Search (20 results, page 1 of 1)

0.008626453 = product of:
  0.06901162 = sum of:
    0.06901162 = weight(_text_:studies in 1118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06901162 = score(doc=1118,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.43643627 = fieldWeight in 1118, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1118)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This article presents a brief history of the term "information" and its different meanings, which are both important and difficult because the different meanings of the term imply whole theories of knowledge. The article further considers the relation between "information" and the concepts "matter and energy", "data", "sign and meaning", "knowledge" and "communication". It presents and analyses the influence of information in information studies and knowledge organization and contains a presentation and critical analysis of some compound terms such as "information need", "information overload" and "information retrieval", which illuminate the use of the term information in information studies. An appendix provides a chronological list of definitions of information.

0.0072334325 = product of:
  0.05786746 = sum of:
    0.05786746 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05786746 = score(doc=5838,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.44452196 = fieldWeight in 5838, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5838)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze and re-direct recent schematic and empirical scholarship on Habermas' theory of the public sphere in library and information science (LIS). Design/methodology/approach This paper conducts a critical analysis of the relevant literature in light of Habermas' origination and use/purpose of the public sphere concept. Findings The authors examined here produced a schematic operationalization of the public sphere that thinned the concept, but in turn, that schematization has produced insight into the civil society functions and communications of libraries, both within and without. For this work to be meaningful, the considerations and contexts of democratic society must be reinserted. Research limitations/implications Further explorations of the relationship between the public sphere and civil society as they are manifested around and in libraries is called for. Additionally, Weigand's approach to producing data/evidence on the public sphere and libraries should be furthered. Practical implications Understanding the role and function of libraries in democratic societies is essential for libraries to play a productive democratic role in those societies and thus, in guiding them. Social implications This paper helps to situate the bewildering circumstances of libraries who face both popular support and broad political-social questioning of their role and place. Originality/value This paper arguably interjects a more sophisticated and nuanced theoretical picture of the public sphere than prior precis presented in the LIS literature have undertaken. It also engages a unique set of empirical-theoretical students from another perspective in order to deepen and shift that research discourse.

0.0063469075 = product of:
  0.05077526 = sum of:
    0.05077526 = weight(_text_:case in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05077526 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.29144385 = fieldWeight in 637, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=637)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This paper explores collaborative information behavior in the context of highly politicized decision making. It draws upon a qualitative case study of project management of a contentious public sector infrastructure project. We noted the creation of spaces for the development and exchange of information by experts and conceptualize these as information spheres. We postulate that these were formed to bypass power-induced information behavior that excludes expert power, such as information avoidance. This approach contrasts with the expected project management and information norms, rules and behavior, however, provides a language that can be used to explain the phenomena of bounded information spaces which complement and may be used as a development of adjunct to small world's theory.

0.0061617517 = product of:
  0.049294014 = sum of:
    0.049294014 = weight(_text_:studies in 352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049294014 = score(doc=352,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.3117402 = fieldWeight in 352, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=352)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Since the inception of gatekeeping research in the 1940s, most studies on gatekeeping have been human-centric, treating and studying individuals as gatekeepers, who perform their gatekeeping role using a combination of the following mechanisms: forming communities, and/or broadcasting, discovering-searching, collecting, organizing, or protecting information. However, the nature of communication channels and how information is produced by and shared with users has fundamentally changed in the last 80 years. One significant change is the growing use of technology-enabled metadata like hashtags when sharing information on social media. Rarely any study investigates whether hashtags can perform gatekeeping of information and what it means for information gatekeeping. This paper fills in the gap by conducting a content analysis of 77 interdisciplinary studies on hashtags and gatekeeping to confirm how they can implement six gatekeeping mechanisms. This study shows that hashtags expand our understanding of the role of technology solutions in gatekeeping and advance research on hierarchical gatekeeping. The benefits of hashtags for gatekeeping suggest that they act as "information anchors" for online communities, thereby highlighting the utility of information gatekeepers for society.

0.0052890894 = product of:
  0.042312715 = sum of:
    0.042312715 = weight(_text_:case in 5941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042312715 = score(doc=5941,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.24286987 = fieldWeight in 5941, 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=5941)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Data protection laws, including the European Union General Data Protection Regulation, regulate aspects of online personalization. However, the data protection lens is too narrow to analyze personalization. To define conditions for personalization, we should understand data protection in its larger fundamental rights context, starting with the closely connected right to privacy. If the right to privacy is considered along with other European fundamental rights that protect information and communication flows, namely, communications confidentiality; the right to receive information; and freedom of expression, opinion, and thought, these rights are observed to enable what I call a "personal information sphere" for each person. This notion highlights how privacy interferences affect other fundamental rights. The personal information sphere is grounded in European case law and is thus not just an academic affair. The essence of the personal information sphere is control, yet with a different meaning than mere control as guaranteed by data protection law. The personal information sphere is about people controlling how they situate themselves in information and communication networks. It follows that, to respect privacy and related rights, online personalization providers should actively involve users in the personalization process and enable them to use personalization for personal goals.

0.0052890894 = product of:
  0.042312715 = sum of:
    0.042312715 = weight(_text_:case in 5974) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042312715 = score(doc=5974,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.24286987 = fieldWeight in 5974, 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=5974)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

0.0052890894 = product of:
  0.042312715 = sum of:
    0.042312715 = weight(_text_:case in 354) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042312715 = score(doc=354,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.24286987 = fieldWeight in 354, 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=354)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Alongside cognitive and social phenomena, many scholars have examined emotional and affective considerations in information science, but a potential emotional or affective paradigm has not coalesced to the extent of the social or cognitive paradigms. We argue information science research should integrate the social paradigm, as offered by social informatics, with affective and emotional considerations: a socio-emotional paradigm. A review of existing literature and findings from users' motivations to participate on the Academia section of the Stack Exchange social questioning-and-answering site make our case. We uncovered tensions between the intended information-centric focus of the community and users who believed social, emotional, and affective considerations needed to be foregrounded, speaking to online communities acting as boundary objects, with the "fit" for one user or community not always the same as for another. An integrated socio-emotional paradigm shows much strength for social informatics and information science research, including uncovering hidden concerns and differences in values, as in our study. Affective and emotional research, often bubbling under in information science, should rise to the surface is not so much a paradigm shift but an integration of social, emotional, and affective considerations into a socio-emotional paradigm.

0.00522842 = product of:
  0.04182736 = sum of:
    0.04182736 = weight(_text_:studies in 411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04182736 = score(doc=411,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.26452032 = fieldWeight in 411, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=411)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

As the prevalence of online misinformation grows increasingly apparent, our need to understand its spread becomes more essential. Trolling, in particular, may aggravate the spread of misinformation online. While many studies have investigated the negative impact of trolling and misinformation on social media, less attention has been devoted to the relationships between the two and their manifestation on social question and answer (SQA) sites. We examine the extent of and relationships between trolling and misinformation on SQA sites. Through content analysis of 8,401 posts (159 questions and 8,242 answers) from the Yahoo Answers! Politics & Government and Society & Culture categories, we identified levels of and relationships between misinformation and trolling. We find that trolling and misinformation tend to reinforce themselves and each other and that trolling and misinformation are more common in the Politics & Government category than in the Society & Culture category. Our study is among the first to consider the prevalence of and relationship between misinformation and trolling on SQA sites.

0.0043570166 = product of:
  0.034856133 = sum of:
    0.034856133 = weight(_text_:studies in 5710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034856133 = score(doc=5710,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 5710, 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=5710)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to review and discuss Luciano Floridi's 2019 book The Logic of Information: A Theory of Philosophy as Conceptual Design, the latest instalment in his philosophy of information (PI) tetralogy, particularly with respect to its implications for library and information studies (LIS). Design/methodology/approach Nine scholars with research interests in philosophy and LIS read and responded to the book, raising critical and heuristic questions in the spirit of scholarly dialogue. Floridi responded to these questions. Findings Floridi's PI, including this latest publication, is of interest to LIS scholars, and much insight can be gained by exploring this connection. It seems also that LIS has the potential to contribute to PI's further development in some respects. Research limitations/implications Floridi's PI work is technical philosophy for which many LIS scholars do not have the training or patience to engage with, yet doing so is rewarding. This suggests a role for translational work between philosophy and LIS. Originality/value The book symposium format, not yet seen in LIS, provides forum for sustained, multifaceted and generative dialogue around ideas.

0.0043570166 = product of:
  0.034856133 = sum of:
    0.034856133 = weight(_text_:studies in 5914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034856133 = score(doc=5914,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 5914, 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=5914)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The aim of the study was to develop an empirical measure for everyday information mastering (EIM). EIM describes the ways that individuals, based on their beliefs, attitudes, and expectations, orient themselves to information as a resource of everyday action. The key features of EIM were identified by conceptual analysis focusing on three EIM frameworks. Four modes of EIM-Proactive, Social, Reactive, and Passive-and their 12 constituents were identified. A survey of 39 items was developed in two pilot studies to operationalize the identified modes as measurable EIM constituents. The respondents in the main study were upper secondary school students (n = 412). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was applied to validate subscales for each EIM constituent. Seven subscales emerged: Inquiring and Scanning in the Proactive mode, Social media-centered, and Experiential in the Social mode, and Information poor, Overwhelmed, and Blunting in the Passive mode. Two constituents, Serendipitous and Intuitive, were not supported in the EFA. The findings highlight that the core constituents of an individual's everyday information mastering can be operationalized as psychometric scales. The instrument contributes to the systematic empirical study of EIM constituents and their relationships. The study further sheds light on key modes of EIM.

0.0043570166 = product of:
  0.034856133 = sum of:
    0.034856133 = weight(_text_:studies in 355) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034856133 = score(doc=355,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 355, 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=355)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Many researchers in library and information science have claimed that studies that are holistic are critical to understanding various phenomena. On closer examination, however, the term "holistic" is used mainly as a rhetorical device in the literature, rather than as one that embraces the epistemological tenets of a holistic paradigm, and applies these to research design. This paper examines this rhetorical use, and explores what it would mean, and why it would matter, to adopt substantively holistic approaches to research. We review relevant literature in library and information science to position past uses of holistic and compare these to the conceptual intentions of holism. We also outline the concept of holism, itself, with a focus on methodological and ontological holism, which can most deeply inform research design in our discipline. Greater methodological diversity, including much wider adoption of interpretivist and critical approaches, can address the concerns underlying the use of holistic rhetoric. We illustrate this central conceptual argument with a roadmap illustrating holistic considerations throughout the research process. The paper demonstrates that it is possible to shift away from predominantly rhetorical use of holistic, toward paradigmatically holistic research, which will provide for richer analyses of critical phenomena in the discipline.

0.0043570166 = product of:
  0.034856133 = sum of:
    0.034856133 = weight(_text_:studies in 622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034856133 = score(doc=622,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 622, 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=622)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

For decades, we have been told we live in the "information age"-a time when disruptive technological advancement has reshaped the categories and social uses of knowledge and when quantitative assessment is increasingly privileged. Such methodologies and concepts of information are usually considered the provenance of the natural and social sciences, which present them as politically and philosophically neutral. Yet the humanities should and do play an important role in interpreting and critiquing the historical, cultural, and conceptual nature of information. This book is one of two companion volumes that explore theories and histories of information from a humanistic perspective. They consider information as a long-standing feature of social, cultural, and conceptual management, a matter of social practice, and a fundamental challenge for the humanities today. Information: A Reader provides an introduction to the concept of information in historical, literary, and cultural studies. It features excerpts from more than forty texts by theorists and critics who have helped establish the notion of the "information age" or expand upon it. The reader establishes a canonical framework for thinking about information in humanistic terms. Together with Information: Keywords, it sets forth a major humanistic vision of the concept of information.

0.0043570166 = product of:
  0.034856133 = sum of:
    0.034856133 = weight(_text_:studies in 682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034856133 = score(doc=682,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.22043361 = fieldWeight in 682, 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=682)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Purpose Information scientists may find value in studying cultural information evolution and information diffusion through memetics. Information studies in memetics have often found datafication in memetics research difficult. Meanwhile, current memetic scholarship elsewhere is abundant in data due to their focus on Internet artifacts. This paper offers a way to close the datafication gap for information researchers by associating information data with "differences" between memetic documents. Design/methodology/approach This work offers a joint theory and methodology invested in information-oriented memetics. This methodology of differences is developed from a content analysis of difference on a collection of images with visual similarities. Findings The authors find that this kind of analysis provides a heuristic method for quantitatively bounding where one meme ends and another begins. The authors also find that this approach helps describe the dynamics of memetic media in such a way that the authors can datafy information or cultural evolution more clearly. Originality/value Here the authors offer an approach for studying cultural information evolution through the study of memes. In doing so, the authors forward a methodology of difference which leverages content analysis in order to outline how it functions practically. The authors propose a quantitative methodology to assess differences between versions of document contents in order to examine what a particular meme is. The authors also move toward showing the information structure which defines a meme.

0.003355627 = product of:
  0.026845016 = sum of:
    0.026845016 = product of:
      0.05369003 = sum of:
        0.05369003 = weight(_text_:22 in 5723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05369003 = score(doc=5723,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5723, 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=5723)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

17. 1.2020 22:15:11

0.003355627 = product of:
  0.026845016 = sum of:
    0.026845016 = product of:
      0.05369003 = sum of:
        0.05369003 = weight(_text_:22 in 1085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05369003 = score(doc=1085,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1085, 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=1085)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

18. 8.2022 19:22:57

0.0020133762 = product of:
  0.01610701 = sum of:
    0.01610701 = product of:
      0.03221402 = sum of:
        0.03221402 = weight(_text_:22 in 351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03221402 = score(doc=351,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 351, 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=351)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

18. 9.2021 13:22:27

0.0016778135 = product of:
  0.013422508 = sum of:
    0.013422508 = product of:
      0.026845016 = sum of:
        0.026845016 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026845016 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5835, 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=5835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

13. 2.2020 18:22:13

0.0016778135 = product of:
  0.013422508 = sum of:
    0.013422508 = product of:
      0.026845016 = sum of:
        0.026845016 = weight(_text_:22 in 5839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026845016 = score(doc=5839,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5839, 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=5839)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

30. 4.2020 21:03:22

0.0016778135 = product of:
  0.013422508 = sum of:
    0.013422508 = product of:
      0.026845016 = sum of:
        0.026845016 = weight(_text_:22 in 950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026845016 = score(doc=950,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 950, 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=950)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

22. 4.2023 19:27:56

0.0013422508 = product of:
  0.010738007 = sum of:
    0.010738007 = product of:
      0.021476014 = sum of:
        0.021476014 = weight(_text_:22 in 5655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021476014 = score(doc=5655,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 5655, 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=5655)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

14. 1.2020 11:15:22