Search (19 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0448143 = product of:
  0.0896286 = sum of:
    0.06843241 = weight(_text_:data in 990) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06843241 = score(doc=990,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.46216056 = fieldWeight in 990, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=990)
    0.021196188 = product of:
      0.042392377 = sum of:
        0.042392377 = weight(_text_:processing in 990) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042392377 = score(doc=990,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 990, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=990)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The article employs deep log analysis (DLA) techniques, a more sophisticated form of transaction log analysis, to demonstrate what usage data can disclose about information seeking behaviour of virtual scholars - academics, and researchers. DLA works with the raw server log data, not the processed, pre-defined and selective data provided by journal publishers. It can generate types of analysis that are not generally available via proprietary web logging software because the software filters out relevant data and makes unhelpful assumptions about the meaning of the data. DLA also enables usage data to be associated with search/navigational and/or user demographic data, hence the name 'deep'. In this connection the usage of two digital journal libraries, those of EmeraldInsight, and Blackwell Synergy are investigated. The information seeking behaviour of nearly three million users is analyzed in respect to the extent to which they penetrate the site, the number of visits made, as well as the type of items and content they view. The users are broken down by occupation, place of work, type of subscriber ("Big Deal", non-subscriber, etc.), geographical location, type of university (old and new), referrer link used, and number of items viewed in a session.

Source

Information processing and management. 42(2006) no.5, S.1345-1365

0.03764897 = product of:
  0.07529794 = sum of:
    0.04138403 = weight(_text_:data in 450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04138403 = score(doc=450,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.2794884 = fieldWeight in 450, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=450)
    0.033913903 = product of:
      0.067827806 = sum of:
        0.067827806 = weight(_text_:processing in 450) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067827806 = score(doc=450,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.35780904 = fieldWeight in 450, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=450)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Outlines a structure for analysing information needs. The purpose of the structure is to enable data on users to be collected in a systematic and routine manner. The form of analysis is demonstrated through a consideration of the information needs of newspaper journalists. Aspects of information need considered are: subject, nature, function, viewpoint, authority, quantity, quality, place of origin, speed of delivery, and processing/packaging. Considers the barriers to meeting information needs and training, time, resources, access and information overload. Also assesses the library's role in meeting information needs

0.0314639 = product of:
  0.0629278 = sum of:
    0.043894395 = weight(_text_:data in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043894395 = score(doc=2680,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.29644224 = fieldWeight in 2680, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2680)
    0.019033402 = product of:
      0.038066804 = sum of:
        0.038066804 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038066804 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Purpose - This study provides evidence on the actual information-seeking behaviour of students in a digital scholarly environment, not what they thought they did. It also compares student information-seeking behaviour with that of other academic communities, and, in some cases, for practitioners. Design/methodology/approach - Data were gathered as part of CIBER's ongoing Virtual Scholar programme. In particular log data from two digital journals libraries, Blackwell Synergy and OhioLINK, and one e-book collection (Oxford Scholarship Online) are utilized. Findings - The study showed a distinctive form of information-seeking behaviour associated with students and differences between them and other members of the academic community. For example, students constituted the biggest users in terms of sessions and pages viewed, and they were more likely to undertake longer online sessions. Undergraduates and postgraduates were the most likely users of library links to access scholarly databases, suggesting an important "hot link" role for libraries. Originality/value - Few studies have focused on the actual (rather than perceived) information-seeking behaviour of students. The study fills that gap.

Date

23. 2.2009 17:22:41

0.023109939 = product of:
  0.046219878 = sum of:
    0.029262928 = weight(_text_:data in 2040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029262928 = score(doc=2040,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.19762816 = fieldWeight in 2040, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2040)
    0.016956951 = product of:
      0.033913903 = sum of:
        0.033913903 = weight(_text_:processing in 2040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033913903 = score(doc=2040,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.17890452 = fieldWeight in 2040, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2040)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Metrics derived from user visits or sessions provide a means of evaluating Websites and an important insight into online information seeking behaviour, the most important of them being the duration of sessions and the number of pages viewed in a session, a possible busyness indicator. However, the identification of session (termed often 'sessionization') is fraught with difficulty in that there is no way of determining from a transactional log file that a user has ended their session. No one logs out. Instead a session delimiter has to be applied and this is typically done on the basis of a standard period of inactivity. To date researchers have discussed the issue of a time out delimiter in terms of a single value and if a page view time exceeds the cut-off value the session is deemed to have ended. This approach assumes that page view time is a single distribution and that the cut-off value is one point on that distribution. The authors however argue that page time distribution is composed of a number of quite separate view time distributions because of the marked differences in view times between pages (abstract, contents page, full text). This implies that a number of timeout delimiters should be applied. Employing data from a study of the OhioLINK digital journal library, the authors demonstrate how the setting of a time out delimiter impacts on the estimate of page view time and the number of estimated session. Furthermore, they also show how a number of timeout delimiters might apply and they argue that this gives a better and more robust estimate of the number of sessions, session time and page view time compared to an application of a single timeout delimiter.

Source

Information processing and management. 44(2008) no.1, S.358-372

0.020863095 = product of:
  0.04172619 = sum of:
    0.02586502 = weight(_text_:data in 228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02586502 = score(doc=228,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 228, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=228)
    0.01586117 = product of:
      0.03172234 = sum of:
        0.03172234 = weight(_text_:22 in 228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03172234 = score(doc=228,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Presents a brief, critical review of LISA PLaus: the CD-ROM database version of LISA and which includes the database of Current Research in Library and Information Science (CRLIS). The review covers the DOS version only, as it appeared in the Summer 1996 CD-ROM, noting that the Windows version was planned for the future. Points to the way LISA has found its mark, if not its fortune, in LISA Plus and notes its strengths, including: ideal suitability for current awareness in library and information science (LIS); massive and convenient consolidation of the published LIS literature; and massive increase in coverage from 7.900 abstracts in 1993 to over 12.000 currently. Criticizes certain features of LISA Plus, notably: the OPTI-Ware search interface; the combination of 2 databases (LISA and CRLIS) in a single, searchable database; and certain unexpected effects caused by the building of the Subject and Free Text indexes. Points particularly to great lack of consistency in the indexes and the indexing (faults that were fully rectified by a complete overhaul of the data in Summer 1996). Notes that LISA Plus is the first port of call for both information researchers and information science students. The Windows version of LISA Plus was launched in Spring 1997

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22

0.010973599 = product of:
  0.043894395 = sum of:
    0.043894395 = weight(_text_:data in 695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043894395 = score(doc=695,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.29644224 = fieldWeight in 695, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=695)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Metadata registries are considered to be a solution to the problem of ata sharing and standardising of information on the Internet. The International Organization for Information recognised the need for a standardised approach to this problem and produce ISO/IEC 11179 Information Technology - Specification and standardisation of data elements. As part of an ongoing research project on the ISO/IEC 11179 metadata registries implementation a questionnaire survey was carried out on four discussion lists an the EU funded SCHEMAS 2nd workshop (23-24th November 2000). Results from this survey, which was essentially aiming to identify how familiar people were with metadata and metadata registries, are presented along with a brief introduction to the ISO/IEC 11179 Information Technology - Specification and standardisation of data elements standard.

0.009144665 = product of:
  0.03657866 = sum of:
    0.03657866 = weight(_text_:data in 722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03657866 = score(doc=722,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.24703519 = fieldWeight in 722, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=722)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.009144665 = product of:
  0.03657866 = sum of:
    0.03657866 = weight(_text_:data in 1911) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03657866 = score(doc=1911,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.24703519 = fieldWeight in 1911, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1911)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.007930585 = product of:
  0.03172234 = sum of:
    0.03172234 = product of:
      0.06344468 = sum of:
        0.06344468 = weight(_text_:22 in 5941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06344468 = score(doc=5941,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16398162 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

26. 2.2008 19:22:51

0.0077595054 = product of:
  0.031038022 = sum of:
    0.031038022 = weight(_text_:data in 3736) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031038022 = score(doc=3736,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 3736, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3736)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Touch-screen kiosks are situated in a variety of locations to provide the public with ready access to health information. This paper examines their use, via the transactional logs, and makes comparisons between the types of organisation in which the kiosks are housed. Twenty-one kiosks were selected and categorised into four groups - pharmacy, hospital, information centre and surgery. A small case study features a supermarket kiosk. Details of nearly 90,000 user sessions and 750,000 page views were used for the comparison. Comparisons between sites were made in terms of number of users, their age and gender, trends over time, the number of sessions conducted, page view time, session duration, pages viewed, site penetration, number of pages printed and health topics viewed. There were considerable differences between the kiosk locations. This early research provides the quantitative foundation for a fuller study of kiosk location and the differences in perceptions of the quality/authority of kiosk data.

0.0077595054 = product of:
  0.031038022 = sum of:
    0.031038022 = weight(_text_:data in 4440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031038022 = score(doc=4440,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 4440, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4440)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.0077595054 = product of:
  0.031038022 = sum of:
    0.031038022 = weight(_text_:data in 2566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031038022 = score(doc=2566,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 2566, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2566)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - The study aims to examines two aspects of information seeking behaviour of physicists and astronomers including methods applied for keeping up-to-date and methods used for finding articles. The relationship between academic status and research field of users with their information seeking behaviour was investigated. Design/methodology/approach - Data were gathered using a questionnaire survey of PhD students and staff of the Department of Physics and Astronomy at University College London; 114 people (47.1 per cent response rate) participated in the survey. Findings - The study reveals differences among subfields of physics and astronomy in terms of information-seeking behaviour, highlights the need for and the value of looking at narrower subject communities within disciplines for a deeper understanding of the information behaviour of scientists. Originality/value - The study is the first to deeply investigate intradisciplinary dissimilarities of information-seeking behaviour of scientists in a discipline. It is also an up-to-date account of information seeking behaviour of physicists and astronomers.

0.0077595054 = product of:
  0.031038022 = sum of:
    0.031038022 = weight(_text_:data in 3113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031038022 = score(doc=3113,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 3113, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3113)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

An international survey of over 3,600 researchers examined how trustworthiness and quality are determined for making decisions on scholarly reading, citing, and publishing and how scholars perceive changes in trust with new forms of scholarly communication. Although differences in determining trustworthiness and authority of scholarly resources exist among age groups and fields of study, traditional methods and criteria remain important across the board. Peer review is considered the most important factor for determining the quality and trustworthiness of research. Researchers continue to read abstracts, check content for sound arguments and credible data, and rely on journal rankings when deciding whether to trust scholarly resources in reading, citing, or publishing. Social media outlets and open access publications are still often not trusted, although many researchers believe that open access has positive implications for research, especially if the open access journals are peer reviewed.

0.006466255 = product of:
  0.02586502 = sum of:
    0.02586502 = weight(_text_:data in 4433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02586502 = score(doc=4433,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 4433, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4433)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Examines statistically the public's use and attitudes towards interactive and personal health services via an online questionnaire survey and enhances these data with an expert assessment of a number of consumer health sites and their services. Over a period of three weeks more than 1,300 people responded to an online questionnaire produced by The British Life and Internet Project. Of the respondents, 81 per cent were British. The likely potential uptake figure for support group participation among Internet health users is about 20 per cent while around 11 to 13 per cent will go online to describe a medical condition. Those in poor heath were approximately ten to 13 times more likely to have participated in an online support group. Those aged over 65 were four times as likely to e-mail their doctor. More positive health outcomes were associated with those respondents that participated in online support groups and the least number of health outcomes were associated with those people that maintained e-mail contact with a doctor or surgery.

0.006466255 = product of:
  0.02586502 = sum of:
    0.02586502 = weight(_text_:data in 824) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02586502 = score(doc=824,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 824, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=824)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.006466255 = product of:
  0.02586502 = sum of:
    0.02586502 = weight(_text_:data in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02586502 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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.

0.0063588563 = product of:
  0.025435425 = sum of:
    0.025435425 = product of:
      0.05087085 = sum of:
        0.05087085 = weight(_text_:processing in 4231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05087085 = score(doc=4231,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 4231, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4231)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 46(2010) no.2, S.233-243

0.005299047 = product of:
  0.021196188 = sum of:
    0.021196188 = product of:
      0.042392377 = sum of:
        0.042392377 = weight(_text_:processing in 925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042392377 = score(doc=925,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18956426 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046827413 = queryNorm
            0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 925, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=925)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Information processing and management. 43(2007) no.4, S.1085-1102

0.0051730038 = product of:
  0.020692015 = sum of:
    0.020692015 = weight(_text_:data in 5832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020692015 = score(doc=5832,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14807065 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046827413 = queryNorm
        0.1397442 = fieldWeight in 5832, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5832)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

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