Search (679 results, page 1 of 34)

0.056382068 = product of:
  0.112764135 = sum of:
    0.112764135 = sum of:
      0.07031496 = weight(_text_:1990 in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07031496 = score(doc=3361,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.3485678 = fieldWeight in 3361, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3361)
      0.04244918 = weight(_text_:22 in 3361) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04244918 = score(doc=3361,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3361, 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=3361)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This chapter considers the continuing relevance of the ideas of browsing, serendipity, information encountering and literature discovery in the context of the information retrieval (IR) environment of 2010, though its scope extends to the ideas in the broader contexts of information seeking and information-related behaviour. It is based around a selective review of the literature since 1990 and reflection and speculation on the results. The central focus is on questions of how the concept of browsing, serendipity and related ideas have changed in the new IR environment of the web and whether, indeed, they are still meaningfull concepts.

Pages

S.1-22

0.05331636 = product of:
  0.10663272 = sum of:
    0.10663272 = product of:
      0.42653087 = sum of:
        0.42653087 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.42653087 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37946367 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.

0.0444303 = product of:
  0.0888606 = sum of:
    0.0888606 = product of:
      0.3554424 = sum of:
        0.3554424 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.3554424 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37946367 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.040272906 = product of:
  0.08054581 = sum of:
    0.08054581 = sum of:
      0.05022497 = weight(_text_:1990 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05022497 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.248977 = fieldWeight in 4147, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4147)
      0.030320844 = weight(_text_:22 in 4147) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030320844 = score(doc=4147,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4147, 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=4147)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This review aims to show, broadly, how the h-index has become a subject of widespread debate, how it has spawned many variants and diverse applications since first introduced in 2005 and some of the issues in its use. Design/methodology/approach - The review drew on a range of material published in 1990 or so sources published since 2005. From these sources, a number of themes were identified and discussed ranging from the h-index's advantages to which citation database might be selected for its calculation. Findings - The analysis shows how the h-index has quickly established itself as a major subject of interest in the field of bibliometrics. Study of the index ranges from its mathematical underpinning to a range of variants perceived to address the indexes' shortcomings. The review illustrates how widely the index has been applied but also how care must be taken in its application. Originality/value - The use of bibliometric indicators to measure research performance continues, with the h-index as its latest addition. The use of the h-index, its variants and many applications to which it has been put are still at the exploratory stage. The review shows the breadth and diversity of this research and the need to verify the veracity of the h-index by more studies.

Date

8. 1.2011 19:22:13

0.040272906 = product of:
  0.08054581 = sum of:
    0.08054581 = sum of:
      0.05022497 = weight(_text_:1990 in 1410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05022497 = score(doc=1410,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.248977 = fieldWeight in 1410, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1410)
      0.030320844 = weight(_text_:22 in 1410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030320844 = score(doc=1410,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1410, 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=1410)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper aims to study the conceptual dimension of Knowledge Organization (KO) in the ISKO proceedings (1990-2012) domain. After analyzing a corpus of 71 papers that presented the term "knowledge organization" in their titles, using the methodology of Bardin's content analysis, it was possible to obtain a set of 11 definitions of KO which were studied using the following categories: nature, object, tools, processes, and perspectives/approaches. These categories act as a basis to identify the communities of authors that interact in the domain under different conceptual perspectives. The results show that KO has been mainly understood as an area or field of knowledge whose objects are recorded knowledge and conceptual structures, and whose main processes are classification and indexing, as well as information retrieval. The nature of KO is mostly linked to the construction of specialized discourses and the methodological dimension of such area is related to the systematization of recorded scientific knowledge.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.040272906 = product of:
  0.08054581 = sum of:
    0.08054581 = sum of:
      0.05022497 = weight(_text_:1990 in 4692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05022497 = score(doc=4692,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.248977 = fieldWeight in 4692, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4692)
      0.030320844 = weight(_text_:22 in 4692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030320844 = score(doc=4692,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4692, 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=4692)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The main point that we want to state in this study is that research in the field of knowledge organization in Romania over the last twenty years is unequally and unjustly distributed among different professional categories ranging from library and information science faculty members, library professionals, software tools developers and independent researchers. The special condition of library and information science functioning as a university department in Romania with an interruption of 20 years (1970-1990) affected the overall situation of scientific research in the specific fields associated with this discipline. Our study has three stages: data collection, data recording and data interpretation. The primary outcomes of the scientific research activities considered are publications (books, book chapters and journal articles). Given this, our interest will be directed towards analyzing to what extent research and writing for publication have an impact on the evolution of Romanian libraries over this twenty years span.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.040272906 = product of:
  0.08054581 = sum of:
    0.08054581 = sum of:
      0.05022497 = weight(_text_:1990 in 4696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05022497 = score(doc=4696,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.248977 = fieldWeight in 4696, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4696)
      0.030320844 = weight(_text_:22 in 4696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030320844 = score(doc=4696,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4696, 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=4696)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The 15th International ISKO Conference has been held in Porto (Portugal) under the topic Challenges and opportunities for KO in the digital age. ISKO has been organizing biennial international conferences since 1990, in order to promote a space for debate among Knowledge Organization (KO) scholars and practitioners all over the world. The topics under discussion in the 15th International ISKO Conference are intended to cover a wide range of issues that, in a very incisive way, constitute challenges, obstacles and questions in the field of KO, but also highlight ways and open innovative perspectives for this area in a world undergoing constant change, due to the digital revolution that unavoidably moulds our society. Accordingly, the three aggregating themes, chosen to fit the proposals for papers and posters to be submitted, are as follows: 1 - Foundations and methods for KO; 2 - Interoperability towards information access; 3 - Societal challenges in KO. In addition to these themes, the inaugural session includes a keynote speech by Prof. David Bawden of City University London, entitled Supporting truth and promoting understanding: knowledge organization and the curation of the infosphere.

Date

17. 1.2019 17:22:18

0.032218326 = product of:
  0.06443665 = sum of:
    0.06443665 = sum of:
      0.040179975 = weight(_text_:1990 in 770) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040179975 = score(doc=770,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.1991816 = fieldWeight in 770, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=770)
      0.024256675 = weight(_text_:22 in 770) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024256675 = score(doc=770,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 770, 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=770)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of the research reported here is to improve comprehension of the socially-negotiated identity of concepts in the domain of knowledge organization. Because knowledge organization as a domain has as its focus the order of concepts, both from a theoretical perspective and from an applied perspective, it is important to understand how the domain itself understands the meaning of a concept. Design/methodology/approach - The paper provides an empirical demonstration of how the domain itself understands the meaning of a concept. The paper employs content analysis to demonstrate the ways in which concepts are portrayed in KO concept maps as signs, and they are subjected to evaluative semiotic analysis as a way to understand their meaning. The frame was the entire population of formal proceedings in knowledge organization - all proceedings of the International Society for Knowledge Organization's international conferences (1990-2010) and those of the annual classification workshops of the Special Interest Group for Classification Research of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (SIG/CR). Findings - A total of 344 concept maps were analyzed. There was no discernible chronological pattern. Most concept maps were created by authors who were professors from the USA, Germany, France, or Canada. Roughly half were judged to contain semiotic content. Peirceian semiotics predominated, and tended to convey greater granularity and complexity in conceptual terminology. Nodes could be identified as anchors of conceptual clusters in the domain; the arcs were identifiable as verbal relationship indicators. Saussurian concept maps were more applied than theoretical; Peirceian concept maps had more theoretical content. Originality/value - The paper demonstrates important empirical evidence about the coherence of the domain of knowledge organization. Core values are conveyed across time through the concept maps in this population of conference papers.

Content

Vgl. auch den Beitrag: Treude, L.: Das Problem der Konzeptdefinition in der Wissensorganisation: über einen missglückten Versuch der Klärung. In: LIBREAS: Library ideas. no.22, 2013, S.xx-xx.

0.03110121 = product of:
  0.06220242 = sum of:
    0.06220242 = product of:
      0.24880968 = sum of:
        0.24880968 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.24880968 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37946367 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = 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)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

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].

0.02665818 = product of:
  0.05331636 = sum of:
    0.05331636 = product of:
      0.21326543 = sum of:
        0.21326543 = weight(_text_:3a in 400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21326543 = score(doc=400,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37946367 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 400, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=400)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Faclanthology.org%2FD19-5317.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0ZZFyq5wWTtNTvNkrvjlGA.

0.02665818 = product of:
  0.05331636 = sum of:
    0.05331636 = product of:
      0.21326543 = sum of:
        0.21326543 = weight(_text_:3a in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21326543 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37946367 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

https%3A%2F%2Fjournals.univie.ac.at%2Findex.php%2Fvoebm%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F5332%2F5271%2F&usg=AOvVaw2yQdFGHlmOwVls7ANCpTii.

0.024256675 = product of:
  0.04851335 = sum of:
    0.04851335 = product of:
      0.0970267 = sum of:
        0.0970267 = weight(_text_:22 in 2851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0970267 = score(doc=2851,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2851, 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=2851)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

0.024163742 = product of:
  0.048327483 = sum of:
    0.048327483 = sum of:
      0.03013498 = weight(_text_:1990 in 3206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03013498 = score(doc=3206,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.1493862 = fieldWeight in 3206, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3206)
      0.018192505 = weight(_text_:22 in 3206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.018192505 = score(doc=3206,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3206, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3206)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Im Online-Katalog erfahren Studenten auch, ob das Buch verfügbar oder verliehen ist. Ist es gerade vergriffen, kann man es vormerken lassen, er- klärt Monika Ziller, Vorsitzen- de des Deutschen Bibliotheksverbands in Berlin. Dann werden die Studenten entsprechend benachrichtigt, wenn es zurückgegeben wurde. Außerdem könnten Studenten virtuelle Fachbibliotheken nutzen, erklärt Grau. Um das Thema Slavistik kümmert sich etwa die Staatsbibliothek in Berlin. Auf der Internetseite kann man über Suchbegriffe alle elektronischen Slavistik-Angebote wie Zeitschriften, E-Books oder Bibliografien durchforsten. Die virtuelle Fachbibliothek spuckt dann eine Titelliste aus. Bestenfalls können Studenten gleich auf einzelne Volltexte der Liste zugreifen. Oder sie müssen schauen, ob die eigene Bibliothek das gesuchte Werk hat. Vor allem Zeitschriften sind oft online im Volltext abrufbar, aber auch Enzyklopädien. "Die sind auch aktueller als der Brockhaus von 1990, der zu Hause im Regal steht" sagt Grau. Manchmal ließen sich die Texte aus Gründen des Urheberrechts aber nur auf den Rechnern auf dem Unicampus lesen, ergänzt Hohoff. Findet man ein Buch nicht, ist der Grund dafür oft ein Fehler, der sich bei der Suche eingeschlichen hat. Das fängt bei der Rechtschreibung an: "Bibliothekskataloge verfügen über keine fehlertolerante Suche wie Google", erklärt Ziller.

Date

3. 5.1997 8:44:22

0.02327628 = product of:
  0.04655256 = sum of:
    0.04655256 = sum of:
      0.025112486 = weight(_text_:1990 in 2171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.025112486 = score(doc=2171,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.1244885 = fieldWeight in 2171, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2171)
      0.021440074 = weight(_text_:22 in 2171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.021440074 = score(doc=2171,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.044758573 = queryNorm
          0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 2171, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2171)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Der neue Herausgeber des Brockhaus, ein Tochterverlag von Bertelsmann, hat unterdessen angekündigt, zum gedruckten Lexikon zurückzukehren. Etwa Anfang 2015 soll die 22. Auflage erscheinen. In Zeiten des virtuellen Informationsoverkills gebe es einen Bedarf an Orientierung, an Relevanzvorgaben, sagt Geschäftsführer Christoph Hünermann. Ausgerechnet Bertelsmann druckte 2008 ein knapp 1 000 Seiten langes Wikipedia-Lexikon mit den 50 000 meist gesuchten Begriffen. Eine Experten-Redaktion überprüfte die Einträge sicherheitshalber zuvor - soll allerdings kaum Fehler gefunden haben."

Footnote

Die Druckausgabe war teuer Die Wikipedia ist ein kostenloses Online-Lexikon, an dem jeder als Autor mitwirken kann. Die Plattform wurde 2001 gegründet. Sie existiert in 280 Sprachen. Die englische Version enthält fast vier Millionen Artikel, die deutsche etwa 1,4 Millionen. Weltweit haben sich schon weit über eine Million Nutzer beteiligt. Der Brockhaus galt lange Zeit als das wichtigste deutsche Nachschlagewerk. 1796 erschien ein Vorläufer der ersten Auflage. 2008 wurde entschieden, die rund 2800 Euro teure Druckausgabe einzustellen. Die Nachfrage war zu stark eingebrochen. Spätestens 2015 soll es nun doch ein Comeback geben. Die Encyclopaedia Britannica gilt als Produkt der schottischen Aufklärung. Ihre aktuelle Auflage kostet rund 1500 Euro. Zuletzt wurden nur noch 8000 Exemplare verkauft. 1990 waren es noch 120.000. Die Encyclopaedia wird es künftig nur noch online geben, zu einem Abo-Preis von 70 Euro pro Jahr. Zu den Themen, die die Wikipedianer in Berlin diskutieren, gehört vor allem die noch sehr einseitige demografische Durchmischung der Autoren. Vor allem Frauen sind mit einem Anteil von nur neun Prozent stark unterrepräsentiert - weltweit. Laut Pavel Richter ist der typische Autor männlich, gut gebildet und zwischen 20 und 30 Jahren alt. "Wir haben uns für dieses Jahr vorgenommen, zu untersuchen woran es liegt, dass Frauen sich kaum beteiligen", sagt er. Eine erste Vermutung sei die stark männlich geprägte Diskussionskultur. Auch Senioren und Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund gibt es unter den Autoren kaum. Die Wikimedia Foundation plant deshalb Projekte zum Beispiel in Seniorenbildungseinrichtungen.

Source

Frankfurter Rundschau. Nr.76 vom 29.3.2012, S.22-23

0.02221515 = product of:
  0.0444303 = sum of:
    0.0444303 = product of:
      0.1777212 = sum of:
        0.1777212 = weight(_text_:3a in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1777212 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37946367 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4997, 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=4997)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

PhD Dissertation at International Doctorate School in Information and Communication Technology. Vgl.: https%3A%2F%2Fcore.ac.uk%2Fdownload%2Fpdf%2F150083013.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2n-qisNagpyT0lli_6QbAQ.

0.02221515 = product of:
  0.0444303 = sum of:
    0.0444303 = product of:
      0.1777212 = sum of:
        0.1777212 = weight(_text_:3a in 4388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1777212 = score(doc=4388,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37946367 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 4388, 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=4388)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Vgl. unter: https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwizweHljdbcAhVS16QKHXcFD9QQFjABegQICRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.researchgate.net%2Fpublication%2F271200105_Die_Autonomie_des_Menschen_und_der_Maschine_-_gegenwartige_Definitionen_von_Autonomie_zwischen_philosophischem_Hintergrund_und_technologischer_Umsetzbarkeit_Redigierte_Version_der_Magisterarbeit_Karls&usg=AOvVaw06orrdJmFF2xbCCp_hL26q.

0.02221515 = product of:
  0.0444303 = sum of:
    0.0444303 = product of:
      0.1777212 = sum of:
        0.1777212 = weight(_text_:3a in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1777212 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.37946367 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 855, 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=855)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl. auch: New automatic interpreter for complex UDC numbers. Unter: <https%3A%2F%2Fudcc.org%2Ffiles%2FAttilaPiros_EC_36-37_2014-2015.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3kc9CwDDCWP7aArpfjrs5b>

0.02174805 = product of:
  0.0434961 = sum of:
    0.0434961 = product of:
      0.0869922 = sum of:
        0.0869922 = weight(_text_:1990 in 4465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0869922 = score(doc=4465,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.20172533 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.43124083 = fieldWeight in 4465, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.506965 = idf(docFreq=1325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4465)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Increasing interdisciplinarity has been a policy objective since the 1990s, promoted by many governments and funding agencies, but the question is: How deeply has this affected the social sciences? Although numerous articles have suggested that research has become more interdisciplinary, yet no study has compared the extent to which the interdisciplinarity of different social science subjects has changed. To address this gap, changes in the level of interdisciplinarity since 1980 are investigated for subjects with many articles in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), using the percentage of cross-disciplinary citing documents (PCDCD) to evaluate interdisciplinarity. For the 14 SSCI subjects investigated, the median level of interdisciplinarity, as measured using cross-disciplinary citations, declined from 1980 to 1990, but rose sharply between 1990 and 2000, confirming previous research. This increase was not fully matched by an increase in the percentage of articles that were assigned to more than one subject category. Nevertheless, although on average the social sciences have recently become more interdisciplinary, the extent of this change varies substantially from subject to subject. The SSCI subject with the largest increase in interdisciplinarity between 1990 and 2000 was Information Science & Library Science (IS&LS) but there is evidence that the level of interdisciplinarity of IS&LS increased less quickly during the first decade of this century.

0.021440074 = product of:
  0.042880148 = sum of:
    0.042880148 = product of:
      0.085760295 = sum of:
        0.085760295 = weight(_text_:22 in 2810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.085760295 = score(doc=2810,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 2810, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2810)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2004 9:42:33
22. 4.2017 11:58:05

0.021440074 = product of:
  0.042880148 = sum of:
    0.042880148 = product of:
      0.085760295 = sum of:
        0.085760295 = weight(_text_:22 in 3582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.085760295 = score(doc=3582,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1567369 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044758573 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 3582, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3582)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 4.2017 10:42:05
22. 4.2017 10:48:38