objective definition of information nor "having it both ways" is fruitful. This is expressed, for example, by joining Karpatschof's (2000) definition of information as a physical signal relative to a certain release mechanism, which implies that information is not something objective that can be understood independently of an observer or independently of other kinds of mechanism that are programmed to be sensitive to specific attributes of a signal: There are many differences in the world, and each of them is potentially informative in given situations. Regarding Parker's definition, "patterns of organization of matter and energy" are no more than that until they inform somebody about something. When they inform somebody about something, they may be considered information. The following quote is part of the argumentation in Bates (2008): "He contrasts my definition of information as 'observer-independent' with his position that information is 'situational' and adds a list of respected names on the situational side (Hjoerland, 2007, p. 1448). What this sentence, and much of the remainder of his argument, ignores is the fact that my approach accounts for both an observer-independent and a contextual, situational sense of information." Yes, it is correct that I mostly concentrated on refuting Bates' objective definition of information. It is as if Bates expects an overall appraisal of her work rather than providing a specific analysis of the points on which there are disagreements. I see Bates' "having it both ways": a symptom of inconsistence in argumentation.
    Bates (2008, p. 843) further writes about her definition of information: "This is the objectivist foundation, the rock bottom minimum of the meaning of information; it informs both articles throughout." This is exactly the focus of my disagreement. If we take a word in a language, it is understood as both being a "pattern of organization of matter and energy" (e.g., a sound) and carrying meaning. But the relation between the physical sign and its meaning is considered an arbitrary relation in linguistics. Any physical material has the potential of carrying any meaning and to inform somebody. The physical stuff in itself is not information until it is used as a sign. An important issue in this debate is whether Bates' examples demonstrate the usefulness of her own position as opposed to mine. Her example about information seeking concerning navigation and how "the very layout of the ship and the design of the bridge promoted the smooth flow of information from the exterior of the ship to the crew and among the crewmembers" (Bates, 2006, pp. 1042-1043) does not justify Bates' definition of information as an objective phenomenon. The design is made for a purpose, and this purpose determines how information should be defined in this context. Bates' view on "curatorial sciences" (2006, p. 1043) is close to Hjorland's suggestions (2000) about "memory institutions," which is based on the subjective understanding of information. However, she does not relate to this proposal, and she does not argue how the objective understanding of information is related to this example. I therefore conclude that Bates' practical examples do not support her objective definition of information, nor do they support her "having it both ways." Finally, I exemplify the consequences of my understanding of information by showing how an archaeologist and a geologist might represent the same stone differently in information systems. Bates (2008, p. 843) writes about this example: "This position is completely consistent with mine." However, this "consistency" was not recognized by Bates until I published my objections and, therefore, this is an indication that my criticism was needed. I certainly share Professor Bates (2008) advice to read her original articles: They contain much important stuff. I just recommend that the reader ignore the parts that argue about information being an objective phenomenon."
    References Bates, M.J. (2005). Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science. Information Research, 10(4), paper 239. Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/10-4/paper239.html. Bates, M.J. (2006). Fundamental forms of information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8), 1033-1045. Bates, M.J. (2008). Hjorland's critique of Bates' work on defining information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5), 842-844. Hjoerland, B. (2000). Documents, memory institutions, and information science. Journal of Documentation, 56, 27-41. Hjoerland, B. (2007). Information: Objective or subjective-situational? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(10), 1448-1456. Karpatschof, B. (2000). Human activity. Contributions to the anthropological sciences from a perspective of activity theory. Copenhagen: Dansk Psykologisk Forlag. Retrieved May 14, 2007, from http://informationr.net/ir/ 12-3/Karpatschof/Karp00.html.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 18:13:27
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.643
    Theme
    Information

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 1015
  • m 232
  • el 57
  • s 45
  • x 9
  • r 4
  • d 3
  • ? 2
  • p 2
  • b 1
  • fi 1
  • i 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications