Search (43 results, page 1 of 3)

0.10820834 = product of:
  0.21641669 = sum of:
    0.21641669 = sum of:
      0.16103142 = weight(_text_:journals in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.16103142 = score(doc=3687,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05109862 = queryNorm
          0.627633 = fieldWeight in 3687, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3687)
      0.055385258 = weight(_text_:22 in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.055385258 = score(doc=3687,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05109862 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3687, 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=3687)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reports results of a questionnaire survey to assess the attitudes of scholarly users towards electronic journals and examines the current level of use of these publications by university academics in 2 departments in each of 5 faculties of a UK university

Date

22. 5.1999 19:07:29

0.030193392 = product of:
  0.060386784 = sum of:
    0.060386784 = product of:
      0.12077357 = sum of:
        0.12077357 = weight(_text_:journals in 1823) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12077357 = score(doc=1823,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.47072473 = fieldWeight in 1823, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1823)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study reports an analysis of American Chemical Society electronic journal downloads at Cornell University by individual IP addresses. While the majority of users (IPs) limited themselves to a small number of both journals and article downloads, a small minority of heavy users had a large effect an total journal downloads. There was a very strong relationship between the number of article downloads and the number of users, implying that a user-population can be estimated by just knowing the total use of a journal. Aggregate users (i.e. Library Proxy Server and public library computers) can be regarded as a sample of the entire user population. Analysis of article downloads by format (PDF versus HTML) suggests that individuals are using the system like a networked photocopier, for the purposes of creating print-on-demand copies of articles.

0.025161162 = product of:
  0.050322324 = sum of:
    0.050322324 = product of:
      0.10064465 = sum of:
        0.10064465 = weight(_text_:journals in 2388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10064465 = score(doc=2388,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.39227062 = fieldWeight in 2388, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2388)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Hypothesizing that workplace significantly affects information-seeking patterns, this study compared accessibility and use of information sources among 233 Israeli computer scientists and software engineers, employed in industry and academy, using a mail questionnaire, which yielded a usable reply rate of 33%. The two groups were found to differ significantly in age, education, seniority, and type of research they performed (basic vs. applied). Printed textbooks, professional journals, and oral discussions with colleagues or experts in the organization were common to both groups, topping almost all lists of accessibility and use. For most information sources, however, the two groups differed significantly and consistently. Printed professional journals as weIl as printed and electronic conference or meeting papers were consistently more accessible and more often used by the academy group, while the industry group reported greater access to and more frequent use of electronic textbooks and trade or promotional literature. In regard to handbooks and standards, in-house technical reports (printed), government technical reports (Internet), librarians and technical specialists (Internet), and oral discussions with supervisors, no significant differences in accessibility were found, but their use by the industry group was much higher. In both groups, accessibility was only partly related to use, and more so among the academy than the industry group.

0.02423105 = product of:
  0.0484621 = sum of:
    0.0484621 = product of:
      0.0969242 = sum of:
        0.0969242 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0969242 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7585, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7585)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2000 17:52:11

0.02423105 = product of:
  0.0484621 = sum of:
    0.0484621 = product of:
      0.0969242 = sum of:
        0.0969242 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0969242 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3924, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3924)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library and information science research. 22(2000) no.4, S.371-382

0.021349952 = product of:
  0.042699903 = sum of:
    0.042699903 = product of:
      0.08539981 = sum of:
        0.08539981 = weight(_text_:journals in 2208) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08539981 = score(doc=2208,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.33285263 = fieldWeight in 2208, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2208)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study reports an analysis of referral URL data by the Cornell University IP address from the American Chemical Society servers. The goal of this work is to better understand the tools used and pathways taken when scientists connect to electronic journals. While various methods of referral were identified in this study, most individuals were referred infrequently and followed few and consistent pathways each time they connected. The relationship between the number and types of referrals followed an inverse-square law. Whereas the majority of referrals came from established finding tools (library catalog, library e-journal list, and bibliographic databases), a substantial number of referrals originated from generic Web searches. Scientists are also relying an local alternatives or substitutes such as departmental or personal Web pages with lists of linked publications. The use of electronic mail as a method to refer scientists directly to online articles may be greatly underestimated. Implications for the development of redundant library services such as e-journal lists and the practice of publishers to allow linking from other resources are discussed.

0.021349952 = product of:
  0.042699903 = sum of:
    0.042699903 = product of:
      0.08539981 = sum of:
        0.08539981 = weight(_text_:journals in 2542) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08539981 = score(doc=2542,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.33285263 = fieldWeight in 2542, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2542)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

During the feasibility study into a National Union catalogue for the UK (UKNUC), a questionnaire survey was undertaken of the needs of both academic staff in higher education and library staff. A response rate of 40-50 per cent was achieved, 846 questionnaires being returned for academics and 724 for librarians. The analysis suggests that a UKNUC would be highly valued and heavily used by all categories. Academics felt it would have a positive effect on their information searching, and wished to include the holdings of the British Library, and libraries of both the major research universities and the "traditional" universities. They wanted it to be comprehensive and easy to use, to include locations of both books and journals, and to facilitate subject collection searching. Library staff have similar priorities to academics, although there are more variations by sector and a recognition of a UKNUC's value as a potential source of bibliographic records.

0.021349952 = product of:
  0.042699903 = sum of:
    0.042699903 = product of:
      0.08539981 = sum of:
        0.08539981 = weight(_text_:journals in 3113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08539981 = score(doc=3113,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.33285263 = fieldWeight in 3113, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3113)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

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

0.020769471 = product of:
  0.041538943 = sum of:
    0.041538943 = product of:
      0.083077885 = sum of:
        0.083077885 = weight(_text_:22 in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.083077885 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

9. 2.2008 17:52:22

0.017791625 = product of:
  0.03558325 = sum of:
    0.03558325 = product of:
      0.0711665 = sum of:
        0.0711665 = weight(_text_:journals in 575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0711665 = score(doc=575,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.2773772 = fieldWeight in 575, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=575)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study details the activities and strategies that 11th grade students with high academic abilities used during their information seeking and use to complete class projects in a Persuasive Speech class. The study took place in a suburban high school in Maryland, and participants included 21 junior honors students, their teacher, and their library media specialist. Each student produced a 5-7-minute speech on a self-chosen topic. Conducted in the framework of qualitative research in a constructivist paradigm (E.G. Guba, & Y.S. Lincoln, 1998), the study used data collected from observations, individual interviews, and documents students produced for their projects - concept maps, paragraphs, outlines, and research journals. Interview and observation data were analyzed using the constant comparative method (B. Glaser & A. Strauss, 1967) with the help of QSR NVivo 2 (QSR International Pty Ltd, 2002); students' documents were analyzed manually. The findings show that students' understanding, strategies, and activities during information seeking and use were interactive and serendipitous and that students learned about their topics as they searched. The research suggests that high school honors students in an information-rich environment are especially confident with learning tasks requiring an exploratory mode of learning.

0.017791625 = product of:
  0.03558325 = sum of:
    0.03558325 = product of:
      0.0711665 = sum of:
        0.0711665 = weight(_text_:journals in 990) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0711665 = score(doc=990,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.2773772 = fieldWeight in 990, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=990)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.017791625 = product of:
  0.03558325 = sum of:
    0.03558325 = product of:
      0.0711665 = sum of:
        0.0711665 = weight(_text_:journals in 1305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0711665 = score(doc=1305,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25656942 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.2773772 = fieldWeight in 1305, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.021064 = idf(docFreq=792, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1305)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This qualitative investigation is situated in the field of information seeking and use, and decision-making theory provided a framework for the study. In a naturalistic setting and across a range of curriculum areas, it investigated the behavior of secondary school students undertaking information search tasks. Research questions focused on students' criteria for assessing the relevance and reliability of information. Thirty-seven students between 14 and 17 years of age from a southeastern Australian school participated. The study collected data from journals; interviews, including video-stimulated recall interviews; think-aloud reports; video screen captures; and questionnaires. Data analysis culminated in grounded theory. Initial judgments of an item's relevance were based on comprehensibility, completeness of source, whether the item needed to be purchased, whether video sources were suitable, and whether factual or opinionative material met students' needs. Participants preferred information that provided topic overviews, information that linked to prior knowledge, and sources that treated topics in acceptable depth and were structured to facilitate accessibility. Students derived clues about reliability from URLs and considered the reputation of sources. The ability of an item to corroborate prior knowledge, its graphic design, its style of writing, and the perceived authority of its creators influenced participants' decisions about reliability.

0.0138463145 = product of:
  0.027692629 = sum of:
    0.027692629 = product of:
      0.055385258 = sum of:
        0.055385258 = weight(_text_:22 in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055385258 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1628, 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=1628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

29. 7.1998 10:57:22

0.0138463145 = product of:
  0.027692629 = sum of:
    0.027692629 = product of:
      0.055385258 = sum of:
        0.055385258 = weight(_text_:22 in 5299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055385258 = score(doc=5299,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5299, 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=5299)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2006 18:17:44

0.0138463145 = product of:
  0.027692629 = sum of:
    0.027692629 = product of:
      0.055385258 = sum of:
        0.055385258 = weight(_text_:22 in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055385258 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2905, 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=2905)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.2009 18:50:43

0.012115525 = product of:
  0.02423105 = sum of:
    0.02423105 = product of:
      0.0484621 = sum of:
        0.0484621 = weight(_text_:22 in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0484621 = score(doc=760,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 760, 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=760)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The degree of variability in the percentage of subject searching in an online public access catalog (OPAC) among branch libraries of one university was studied. A full semester's worth of transactions was analyzed, not sampled. The time units used were hour of the day, day of the week, and week of the semester. The findings show that subject searching varies from a low of 22% to a high of 74% over the hours of a day. Variability for the days of the week ranged from 17% to 64%, and for the weeks of the semester variability ranged from 12% to 70%. Valuable management information on the utilization of the OPAC within each brach library and among all the branch libraries is provided through numerous charts and graphs.

0.012115525 = product of:
  0.02423105 = sum of:
    0.02423105 = product of:
      0.0484621 = sum of:
        0.0484621 = weight(_text_:22 in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0484621 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7914, 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=7914)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 22(1993) no.4, S.68-71

0.012115525 = product of:
  0.02423105 = sum of:
    0.02423105 = product of:
      0.0484621 = sum of:
        0.0484621 = weight(_text_:22 in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0484621 = score(doc=1795,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1795, 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=1795)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Canadian journal of information and library science. 19(1994) no.4, S.1-22

0.012115525 = product of:
  0.02423105 = sum of:
    0.02423105 = product of:
      0.0484621 = sum of:
        0.0484621 = weight(_text_:22 in 6966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0484621 = score(doc=6966,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6966, 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=6966)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon

0.012115525 = product of:
  0.02423105 = sum of:
    0.02423105 = product of:
      0.0484621 = sum of:
        0.0484621 = weight(_text_:22 in 883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0484621 = score(doc=883,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17893866 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05109862 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 883, 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=883)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

BibliotheekBlad. 1(1997) no.21, S.22-23