Search (312 results, page 1 of 16)

  • × theme_ss:"Literaturübersicht"
  1. Julien, C.-A.; Leide, J.E.; Bouthillier, F.: Controlled user evaluations of information visualization interfaces for text retrieval : literature review and meta-analysis (2008) 0.03
    0.02935347 = product of:
      0.10762939 = sum of:
        0.01939093 = weight(_text_:of in 1718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01939093 = score(doc=1718,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 1718, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1718)
        0.015660247 = weight(_text_:on in 1718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015660247 = score(doc=1718,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 1718, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1718)
        0.072578214 = weight(_text_:great in 1718) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.072578214 = score(doc=1718,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19443816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.37327147 = fieldWeight in 1718, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1718)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    This review describes experimental designs (users, search tasks, measures, etc.) used by 31 controlled user studies of information visualization (IV) tools for textual information retrieval (IR) and a meta-analysis of the reported statistical effects. Comparable experimental designs allow research designers to compare their results with other reports, and support the development of experimentally verified design guidelines concerning which IV techniques are better suited to which types of IR tasks. The studies generally use a within-subject design with 15 or more undergraduate students performing browsing to known-item tasks on sets of at least 1,000 full-text articles or Web pages on topics of general interest/news. Results of the meta-analysis (N = 8) showed no significant effects of the IV tool as compared with a text-only equivalent, but the set shows great variability suggesting an inadequate basis of comparison. Experimental design recommendations are provided which would support comparison of existing IV tools for IR usability testing.
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.6, S.1012-1024
  2. Solomon, S.: Discovering information in context (2002) 0.03
    0.02570876 = product of:
      0.094265446 = sum of:
        0.018565401 = weight(_text_:of in 4294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018565401 = score(doc=4294,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 4294, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4294)
        0.064626575 = weight(_text_:technological in 4294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064626575 = score(doc=4294,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.3522307 = fieldWeight in 4294, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4294)
        0.011073467 = weight(_text_:on in 4294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011073467 = score(doc=4294,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 4294, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4294)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter has three purposes: to illuminate the ways in which people discover, shape, or create information as part of their lives and work; to consider how the resources and rules of people's situations facilitate or limit discovery of information; and to introduce the idea of a sociotechnical systems design science that is founded in part an understanding the discovery of information in context. In addressing these purposes the chapter focuses an both theoretical and research works in information studies and related fields that shed light on information as something that is embedded in the fabric of people's lives and work. Thus, the discovery of information view presented here characterizes information as being constructed through involvement in life's activities, problems, tasks, and social and technological structures, as opposed to being independent and context free. Given this process view, discovering information entails engagement, reflection, learning, and action-all the behaviors that research subjects often speak of as making sense-above and beyond the traditional focus of the information studies field: seeking without consideration of connections across time.
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 36(2002), S.229-264
  3. Thelwall, M.; Vaughan, L.; Björneborn, L.: Webometrics (2004) 0.02
    0.022828344 = product of:
      0.08370393 = sum of:
        0.0139941955 = weight(_text_:of in 4279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0139941955 = score(doc=4279,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 4279, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4279)
        0.009227889 = weight(_text_:on in 4279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.009227889 = score(doc=4279,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 4279, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4279)
        0.060481843 = weight(_text_:great in 4279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060481843 = score(doc=4279,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19443816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 4279, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4279)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    Webometrics, the quantitative study of Web-related phenomena, emerged from the realization that methods originally designed for bibliometric analysis of scientific journal article citation patterns could be applied to the Web, with commercial search engines providing the raw data. Almind and Ingwersen (1997) defined the field and gave it its name. Other pioneers included Rodriguez Gairin (1997) and Aguillo (1998). Larson (1996) undertook exploratory link structure analysis, as did Rousseau (1997). Webometrics encompasses research from fields beyond information science such as communication studies, statistical physics, and computer science. In this review we concentrate on link analysis, but also cover other aspects of webometrics, including Web log fle analysis. One theme that runs through this chapter is the messiness of Web data and the need for data cleansing heuristics. The uncontrolled Web creates numerous problems in the interpretation of results, for instance, from the automatic creation or replication of links. The loose connection between top-level domain specifications (e.g., com, edu, and org) and their actual content is also a frustrating problem. For example, many .com sites contain noncommercial content, although com is ostensibly the main commercial top-level domain. Indeed, a skeptical researcher could claim that obstacles of this kind are so great that all Web analyses lack value. As will be seen, one response to this view, a view shared by critics of evaluative bibliometrics, is to demonstrate that Web data correlate significantly with some non-Web data in order to prove that the Web data are not wholly random. A practical response has been to develop increasingly sophisticated data cleansing techniques and multiple data analysis methods.
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 39(2005), S.81-138
  4. Drenth, H.; Morris, A.; Tseng, G.: Expert systems as information intermediaries (1991) 0.02
    0.020308744 = product of:
      0.11169809 = sum of:
        0.014927144 = weight(_text_:of in 3695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014927144 = score(doc=3695,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 3695, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3695)
        0.09677095 = weight(_text_:great in 3695) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09677095 = score(doc=3695,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19443816 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.49769527 = fieldWeight in 3695, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3695)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    Points out that expert systems have great potential to enhance access to information retrieval systems as they use expertise to carry out tasks such as diagnosis and planning and make expertise available to nonexperts. Potential end users of online information retrieval systems are frequently deterred by the complexity of theses systems. Expert systems can mediate between the searcher and the information retrieval system and might be the key both to increasing and end user searching and to improving the quality of searches overall
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 26(1991), S.113-154
  5. Saracevic, T.: Relevance: a review of the literature and a framework for thinking on the notion in information science. Part II : nature and manifestations of relevance (2007) 0.02
    0.019774072 = product of:
      0.07250493 = sum of:
        0.04281316 = weight(_text_:effect in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04281316 = score(doc=612,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18289955 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.23408018 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
        0.014927144 = weight(_text_:of in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014927144 = score(doc=612,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
        0.014764623 = weight(_text_:on in 612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014764623 = score(doc=612,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 612, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=612)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    Relevance is a, if not even the, key notion in information science in general and information retrieval in particular. This two-part critical review traces and synthesizes the scholarship on relevance over the past 30 years and provides an updated framework within which the still widely dissonant ideas and works about relevance might be interpreted and related. It is a continuation and update of a similar review that appeared in 1975 under the same title, considered here as being Part I. The present review is organized into two parts: Part II addresses the questions related to nature and manifestations of relevance, and Part III addresses questions related to relevance behavior and effects. In Part II, the nature of relevance is discussed in terms of meaning ascribed to relevance, theories used or proposed, and models that have been developed. The manifestations of relevance are classified as to several kinds of relevance that form an interdependent system of relevances. In Part III, relevance behavior and effects are synthesized using experimental and observational works that incorporate data. In both parts, each section concludes with a summary that in effect provides an interpretation and synthesis of contemporary thinking on the topic treated or suggests hypotheses for future research. Analyses of some of the major trends that shape relevance work are offered in conclusions.
    Content
    Relevant: Having significant and demonstrable bearing on the matter at hand.[Note *][A version of this article has been published in 2006 as a chapter in E.G. Abels & D.A. Nitecki (Eds.), Advances in Librarianship (Vol. 30, pp. 3-71). San Diego: Academic Press. (Saracevic, 2006).] Relevance: The ability as of an information retrieval system to retrieve material that satisfies the needs of the user. - Merriam-Webster Dictionary 2005
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.13, S.1915-1933
  6. MacFarlane, A.; Missaoui, S.; Makri, S.; Gutierrez Lopez, M.: Sender vs. recipient-orientated information systems revisited (2022) 0.02
    0.018613053 = product of:
      0.06824786 = sum of:
        0.012376934 = weight(_text_:of in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012376934 = score(doc=607,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.2292085 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
        0.043084387 = weight(_text_:technological in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043084387 = score(doc=607,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.23482047 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
        0.012786539 = weight(_text_:on in 607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012786539 = score(doc=607,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.16835764 = fieldWeight in 607, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=607)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose Belkin and Robertson (1976a) reflected on the ethical implications of theoretical research in information science and warned that there was potential for abuse of knowledge gained by undertaking such research and applying it to information systems. In particular, they identified the domains of advertising and political propaganda that posed particular problems. The purpose of this literature review is to revisit these ideas in the light of recent events in global information systems that demonstrate that their fears were justified. Design/methodology/approach The authors revisit the theory in information science that Belkin and Robertson used to build their argument, together with the discussion on ethics that resulted from this work in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The authors then review recent literature in the field of information systems, specifically information retrieval, social media and recommendation systems that highlight the problems identified by Belkin and Robertson. Findings Information science theories have been used in conjunction with empirical evidence gathered from user interactions that have been detrimental to both individuals and society. It is argued in the paper that the information science and systems communities should find ways to return control to the user wherever possible, and the ways to achieve this are considered. Research limitations/implications The ethical issues identified require a multidisciplinary approach with research in information science, computer science, information systems, business, sociology, psychology, journalism, government and politics, etc. required. This is too large a scope to deal with in a literature review, and we focus only on the design and implementation of information systems (Zimmer, 2008a) through an information science and information systems perspective. Practical implications The authors argue that information systems such as search technologies, social media applications and recommendation systems should be designed with the recipient of the information in mind (Paisley and Parker, 1965), not the sender of that information. Social implications Information systems designed ethically and with users in mind will go some way to addressing the ill effects typified by the problems for individuals and society evident in global information systems. Originality/value The authors synthesize the evidence from the literature to provide potential technological solutions to the ethical issues identified, with a set of recommendations to information systems designers and implementers.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 78(2022) no.2, S.485-509
  7. Cho, H.; Pham, M.T.N.; Leonard, K.N.; Urban, A.C.: ¬A systematic literature review on image information needs and behaviors (2022) 0.02
    0.018455964 = product of:
      0.067671865 = sum of:
        0.011800943 = weight(_text_:of in 606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011800943 = score(doc=606,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.21854173 = fieldWeight in 606, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=606)
        0.043084387 = weight(_text_:technological in 606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043084387 = score(doc=606,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.23482047 = fieldWeight in 606, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=606)
        0.012786539 = weight(_text_:on in 606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012786539 = score(doc=606,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.16835764 = fieldWeight in 606, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=606)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose With ready access to search engines and social media platforms, the way people find image information has evolved and diversified in the past two decades. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the literature on image information needs and behaviors. Design/methodology/approach Following an eight-step procedure for conducting systematic literature reviews, the paper presents an analysis of peer-reviewed work on image information needs and behaviors, with publications ranging from the years 1997 to 2019. Findings Application of the inclusion criteria led to 69 peer-reviewed works. These works were synthesized according to the following categories: research methods, users targeted, image types, identified needs, search behaviors and search obstacles. The reviewed studies show that people seek and use images for multiple reasons, including entertainment, illustration, aesthetic appreciation, knowledge construction, engagement, inspiration and social interactions. The reviewed studies also report that common strategies for image searches include keyword searches with short queries, browsing, specialization and reformulation. Observed trends suggest common deployment of query analysis, survey questionnaires and undergraduate participant pools to research image information needs and behavior. Originality/value At this point, after more than two decades of image information needs research, a holistic systematic review of the literature was long overdue. The way users find image information has evolved and diversified due to technological developments in image retrieval. By synthesizing this burgeoning field into specific foci, this systematic literature review provides a foundation for future empirical investigation. With this foundation set, the paper then pinpoints key research gaps to investigate, particularly the influence of user expertise, a need for more diverse population samples, a dearth of qualitative data, new search features and information and visual literacies instruction.
    Source
    Journal of documentation. 78(2022) no.2, S.207-227
  8. Khoo, S.G.; Na, J.-C.: Semantic relations in information science (2006) 0.02
    0.01767223 = product of:
      0.06479818 = sum of:
        0.032109868 = weight(_text_:effect in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032109868 = score(doc=1978,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18289955 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.17556013 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
        0.016078109 = weight(_text_:of in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016078109 = score(doc=1978,freq=66.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.2977506 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
              8.124039 = tf(freq=66.0), with freq of:
                66.0 = termFreq=66.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
        0.016610201 = weight(_text_:on in 1978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016610201 = score(doc=1978,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.21870299 = fieldWeight in 1978, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1978)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    This chapter examines the nature of semantic relations and their main applications in information science. The nature and types of semantic relations are discussed from the perspectives of linguistics and psychology. An overview of the semantic relations used in knowledge structures such as thesauri and ontologies is provided, as well as the main techniques used in the automatic extraction of semantic relations from text. The chapter then reviews the use of semantic relations in information extraction, information retrieval, question-answering, and automatic text summarization applications. Concepts and relations are the foundation of knowledge and thought. When we look at the world, we perceive not a mass of colors but objects to which we automatically assign category labels. Our perceptual system automatically segments the world into concepts and categories. Concepts are the building blocks of knowledge; relations act as the cement that links concepts into knowledge structures. We spend much of our lives identifying regular associations and relations between objects, events, and processes so that the world has an understandable structure and predictability. Our lives and work depend on the accuracy and richness of this knowledge structure and its web of relations. Relations are needed for reasoning and inferencing. Chaffin and Herrmann (1988b, p. 290) noted that "relations between ideas have long been viewed as basic to thought, language, comprehension, and memory." Aristotle's Metaphysics (Aristotle, 1961; McKeon, expounded on several types of relations. The majority of the 30 entries in a section of the Metaphysics known today as the Philosophical Lexicon referred to relations and attributes, including cause, part-whole, same and opposite, quality (i.e., attribute) and kind-of, and defined different types of each relation. Hume (1955) pointed out that there is a connection between successive ideas in our minds, even in our dreams, and that the introduction of an idea in our mind automatically recalls an associated idea. He argued that all the objects of human reasoning are divided into relations of ideas and matters of fact and that factual reasoning is founded on the cause-effect relation. His Treatise of Human Nature identified seven kinds of relations: resemblance, identity, relations of time and place, proportion in quantity or number, degrees in quality, contrariety, and causation. Mill (1974, pp. 989-1004) discoursed on several types of relations, claiming that all things are either feelings, substances, or attributes, and that attributes can be a quality (which belongs to one object) or a relation to other objects.
    Linguists in the structuralist tradition (e.g., Lyons, 1977; Saussure, 1959) have asserted that concepts cannot be defined on their own but only in relation to other concepts. Semantic relations appear to reflect a logical structure in the fundamental nature of thought (Caplan & Herrmann, 1993). Green, Bean, and Myaeng (2002) noted that semantic relations play a critical role in how we represent knowledge psychologically, linguistically, and computationally, and that many systems of knowledge representation start with a basic distinction between entities and relations. Green (2001, p. 3) said that "relationships are involved as we combine simple entities to form more complex entities, as we compare entities, as we group entities, as one entity performs a process on another entity, and so forth. Indeed, many things that we might initially regard as basic and elemental are revealed upon further examination to involve internal structure, or in other words, internal relationships." Concepts and relations are often expressed in language and text. Language is used not just for communicating concepts and relations, but also for representing, storing, and reasoning with concepts and relations. We shall examine the nature of semantic relations from a linguistic and psychological perspective, with an emphasis on relations expressed in text. The usefulness of semantic relations in information science, especially in ontology construction, information extraction, information retrieval, question-answering, and text summarization is discussed. Research and development in information science have focused on concepts and terms, but the focus will increasingly shift to the identification, processing, and management of relations to achieve greater effectiveness and refinement in information science techniques. Previous chapters in ARIST on natural language processing (Chowdhury, 2003), text mining (Trybula, 1999), information retrieval and the philosophy of language (Blair, 2003), and query expansion (Efthimiadis, 1996) provide a background for this discussion, as semantic relations are an important part of these applications.
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 40(2006), S.157-228
  9. Deokattey, S.; Sharma, S.B.K.; Kumar, G.R.; Bhanumurthy, K.: Knowledge organization research : an overview (2015) 0.02
    0.015280817 = product of:
      0.05602966 = sum of:
        0.01727841 = weight(_text_:of in 2092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01727841 = score(doc=2092,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 2092, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2092)
        0.022376444 = weight(_text_:on in 2092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022376444 = score(doc=2092,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.29462588 = fieldWeight in 2092, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2092)
        0.016374804 = product of:
          0.03274961 = sum of:
            0.03274961 = weight(_text_:22 in 2092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03274961 = score(doc=2092,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2092, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2092)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    The object of this literature review is to provide a historical perspective of R and D work in the area of Knowledge Organization (KO). This overview/summarization will provide information on major areas of KO. Journal articles published in core areas of KO: (Classification, Indexing, Thesauri and Taxonomies, Internet and Subject approach to information in the electronic era and Ontologies will be predominantly covered in this literature review. Coverage in this overview may not be completely exhaustive, but it succinctly showcases major developments in the area of KO. This review is a good source of additional reading material on KO apart from prescribed reading material on KO
    Date
    22. 6.2015 16:13:38
  10. Bergeron, P.: Information resources management (1996) 0.02
    0.01527591 = product of:
      0.0840175 = sum of:
        0.01939093 = weight(_text_:of in 7364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01939093 = score(doc=7364,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 7364, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7364)
        0.064626575 = weight(_text_:technological in 7364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064626575 = score(doc=7364,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.3522307 = fieldWeight in 7364, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7364)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    State of the art review of the concept and practice of information resources management (IRM), particularly during the period 1986 to 1995. Notes the emergence of 2 approaches: the technological view emphasizing the technical aspect of IRM; and the integrative view which considers IRM as a convergent approach to information problems. Identifies the perceived barriers to IRM implementation: lack of well defined IRM concepts, practices, guidelines and tools; failure of organizations to perceive information as a resource; lack of measurement of information costs and value; and resistance to organizational change, such as the modification of organizational structures, policies, procedures, and the new roles for information professionals. Concludes by suggesting that there is a trend toward an integrative approach to IRM in terms of value added processes and considers whether IRM is finding its way as a discipline or subdiscipline within information science
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 31(1996), S.263-300
  11. Weiss, A.K.; Carstens, T.V.: ¬The year's work in cataloging, 1999 (2001) 0.01
    0.013811398 = product of:
      0.050641794 = sum of:
        0.0159967 = weight(_text_:of in 6084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0159967 = score(doc=6084,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 6084, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6084)
        0.01827029 = weight(_text_:on in 6084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01827029 = score(doc=6084,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 6084, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6084)
        0.016374804 = product of:
          0.03274961 = sum of:
            0.03274961 = weight(_text_:22 in 6084) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03274961 = score(doc=6084,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6084, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6084)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    The challenge of cataloging Web sites and electronic resources was the most important issue facing the cataloging world in the last year. This article reviews attempts to analyze and revise the cataloging code in view of the new electronic environment. The difficulties of applying traditional library cataloging standards to Web resources has led some to favor metadata as the best means of providing access to these materials. The appropriate education and training for library cataloging personnel remains crucial during this transitional period. Articles on user understanding of Library of Congress subject headings and on cataloging practice are also reviewed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  12. Haas, S.W.: Natural language processing : toward large-scale, robust systems (1996) 0.01
    0.013682111 = product of:
      0.05016774 = sum of:
        0.016689055 = weight(_text_:of in 7415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016689055 = score(doc=7415,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 7415, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7415)
        0.014764623 = weight(_text_:on in 7415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014764623 = score(doc=7415,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 7415, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7415)
        0.018714061 = product of:
          0.037428122 = sum of:
            0.037428122 = weight(_text_:22 in 7415) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037428122 = score(doc=7415,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 7415, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7415)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    State of the art review of natural language processing updating an earlier review published in ARIST 22(1987). Discusses important developments that have allowed for significant advances in the field of natural language processing: materials and resources; knowledge based systems and statistical approaches; and a strong emphasis on evaluation. Reviews some natural language processing applications and common problems still awaiting solution. Considers closely related applications such as language generation and th egeneration phase of machine translation which face the same problems as natural language processing. Covers natural language methodologies for information retrieval only briefly
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 31(1996), S.83-119
  13. Genereux, C.: Building connections : a review of the serials literature 2004 through 2005 (2007) 0.01
    0.013097843 = product of:
      0.04802542 = sum of:
        0.014810067 = weight(_text_:of in 2548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014810067 = score(doc=2548,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 2548, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2548)
        0.01917981 = weight(_text_:on in 2548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01917981 = score(doc=2548,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.25253648 = fieldWeight in 2548, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2548)
        0.014035545 = product of:
          0.02807109 = sum of:
            0.02807109 = weight(_text_:22 in 2548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02807109 = score(doc=2548,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2548, 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=2548)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    This review of 2004 and 2005 serials literature covers the themes of cost, management, and access. Interwoven through the serials literature of these two years are the importance of collaboration, communication, and linkages between scholars, publishers, subscription agents and other intermediaries, and librarians. The emphasis in the literature is on electronic serials and their impact on publishing, libraries, and vendors. In response to the crisis of escalating journal prices and libraries' dissatisfaction with the Big Deal licensing agreements, Open Access journals and publishing models were promoted. Libraries subscribed to or licensed increasing numbers of electronic serials. As a result, libraries sought ways to better manage licensing and subscription data (not handled by traditional integrated library systems) by implementing electronic resources management systems. In order to provide users with better, faster, and more current information on and access to electronic serials, libraries implemented tools and services to provide A-Z title lists, title by title coverage data, MARC records, and OpenURL link resolvers.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  14. Gabbard, R.: Recent literature shows accelerated growth in hypermedia tools : an annotated bibliography (1994) 0.01
    0.01283399 = product of:
      0.047057964 = sum of:
        0.007463572 = weight(_text_:of in 8460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007463572 = score(doc=8460,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 8460, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8460)
        0.02088033 = weight(_text_:on in 8460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02088033 = score(doc=8460,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.27492687 = fieldWeight in 8460, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8460)
        0.018714061 = product of:
          0.037428122 = sum of:
            0.037428122 = weight(_text_:22 in 8460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037428122 = score(doc=8460,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 8460, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8460)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    An annotated bibliography on hypermedia divided into 3 sections: material on hypertext/hypermedia that is not tied to any hardware platforms or operating systems; materials detailing those hypertext/hypermedia applications for DOS and Windows, HyperCard Macintosh hypertext/hypermedia applications. Includes journal articles, monographs, conference proceedings, and specific product announcements, evaluations, and reviews from 1990 until the summer of 1993
    Source
    Reference services review. 22(1994) no.2, S.31-40
  15. El-Sherbini, M.A.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2005-06 (2008) 0.01
    0.012656175 = product of:
      0.04640597 = sum of:
        0.012927286 = weight(_text_:of in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012927286 = score(doc=249,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
        0.014764623 = weight(_text_:on in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014764623 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
        0.018714061 = product of:
          0.037428122 = sum of:
            0.037428122 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037428122 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    This paper reviews library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2005-06. It covers pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of cataloging; Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records (FRBR); metadata and its applications and relation to Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC); cataloging tools and standards; authority control; and recruitment, training, and the changing role of catalogers.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  16. Chambers, S.; Myall, C.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2007-8 (2010) 0.01
    0.012351968 = product of:
      0.04529055 = sum of:
        0.0159967 = weight(_text_:of in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0159967 = score(doc=4309,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 4309, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4309)
        0.012919044 = weight(_text_:on in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012919044 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 4309, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4309)
        0.016374804 = product of:
          0.03274961 = sum of:
            0.03274961 = weight(_text_:22 in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03274961 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4309, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4309)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    This paper surveys library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2007-8, indicating its extent and range in terms of types of literature, major subject areas, and themes. The paper reviews pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of bibliographic control, general cataloging standards and texts, Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), cataloging varied resources, metadata and cataloging in the Web world, classification and subject access, questions of diversity and diverse perspectives, additional reports of practice and research, catalogers' education and careers, keeping current through columns and blogs, and cataloging history.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  17. Martin, K.E.; Mundle, K.: Positioning libraries for a new bibliographic universe (2014) 0.01
    0.01183834 = product of:
      0.043407246 = sum of:
        0.013711456 = weight(_text_:of in 2608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013711456 = score(doc=2608,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 2608, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2608)
        0.015660247 = weight(_text_:on in 2608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.015660247 = score(doc=2608,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.20619515 = fieldWeight in 2608, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2608)
        0.014035545 = product of:
          0.02807109 = sum of:
            0.02807109 = weight(_text_:22 in 2608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02807109 = score(doc=2608,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2608, 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=2608)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    This paper surveys the English-language literature on cataloging and classification published during 2011 and 2012, covering both theory and application. A major theme of the literature centered on Resource Description and Access (RDA), as the period covered in this review includes the conclusion of the RDA test, revisions to RDA, and the implementation decision. Explorations in the theory and practical applications of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), upon which RDA is organized, are also heavily represented. Library involvement with linked data through the creation of prototypes and vocabularies are explored further during the period. Other areas covered in the review include: classification, controlled vocabularies and name authority, evaluation and history of cataloging, special formats cataloging, cataloging and discovery services, non-AACR2/RDA metadata, cataloging workflows, and the education and careers of catalogers.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  18. Hsueh, D.C.: Recon road maps : retrospective conversion literature, 1980-1990 (1992) 0.01
    0.01116607 = product of:
      0.040942255 = sum of:
        0.007463572 = weight(_text_:of in 2193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007463572 = score(doc=2193,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.13821793 = fieldWeight in 2193, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2193)
        0.014764623 = weight(_text_:on in 2193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014764623 = score(doc=2193,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.07594867 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 2193, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2193)
        0.018714061 = product of:
          0.037428122 = sum of:
            0.037428122 = weight(_text_:22 in 2193) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037428122 = score(doc=2193,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12092275 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.034531306 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2193, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2193)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.27272728 = coord(3/11)
    
    Abstract
    This paper aims to bring together in one place books, articles, reports, and lectures on retrospective conversion in print and non-print formats, appearing between 1980-1990. The bibliography, preceded by a brief review of the literature, is divided into ten broad categories to facilitate quick reference.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 14(1992) nos.3/4, S.5-22
  19. Gilliland-Swetland, A.: Electronic records management (2004) 0.01
    0.011016004 = product of:
      0.060588017 = sum of:
        0.017503629 = weight(_text_:of in 4280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017503629 = score(doc=4280,freq=44.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.3241498 = fieldWeight in 4280, product of:
              6.6332498 = tf(freq=44.0), with freq of:
                44.0 = termFreq=44.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4280)
        0.043084387 = weight(_text_:technological in 4280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043084387 = score(doc=4280,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.23482047 = fieldWeight in 4280, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4280)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    What is an electronic record, how should it best be preserved and made available, and to what extent do traditional, paradigmatic archival precepts such as provenance, original order, and archival custody hold when managing it? Over more than four decades of work in the area of electronic records (formerly known as machine-readable records), theorists and researchers have offered answers to these questions-or at least devised approaches for trying to answer them. However, a set of fundamental questions about the nature of the record and the applicability of traditional archival theory still confronts researchers seeking to advance knowledge and development in this increasingly active, but contested, area of research. For example, which characteristics differentiate a record from other types of information objects (such as publications or raw research data)? Are these characteristics consistently present regardless of the medium of the record? Does the record always have to have a tangible form? How does the record manifest itself within different technological and procedural contexts, and in particular, how do we determine the parameters of electronic records created in relational, distributed, or dynamic environments that bear little resemblance an the surface to traditional paper-based environments? At the heart of electronic records research lies a dual concern with the nature of the record as a specific type of information object and the nature of legal and historical evidence in a digital world. Electronic records research is relevant to the agendas of many communities in addition to that of archivists. Its emphasis an accountability and an establishing trust in records, for example, addresses concerns that are central to both digital government and e-commerce. Research relating to electronic records is still relatively homogeneous in terms of scope, in that most major research initiatives have addressed various combinations of the following: theory building in terms of identifying the nature of the electronic record, developing alternative conceptual models, establishing the determinants of reliability and authenticity in active and preserved electronic records, identifying functional and metadata requirements for record keeping, developing and testing preservation
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 39(2005), S.219-256
  20. Rogers, Y.: New theoretical approaches for human-computer interaction (2003) 0.01
    0.010106127 = product of:
      0.055583693 = sum of:
        0.017884856 = weight(_text_:of in 4270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017884856 = score(doc=4270,freq=60.0), product of:
            0.053998582 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.33120972 = fieldWeight in 4270, product of:
              7.745967 = tf(freq=60.0), with freq of:
                60.0 = termFreq=60.0
              1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4270)
        0.03769884 = weight(_text_:technological in 4270) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03769884 = score(doc=4270,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18347798 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.034531306 = queryNorm
            0.20546791 = fieldWeight in 4270, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3133807 = idf(docFreq=591, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4270)
      0.18181819 = coord(2/11)
    
    Abstract
    "Theory weary, theory leery, why can't I be theory cheery?" (Erickson, 2002, p. 269). The field of human-computer interaction (HCI) is rapidly expanding. Alongside the extensive technological developments that are taking place, a profusion of new theories, methods, and concerns has been imported into the field from a range of disciplines and contexts. An extensive critique of recent theoretical developments is presented here together with an overview of HCI practice. A consequence of bringing new theories into the field has been much insightful explication of HCI phenomena and also a broadening of the field's discourse. However, these theoretically based approaches have had limited impact an the practice of interaction design. This chapter discusses why this is so and suggests that different kinds of mechanisms are needed that will enable both designers and researchers to better articulate and theoretically ground the challenges facing them today. Human-computer interaction is bursting at the seams. Its mission, goals, and methods, well established in the '80s, have all greatly expanded to the point that "HCI is now effectively a boundless domain" (Barnard, May, Duke, & Duce, 2000, p. 221). Everything is in a state of flux: The theory driving research is changing, a flurry of new concepts is emerging, the domains and type of users being studied are diversifying, many of the ways of doing design are new, and much of what is being designed is significantly different. Although potentially much is to be gained from such rapid growth, the downside is an increasing lack of direction, structure, and coherence in the field. What was originally a bounded problem space with a clear focus and a small set of methods for designing computer systems that were easier and more efficient to use by a single user is now turning into a diffuse problem space with less clarity in terms of its objects of study, design foci, and investigative methods. Instead, aspirations of overcoming the Digital Divide, by providing universal accessibility, have become major concerns (e.g., Shneiderman, 2002a). The move toward greater openness in the field means that many more topics, areas, and approaches are now considered acceptable in the worlds of research and practice.
    A problem with allowing a field to expand eclectically is that it can easily lose coherence. No one really knows what its purpose is anymore or what criteria to use in assessing its contribution and value to both knowledge and practice. For example, among the many new approaches, ideas, methods, and goals now being proposed, how do we know which are acceptable, reliable, useful, and generalizable? Moreover, how do researchers and designers know which of the many tools and techniques to use when doing design and research? To be able to address these concerns, a young field in a state of flux (as is HCI) needs to take stock and begin to reflect an the changes that are happening. The purpose of this chapter is to assess and reflect an the role of theory in contemporary HCI and the extent to which it is used in design practice. Over the last ten years, a range of new theories has been imported into the field. A key question is whether such attempts have been productive in terms of "knowledge transfer." Here knowledge transfer means the translation of research findings (e.g., theory, empirical results, descriptive accounts, cognitive models) from one discipline (e.g., cognitive psychology, sociology) into another (e.g., human-computer interaction, computer supported cooperative work).
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 38(2004), S.87-144

Languages

  • e 303
  • d 5
  • m 2
  • pt 1
  • ru 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 270
  • b 51
  • m 20
  • el 8
  • s 8
  • r 5
  • ? 1
  • i 1
  • More… Less…