Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

0.039823756 = product of:
  0.11947126 = sum of:
    0.11947126 = weight(_text_:specialist in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11947126 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.32440975 = queryWeight, product of:
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04866305 = queryNorm
        0.36827272 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          6.666449 = idf(docFreq=152, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - This article is an edited version of a report commissioned by the British Library and JISC to identify how the specialist researchers of the future (those born after 1993) are likely to access and interact with digital resources in five to ten years' time. The purpose is to investigate the impact of digital transition on the information behaviour of the Google Generation and to guide library and information services to anticipate and react to any new or emerging behaviours in the most effective way. Design/methodology/approach - The study was virtually longitudinal and is based on a number of extensive reviews of related literature, survey data mining and a deep log analysis of a British Library and a JISC web site intended for younger people. Findings - The study shows that much of the impact of ICTs on the young has been overestimated. The study claims that although young people demonstrate an apparent ease and familiarity with computers, they rely heavily on search engines, view rather than read and do not possess the critical and analytical skills to assess the information that they find on the web. Originality/value - The paper reports on a study that overturns the common assumption that the "Google generation" is the most web-literate.

0.0127141215 = product of:
  0.038142364 = sum of:
    0.038142364 = product of:
      0.07628473 = sum of:
        0.07628473 = weight(_text_:librarians in 722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07628473 = score(doc=722,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.34995657 = fieldWeight in 722, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=722)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

There is very little qualitative data on what impact the Internet is having on information seeking in the workplace. Using open-ended interviews, questionnaires and observation, the impact of the Internet on the British Media was assessed. The focus was largely on newspapers, with The Guardian being covered in some depth. Over 300 journalists and media librarians were surveyed. It was found that amongst traditional journalists use was light. Poor access to the Internet - and good access to other information resources - were largely the reasons for this. Of the journalists it was mainly the older and more senior journalists and the New Media journalists who used the Internet. Librarians were also significant users. Searching the World Wide Web was the principal Internet activity and use was generally conservative in character. Newspapers and official sites were favoured, and searches were mainly of a fact-checking nature. Email was used on a very limited scale and was not regarded as a serious journalistic tool. Non-users were partly put off by the Internet's potential for overloading them with information and its reputation for producing information of suspect quality. Users generally dismissed these concerns, dealing with potential overload and quality problems largely by using authoritative sites and exploiting the lower quality data where it was needed. Where the Internet has been used it has not been at the expense of other information sources or communication channels, but online hosts seem to be at most risk in the future.

0.012586337 = product of:
  0.03775901 = sum of:
    0.03775901 = product of:
      0.07551802 = sum of:
        0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07551802 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Examines the searching behaviour of Guardian journalists searching FT PROFILE online system. Using transactional log analysis compares the searching styles of journalists with those of Guardian librarians. In some respects end users conform to the picture that professionals have of them - they search with a very limited range of commands - but in other respects they confound that image - they are very quick and economical searchers. Their behaviour relates to their general information seeking behaviour, and their searching styles would be seen in this regard

0.012586337 = product of:
  0.03775901 = sum of:
    0.03775901 = product of:
      0.07551802 = sum of:
        0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 5532) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07551802 = score(doc=5532,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 5532, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5532)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

BLAISE-LINE provides online access to all of the British Library's major catalogues as well as to other major bibliographies. With its MARC records, Dewey numbers and Library of Congress headings (LCSH), BLAISE-LINE remains a tradtional library oriented online service. Presents the results of a survey of 37 libraries using BLAISE-LINE to find out what users thought of it and how it compared to the more modern systems of enduser, fulltext, CD-ROM and the Internet. The principal uses to which respondents put BLAISE-LINE were bibliographical checking, answering subject enquiries, and obtaining interlibrary loans. The survey also covered frequency of use, ease of use, problems in using the system, cost issues, and training and support. Findings show that professional librarians value the efficiency of BLAISE-LINE above the user friedliness of other systems

0.010988619 = product of:
  0.032965858 = sum of:
    0.032965858 = product of:
      0.065931715 = sum of:
        0.065931715 = weight(_text_:22 in 5941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065931715 = score(doc=5941,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5941, 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=5941)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

26. 2.2008 19:22:51

0.01078829 = product of:
  0.032364868 = sum of:
    0.032364868 = product of:
      0.064729735 = sum of:
        0.064729735 = weight(_text_:librarians in 4440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064729735 = score(doc=4440,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.296948 = fieldWeight in 4440, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4440)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Collating data from a number of log and questionnaire studies conducted largely into the use of a range of consumer health digital information platforms, Centre for Information Behaviour and the Evaluation of Research (Ciber) researchers describe some new thoughts on characterising (and naming) information seeking behaviour in the digital environment, and in so doing, suggest a new typology of digital users. The characteristic behaviour found is one of bouncing in which users seldom penetrate a site to any depth, tend to visit a number of sites for any given information need and seldom return to sites they once visited. They tend to "feed" for information horizontally, and whether they search a site of not depends heavily on "digital visibility", which in turn creates all the conditions for "bouncing". The question whether this type of information seeking represents a form of "dumbing down or up", and what it all means for publishers, librarians and information providers, who might be working on other, possible outdated usage paradigms, is discussed.

0.008990241 = product of:
  0.026970722 = sum of:
    0.026970722 = product of:
      0.053941444 = sum of:
        0.053941444 = weight(_text_:librarians in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053941444 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.24745665 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this article is to report on a large-scale survey that was carried out to assess academic users' awareness, perceptions and existing levels of use of e-books. The survey also seeks to find out about the purposes to which electronic books were put, and to obtain an understanding of the most effective library marketing and communication channels. Design/methodology/approach - An e-mail invitation to participate in the survey was distributed to all UCL staff and students (approximately 27,000) in November 2006, and 1,818 completions were received, an effective response rate of at least 6.7 per cent. Statistical analyses were carried out on the data using Software Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). Findings - The survey findings point to various ways in which user uptake and acceptance of e-books may be encouraged. Book discovery behaviour, a key issue for publishers and librarians in both print and electronic environments, emerges as a critical focus for service delivery and enhancement. Originality/value - The survey is part of an action research project, CIBER's SuperBook, that will further investigate the issues raised in this initial benchmarking survey using deep log analysis and qualitative methods. The paper partly fills the gap in the literature on e-books which has mainly focused on usage and not the users.

0.008990241 = product of:
  0.026970722 = sum of:
    0.026970722 = product of:
      0.053941444 = sum of:
        0.053941444 = weight(_text_:librarians in 1911) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053941444 = score(doc=1911,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.24745665 = fieldWeight in 1911, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1911)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - This article aims to focus on usage data in respect to full-text downloads of journal articles, which is considered an important usage (satisfaction) metric by librarians and publishers. The purpose is to evaluate the evidence regarding full-text viewing by pooling together data on the full-text viewing of tens of thousands of users studied as part of a number of investigations of e-journal databases conducted during the Virtual Scholar research programme. Design/methodology/approach - The paper reviews the web logs of a number of electronic journal libraries including OhioLINK and ScienceDirect using Deep Log Analysis, which is a more sophisticated form of transactional log analysis. The frequency, characteristics and diversity of full-text viewing are examined. The article also features an investigation into the time spent online viewing full-text articles in order to get a clearer understanding of the significance of full-text viewing, especially in regard to reading. Findings - The main findings are that there is a great deal of variety amongst scholars in their full-text viewing habits and that a large proportion of views are very cursory in nature, although there is survey evidence to suggest that reading goes on offline. Originality/value - This is the first time that full-text viewing evidence is studied on such a large scale.

0.0071921926 = product of:
  0.021576578 = sum of:
    0.021576578 = product of:
      0.043153156 = sum of:
        0.043153156 = weight(_text_:librarians in 5832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043153156 = score(doc=5832,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.19796532 = fieldWeight in 5832, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5832)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The study set out to determine: (1) what were the searching characteristics of end-users in a non-academic environment and explain this in the light of their information needs; (2) whether these characteristics were those that were ascribed to end users in the professional literature; (3) whether they differed materially from those of information professionals working in the same fields. Searching characteristics were interpreted in their widest sense to include: command utilisation/knowledge; search success a satisfaction; volume of searching; searching style / approach; duration of searches; file selection; willingness to delegate and levels of training. These issues were explored in relation to 2 practitioner groups - journalists from he Guardian newspaper, and politicians from The House of Commons. Comparative data were also sought from information professionals in these 2 organisations. A mixture of social and statistical methods was used to monitor end-user and professional searching, though transactional log analysis was strongly featured. Altogether the searching behaviour of 170 end users was evaluated in the light of the searching behaviour of 70 librarians. The principal findings were that: in some respects end users did conform to the picture that information professionals have of them: they did seartch with a limited range of commands; more of their searches produced no results, and search statements were simplly constructed. But in other respects they confounded their image - they could be very quick and economical searchers, and they did not display meters of print-out. However, there were variations between individual end users, and it was often possible to find an end-user group that matched an information professional group on one aspect of online searching or another. The online behaviour of end users was very much related to their general information seeking behaviour; and to the fact that they were not trained

0.0065931715 = product of:
  0.019779515 = sum of:
    0.019779515 = product of:
      0.03955903 = sum of:
        0.03955903 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03955903 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

23. 2.2009 17:22:41

0.0054943096 = product of:
  0.016482929 = sum of:
    0.016482929 = product of:
      0.032965858 = sum of:
        0.032965858 = weight(_text_:22 in 228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032965858 = score(doc=228,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 228, 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=228)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22