Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

0.027009096 = product of:
  0.108036384 = sum of:
    0.059237804 = weight(_text_:case in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059237804 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.34001783 = fieldWeight in 3841, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3841)
    0.048798583 = weight(_text_:studies in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048798583 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.30860704 = fieldWeight in 3841, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3841)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract

In order to achieve an appropriate level of revenue, CD-ROM database publishers need to attempt to control access to their databases when they are used in a networked environement. This has led to the creation of complex pricing strategies for the networked use of CD-ROM databases. Identifies some of the key issues for pricing of CD-ROM databases and then focuses on the issue of network pricing, using as case studies the network pricing strategies for BIOSIS, SilverPlatter, Dialog OnDisc and Reedbase. Concludes that a stable pricing startegy for networking CD-ROM databases has yet to be achieved but that greater consistency between vendors must be in the best interests of all parties in the information marketplace

0.019292213 = product of:
  0.07716885 = sum of:
    0.042312715 = weight(_text_:case in 7151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042312715 = score(doc=7151,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.24286987 = fieldWeight in 7151, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7151)
    0.034856133 = weight(_text_:studies in 7151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034856133 = score(doc=7151,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 7151, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7151)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract

This article revisits the debate concerning controlled and natural indexing languages, as used in searching the databases of the online hosts, in-house information retrieval systems, online public access catalogues and databases stored on CD-ROM. The debate was first formulated in the early days of information retrieval more than a century ago but, despite significant advance in technology, remains unresolved. The article divides the history of the debate into four eras. Era one was characterised by the introduction of controlled vocabulary. Era two focused on comparisons between different indexing languages in order to assess which was best. Era three saw a number of case studies of limited generalisability and a general recognition that the best search performance can be achieved by the parallel use of the two types of indexing languages. The emphasis in Era four has been on the development of end-user-based systems, including online public access catalogues and databases on CD-ROM. Recent developments in the use of expert systems techniques to support the representation of meaning may lead to systems which offer significant support to the user in end-user searching. In the meantime, however, information retrieval in practice involves a mixture of natural and controlled indexing languages used to search a wide variety of different kinds of databases

0.008462544 = product of:
  0.06770035 = sum of:
    0.06770035 = weight(_text_:case in 8046) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06770035 = score(doc=8046,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.3885918 = fieldWeight in 8046, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8046)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Geographical Information Systems (GIS) are increasingly being used to provide quick and effective access to spatially related data, and their application in planning, marketing and the development of business strategy in all sectors is becoming increasingly important. Defines GIS, discusses their components and uses, and describes a typical case study of the application of a GIS in the location of a new retail store. Explores the functions and applications of GIS

0.007546574 = product of:
  0.06037259 = sum of:
    0.06037259 = weight(_text_:studies in 449) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06037259 = score(doc=449,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.3818022 = fieldWeight in 449, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=449)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This two-part article establishes a model of the mediating factors that influence student information behavior concerning electronic or digital information sources that support their learning. The first part reviews the literature that underpinned the development of the research methodology for the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) User Behavior Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, as well as the literature that has subsequently helped to develop the model over the 5 years the Framework operated in the United Kingdom, in five cycles of research that were adjusted to meet the emerging needs of the JISC at the time. The literature review attempts to synthesize the two main perspectives in the research studies: (a) smallscale studies of student information behavior; and (b) the studies that focus on the quantitative usage of particular electronic information services in universities, often including implications for training and support. As the review indicates, there are gaps in the evidence concerning the browsing and selection strategies of undergraduate students and the interaction of some of the mediating influences on information behavior. The Framework developed a multimethod, qualitative and quantitative methodology for the continued monitoring of user behavior. This article discusses the methods used and the projectmanagement challenges involved, and concludes that at the outset, intended impacts need to be specified carefully, and that funding needs to be committed at that point for a longitudinal study. A research project on information behavior, intended to inform current policymaking on infrastructure provision, is inherently difficult as behavior changes lag behind provision.

0.006099823 = product of:
  0.048798583 = sum of:
    0.048798583 = weight(_text_:studies in 7427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048798583 = score(doc=7427,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.30860704 = fieldWeight in 7427, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7427)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Reviews the literature on the design and evaluation of user interfaces on commercial CD-ROM databases, with the aim of producing guidelines. Defines interfaces, dialogues and interaction, and explores the diversity in and issues associated with standardization in CD-ROM interface design. Current criteria and guidelines for the design and evaluation of CD-ROM user interfaces include those of the Special Interest Group on CD-ROM Applications and Technology (SIGCAT) and guidelinies proposed by others. Compares the recommendations of 2 studies of CD-ROM user interfaces: Richards and Robinson (CD-ROM professional, 6(1993) no.5, S.92-101) and Harry and Oppenheim (Online and CD-ROM review 17(1993) no.4, S.211-222 u. 17(1993) no.6, S.339-368). An alternative set of guidelines is proposed based on this earlier work

0.005114809 = product of:
  0.040918473 = sum of:
    0.040918473 = weight(_text_:libraries in 7184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040918473 = score(doc=7184,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.3143245 = fieldWeight in 7184, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7184)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Reviews the marketplace for existing current awareness services and uses the main features of these products as standards against which to access 3 new current awareness services: Inside Information; SwetScan; and UnCover. Inside Information, from the British Library Document Supply Centre, provides a short listing of the key features of each article in the world's principal scholarly periodicals. Each reference contains a maximum of 1.500 characters and approximately 1 million references are added to the database each year. SwetScan, from Swets Subscription Service covers 7.000 periodical titles and provides title, ISSN, year-volume, some article names, authors, page numbers, and, if the library is a Swets subscriber, the library's subscription number. An avergae of 111.073 references are added to the database each month. UnCover is a collaborative venture between Blackwells and CARL and offers access to a multidisciplinary database based on the holdings of the participating libraries. UnCover differs from the other 2 services in that it was not originally marketed as a current awarenenss service. UnCover covers 14.000 periodicals representing the holdings of participating libraries together with additional titles for which Blackwells act as subscription agents. The main focus of UnCover is speed of document delivery and the intention is to provide a fax of a document within 24 hours or less (and within the hour if the document is stored on optical disc). Concludes that, if these 3 services are successful and lead to wider availability and use of current awareness services in the academic community, this will have a significant impact on libraries and their relationships with end users

0.0047455733 = product of:
  0.037964586 = sum of:
    0.037964586 = product of:
      0.07592917 = sum of:
        0.07592917 = weight(_text_:22 in 183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07592917 = score(doc=183,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 183, 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=183)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

22. 2.1999 17:50:37

Source

Online and CD-ROM review. 22(1998) no.4, S.277-279

0.0043570166 = product of:
  0.034856133 = sum of:
    0.034856133 = weight(_text_:studies in 3597) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034856133 = score(doc=3597,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 3597, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3597)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

While there is significant progress with policy and a lively debate regarding the potential impact of open access publishing, few studies have examined academics' behavior and attitudes to open access publishing (OAP) in scholarly journals. This article seeks to address this gap through an international and interdisciplinary survey of academics. Issues covered include: use of and intentions regarding OAP, and perceptions regarding advantages and disadvantages of OAP, journal article publication services, peer review, and reuse. Despite reporting engagement in OAP, academics were unsure about their future intentions regarding OAP. Broadly, academics identified the potential for wider circulation as the key advantage of OAP, and were more positive about its benefits than they were negative about its disadvantages. As regards services, rigorous peer review, followed by rapid publication were most valued. Academics reported strong views on reuse of their work; they were relatively happy with noncommercial reuse, but not in favor of commercial reuse, adaptations, and inclusion in anthologies. Comparing science, technology, and medicine with arts, humanities, and social sciences showed a significant difference in attitude on a number of questions, but, in general, the effect size was small, suggesting that attitudes are relatively consistent across the academic community.

0.004176224 = product of:
  0.033409793 = sum of:
    0.033409793 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033409793 = score(doc=4541,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.25664487 = fieldWeight in 4541, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4541)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to highlight limits to the dominant model of social inclusion under which UK public libraries operate, to analyse how and to what extent processes of socio-cultural exclusion emerge in the subject representation and discoverability of "non-dominant" resources in public library OPACs, and to consider folksonomy as a solution to any issues raised. Design/methodology/approach - The paper first develops a critique of the dominant model of "inclusion" within UK public libraries, drawing on feminist and critical theories of identity. It then considers how this critique overlaps with and offers fresh insights into major debates within subject indexing, and develops a theoretical rationale for considering the potential of folksonomy to intervene in more inclusive subject-indexing design. A user-based critical interpretive methodology which understands OPACs as texts open to multiple interpretations is developed, and a comparative reading of standard OPACs and LibraryThing folksonomy is undertaken to evaluate the discoverability and subject representation of LGBTQ and ethnic minority resources. Findings - LibraryThing folksonomy offers benefits over LCSH subject indexing in the discoverability and representation of LGBTQ resources. However, the folksonomy is dominated by US taggers, and this impacts on the tagging of ethnic minority resources. Folksonomy, like traditional indexing, is found to contain its own biases in worldview and subject representation. Originality/value - The importance of subject indexing in developing inclusive library services is highlighted and a new method for evaluating OPACs is developed.

0.0035436437 = product of:
  0.02834915 = sum of:
    0.02834915 = weight(_text_:libraries in 7443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02834915 = score(doc=7443,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 7443, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7443)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Management information facilities transform the library management system into a much more effective management tool. Three levels of management can be identified - operational, tactical and strategic - and each of these has its own unique management information needs. Earlier work on the use of management information in libraries and the development of management information systems demonstrates that progress in these areas has been slow. Management information systems comprise three components: facilities for handling ad hoc enquiries; facilities for standard report report generation; and management information modules, or report generators that support the production of user-defined reports. A lsit of standard reports covering acquisitions, cataloguing, circulation control, serials and inter-library loans is provided. The functions of report generators are explored and the nature of enquiry facilities reviewed. Management information tools available in library management systems form a valuable aid in decision making. These should be further exploited and further developed

0.0033219014 = product of:
  0.026575211 = sum of:
    0.026575211 = product of:
      0.053150423 = sum of:
        0.053150423 = weight(_text_:22 in 3043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053150423 = score(doc=3043,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 3043, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3043)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22
22. 2.1999 17:48:45