Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Vakkari, P."
  1. Vakkari, P.; Järvelin, K.; Chang, Y.-W.: ¬The association of disciplinary background with the evolution of topics and methods in Library and Information Science research 1995-2015 (2023) 0.03
    0.025982773 = product of:
      0.07794832 = sum of:
        0.07794832 = sum of:
          0.047118522 = weight(_text_:2005 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.047118522 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04550987 = queryNorm
              0.23915559 = fieldWeight in 998, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=998)
          0.030829797 = weight(_text_:22 in 998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.030829797 = score(doc=998,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.04550987 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 998, 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=998)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The paper reports a longitudinal analysis of the topical and methodological development of Library and Information Science (LIS). Its focus is on the effects of researchers' disciplines on these developments. The study extends an earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) by a coordinated dataset representing a content analysis of articles published in 31 scholarly LIS journals in 1995, 2005, and 2015. It is novel in its coverage of authors' disciplines, topical and methodological aspects in a coordinated dataset spanning two decades thus allowing trend analysis. The findings include a shrinking trend in the share of LIS from 67 to 36% while Computer Science, and Business and Economics increase their share from 9 and 6% to 21 and 16%, respectively. The earlier cross-sectional study (Vakkari et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2022a, 73, 1706-1722) for the year 2015 identified three topical clusters of LIS research, focusing on topical subfields, methodologies, and contributing disciplines. Correspondence analysis confirms their existence already in 1995 and traces their development through the decades. The contributing disciplines infuse their concepts, research questions, and approaches to LIS and may also subsume vital parts of LIS in their own structures of knowledge production.
    Date
    22. 6.2023 18:15:06
  2. Tuomaala, O.; Järvelin, K.; Vakkari, P.: Evolution of library and information science, 1965-2005 : content analysis of journal articles (2014) 0.02
    0.019236058 = product of:
      0.05770817 = sum of:
        0.05770817 = product of:
          0.11541634 = sum of:
            0.11541634 = weight(_text_:2005 in 1309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11541634 = score(doc=1309,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550987 = queryNorm
                0.5858092 = fieldWeight in 1309, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1309)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article first analyzes library and information science (LIS) research articles published in core LIS journals in 2005. It also examines the development of LIS from 1965 to 2005 in light of comparable data sets for 1965, 1985, and 2005. In both cases, the authors report (a) how the research articles are distributed by topic and (b) what approaches, research strategies, and methods were applied in the articles. In 2005, the largest research areas in LIS by this measure were information storage and retrieval, scientific communication, library and information-service activities, and information seeking. The same research areas constituted the quantitative core of LIS in the previous years since 1965. Information retrieval has been the most popular area of research over the years. The proportion of research on library and information-service activities decreased after 1985, but the popularity of information seeking and of scientific communication grew during the period studied. The viewpoint of research has shifted from library and information organizations to end users and development of systems for the latter. The proportion of empirical research strategies was high and rose over time, with the survey method being the single most important method. However, attention to evaluation and experiments increased considerably after 1985. Conceptual research strategies and system analysis, description, and design were quite popular, but declining. The most significant changes from 1965 to 2005 are the decreasing interest in library and information-service activities and the growth of research into information seeking and scientific communication.
  3. Serola, S.; Vakkari, P.: ¬The anticipated and assessed contribution of information types in references retrieved for preparing a research proposal (2005) 0.01
    0.012416821 = product of:
      0.037250463 = sum of:
        0.037250463 = product of:
          0.074500926 = sum of:
            0.074500926 = weight(_text_:2005 in 3328) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.074500926 = score(doc=3328,freq=5.0), product of:
                0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550987 = queryNorm
                0.37813818 = fieldWeight in 3328, product of:
                  2.236068 = tf(freq=5.0), with freq of:
                    5.0 = termFreq=5.0
                  4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3328)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 56(2005) no.4, S.373-381
    Year
    2005
  4. Vakkari, P.; Järvelin, K.: Explanation in information seeking and retrieval (2005) 0.01
    0.0076944227 = product of:
      0.023083268 = sum of:
        0.023083268 = product of:
          0.046166535 = sum of:
            0.046166535 = weight(_text_:2005 in 643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.046166535 = score(doc=643,freq=3.0), product of:
                0.19702037 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550987 = queryNorm
                0.23432367 = fieldWeight in 643, product of:
                  1.7320508 = tf(freq=3.0), with freq of:
                    3.0 = termFreq=3.0
                  4.329179 = idf(docFreq=1583, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=643)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Year
    2005
  5. Pennanen, M.; Vakkari, P.: Students' conceptual structure, search process, and outcome while preparing a research proposal : a longitudinal case study (2003) 0.01
    0.007266653 = product of:
      0.021799957 = sum of:
        0.021799957 = product of:
          0.043599915 = sum of:
            0.043599915 = weight(_text_:22 in 1682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.043599915 = score(doc=1682,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550987 = queryNorm
                0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1682, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1682)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article focuses an analysing students' information needs in terms of conceptual understanding of the topic they propose to study and its consequences for the search process and outcome. The research subjects were 22 undergraduates of psychology attending a seminar for preparing a research proposal for a small empirical study. They were asked to make searches in the PsycINFO database for their task in the beginning and end of the seminar. A pre- and postsearch interview was conducted in both sessions. The students were asked to think aloud in the sessions. This was recorded, as were the transaction logs. The results show that during the preparation of research proposals different features of the students' conceptual structure were connected to the search success. Students' ability to cover their conceptual construct by query terms was the major feature affecting search success during the whole process. In the beginning also the number of concepts and the proportion of subconcepts in the construct contributed indirectly via search tactics to retrieving partly useful references. Students' ability to extract new query terms from retrieved items improved search results.
    Date
    19. 6.2003 17:22:33
  6. Vakkari, P.; Pennanen, M.; Serola, S.: Changes of search terms and tactics while writing a research proposal : a longitudinal case study (2003) 0.01
    0.0051382994 = product of:
      0.015414898 = sum of:
        0.015414898 = product of:
          0.030829797 = sum of:
            0.030829797 = weight(_text_:22 in 1073) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030829797 = score(doc=1073,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550987 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1073, 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=1073)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The study analyses how students' growing understanding of the topic and search experience were related to their choice of search tactics and terms while preparing a research proposal for a small empirical study. In addition to that, the findings of the study are used to test Vakkari's (2001) theory of task-based IR. The research subjects were 22 students of psychology attending a seminar for preparing the proposal. They made a search for their task in PsychINFO database at the beginning and end of the seminar. Data were collected in several ways. A pre- and post-search interview was conducted in both sessions. The students were asked to think aloud in the sessions. This was recorded as were the transaction logs. The results show that search experience was slightly related to the change of facets. Although the students' vocabulary of the topic grew generating an increased use of specific terms between the sessions, their use of search tactics and operators remained fairly constant. There was no correlation between the terms and tactics used and the total number of useful references found. By comparing these results with the findings of relevant earlier studies the conclusion was drawn that domain knowledge has an impact on searching assuming that users have a sufficient command of the system used. This implies that the tested theory of task-based IR is valid on condition that the searchers are experienced. It is suggested that the theory should be enriched by including search experience in its scope.
  7. Wu, I.-C.; Vakkari, P.: Effects of subject-oriented visualization tools on search by novices and intermediates (2018) 0.01
    0.0051382994 = product of:
      0.015414898 = sum of:
        0.015414898 = product of:
          0.030829797 = sum of:
            0.030829797 = weight(_text_:22 in 4573) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030829797 = score(doc=4573,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15936781 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04550987 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4573, 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=4573)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    9.12.2018 16:22:25