Search (180 results, page 1 of 9)

0.056973968 = product of:
  0.113947935 = sum of:
    0.113947935 = product of:
      0.22789587 = sum of:
        0.22789587 = weight(_text_:perception in 2819) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.22789587 = score(doc=2819,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.7091809 = fieldWeight in 2819, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2819)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.049340907 = product of:
  0.098681815 = sum of:
    0.098681815 = product of:
      0.19736363 = sum of:
        0.19736363 = weight(_text_:perception in 2958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19736363 = score(doc=2958,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.6141687 = fieldWeight in 2958, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2958)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to present selected findings of a recent study of serendipity in information seeking, exploring the paradox of control inherent in the concept of "seeking serendipity". Design/methodology/approach - After providing an overview of the research study, the paper locates the research findings in the context of the literature. The discussion explores the research findings in relation to both the paradox of control and the related concept of "seeking serendipity". Findings - The definition/description of serendipity is examined, the concept of process-perception duality is introduced, and links with the literature are explored. The discussion reassesses the paradox of control in light of the research findings, raising the possibility that information literacy educators have a role to play in developing the perception aspect of serendipity. Practical implications - The paper proposes that, despite the possibly uncomfortable challenges presented by the paradox of control, serendipity deserves more recognition in professional practice. Increased acknowledgement and understanding of serendipity may enable professional practitioners to function more effectively in the unpredictable, dynamic environment that informs the reality of information seeking. Originality/value - The paper adds to the limited existing empirical research investigating serendipity, increasing both academic and practical understanding of the phenomenon. In particular, the introduction of the concept of process-perception duality provides a useful grounding for future research.

0.040286683 = product of:
  0.080573365 = sum of:
    0.080573365 = product of:
      0.16114673 = sum of:
        0.16114673 = weight(_text_:perception in 4060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.16114673 = score(doc=4060,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.50146663 = fieldWeight in 4060, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4060)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the information-seeking behavior of science and social science research scholars, including service effectiveness, satisfaction level on different type of sources and various methods adopted by the scholars for keeping up to date. Design/methodology/approach - Data were gathered using a questionnaire survey of 200, randomly selected, PhD students of science and social science departments of four universities in Kerala, India. Findings - Although similarities exist between social science and science PhD students with regard to information-seeking behavior, there are significant differences as well. There is a significant difference between science and social science scholars on the perception of the adequacy of print journals and database collection which are very relevant to the research purposes. There is no significant difference between science and social science scholars on the perception of the adequacy of e-journals, the most used source for keeping up to date. The study proved that scholars of both the fields are dissatisfied with the effectiveness of the library in keeping them up to date with latest developments. Originality/value - The study is based on actual situation and the result can be used for library service redesign for different types of users.

0.034184385 = product of:
  0.06836877 = sum of:
    0.06836877 = product of:
      0.13673754 = sum of:
        0.13673754 = weight(_text_:perception in 2818) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13673754 = score(doc=2818,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.42550856 = fieldWeight in 2818, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2818)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.034184385 = product of:
  0.06836877 = sum of:
    0.06836877 = product of:
      0.13673754 = sum of:
        0.13673754 = weight(_text_:perception in 3358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13673754 = score(doc=3358,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.42550856 = fieldWeight in 3358, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3358)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

As the nature of information becomes increasingly complex, academic librarians might wish to use critical thinking and media literacy approaches in bibliographic instruction. However, librarians have at the same time to guard against influencing a patron's choice of reference tools because such influence may reflect a bias on the part of the librarian. Presents a case study which compares reprint articles in the Canadian newspaper The Globe and Mail with their originals taken from the New York Times. Findings show that these reprints all undergo reduction and that those dealing with controversial issues experience significantly greater cuts than articles dealing with subjects such as lifestyle and business, thus affecting readers' perception of the presented issues. This case study indicates the responsibility of the academic librarian to warn patrons about the limitations of what may appear to be unimpaechable reference tools and to integrate news media literacy and critical thinking skills into active reference work

0.034184385 = product of:
  0.06836877 = sum of:
    0.06836877 = product of:
      0.13673754 = sum of:
        0.13673754 = weight(_text_:perception in 3294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13673754 = score(doc=3294,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.42550856 = fieldWeight in 3294, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3294)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We investigated the role of subjective factors in the information search process. Forty-eight participants each conducted six Web searches in a controlled setting. We examined relationships between subjective factors (happiness levels, satisfaction with and confidence in the search results, feeling lost during search, familiarity with and interest in the search topic, estimation of task difficulty) and objective factors (search behavior, search outcomes, and search-task characteristics). Data analysis was conducted using a multivariate statistical test (canonical correlations analysis). The findings confirmed existence of several relationships suggested by prior research, including relationships between objective search task difficulty and the perception of task difficulty, and between subjective states and search behaviors and outcomes. One of the original findings suggests that higher happiness levels before and during the search correlate with better feelings after the search, but also correlate with worse search outcomes and lower satisfaction, suggesting that, perhaps, it pays off to feel some pain during the search to gain quality outcomes.

0.032229345 = product of:
  0.06445869 = sum of:
    0.06445869 = product of:
      0.12891738 = sum of:
        0.12891738 = weight(_text_:perception in 280) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12891738 = score(doc=280,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.4011733 = fieldWeight in 280, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=280)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

More complex contexts of information seeking require extensive thinking that involves an intellectual leap which carries the user `beyond the information given' (Bruner, 1973) to the construction of something `new'. According to Arnheim (1969) such thinking is directly affected by one's visual perception of the world and he argues that the most productive thinking results from this imagery. The application of visual or mental imagery to the relationships and structure in information seeking situations may be thought of as a constructive strategy for making meaning. This paper explores the use of mental imagery in the constructive process of information seeking. For the individual, the meaning of information is not inherent in the information itself but in his or her perception of it and how it fits into an image of the world or personal construct system (Boulding, 1961; Kelly, 1963). The use of imagery may facilitate a user's mental image of information and its relation to previously acquired knowledge and, thus, also facilitate new construction during the information seeking process. Mental imagery has been found to play an important role in creativity and problem solving. Shepard (1978) argues that some of the most creative thoughts and solutions which humans devise are those which are not confined to expression within linear verbal communication but rather spring from mental imagery that embraces a spatial approach to problem solving. Mental imagery is more concrete and visually constructive in nature than verbal methods of problem solving. This paper explores the role of imagery in the constructive tasks of problem solving and learning in the information seeking process.

0.028486984 = product of:
  0.056973968 = sum of:
    0.056973968 = product of:
      0.113947935 = sum of:
        0.113947935 = weight(_text_:perception in 3560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.113947935 = score(doc=3560,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.35459045 = fieldWeight in 3560, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3560)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this study a perceived gap between the ideal and the reality of a community network (CN) is examined. Most proponents of CNs state that building a better physical community is their major service goal. However, there has been a concern that citizens might use the service simply as a means to connect to the Internet rather than as a means to connect to their communities. Using a survey research method (n = 213), users' perceptions of community aspects of CN service and the influence of such perceptions an their use were investigated. User demographics and alternative service accessibility were also examined as predictors of use. The present study found that the respondents were using the service mainly for general Internet features. More than two thirds of the respondents were not aware of the community content aspect of the service. Approximately 20% of respondents were identified as those whose perceptions of the community aspects actually affected their use of the service. They were both aware of community contents and using an additional Internet service provider. Findings suggest that the providers did not fully communicate the community aspects of the service with the users, while the user perception of community aspects is a key to further promotion of the service.

0.028486984 = product of:
  0.056973968 = sum of:
    0.056973968 = product of:
      0.113947935 = sum of:
        0.113947935 = weight(_text_:perception in 44) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.113947935 = score(doc=44,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.35459045 = fieldWeight in 44, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=44)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The virtual university environment provides librarians with new opportunities to contribute to the educational process. Building on the success of team-teaching a traditional liberal arts core course with composition and communications faculty, librarians and a communications professor worked together to integrate the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL) Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education (2000) into the online environment. The resulting graduate-level course in multimedia literacy assembled faculty and curriculum resources normally untapped in traditional classrooms. All five information literacy standards covering need, access, evaluation, use and the social, economic, legal, and ethical issues surrounding information use were addressed. Readings and threaded discussions about intellectual property, fair use of copyrighted materials, the evaluation of free and fee-based Web information and Web page design and construction prepared students to work in groups to design and construct Web sites. Students also completed a capstone project in the form of individual Web portfolios, which demonstrated the information and multimedia principles they learned in the class. Assessment of information literacy skills occurred through the analysis of student discussion, evaluative annotations, Web site assignments, perception surveys, and a master's level comprehensive exam question. What was learned in this course will serve as a model for future collaborative partnerships in which faculty and librarians work together to ensure that students who learn from a distance truly master information literacy competencies.

0.028486984 = product of:
  0.056973968 = sum of:
    0.056973968 = product of:
      0.113947935 = sum of:
        0.113947935 = weight(_text_:perception in 3621) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.113947935 = score(doc=3621,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.35459045 = fieldWeight in 3621, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3621)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to introduce the term Information Literacy 2.0 as a subset of information literacy, to describe its development and significance and give an outline of its underlying theoretical assumptions. Design/methodology/approach - The paper first examines the grounds for the possible re-conceptualizations in the field of information literacy and identifies the current developments in the information universe as the principal drive for perception shifts. Based on a literature review and a descriptive analysis of contrasting features of library user education, information literacy and Information literacy 2.0, the paper highlights the main foci of paradigm shifts. Findings - The paper found that the new meaning and understanding of the central conceptions in information literacy are shifting the focus of classical information literacy towards Information literacy 2.0. Many of the aspects of current information literacy practices originate from a print-based culture, which is incongruent with the transient and hybrid nature of digital environments. These radically changing environments are causing the appearance of anomalies in the information literacy paradigm, which could effectively be resolved through the introduction of a sub-concept of information literacy. Practical implications - The article specifies the possibilities for putting theoretical conceptualizations of Information literacy 2.0 into practice by determining the range of shifts in information literacy activities and identifying how new practices differ from the earlier approaches. Originality/value - The study attempts to advance the research field of information literacy by proposing a new outlook on information literacy through the integration of its underlying theoretical conceptions and practical applications.

0.028486984 = product of:
  0.056973968 = sum of:
    0.056973968 = product of:
      0.113947935 = sum of:
        0.113947935 = weight(_text_:perception in 3544) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.113947935 = score(doc=3544,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.35459045 = fieldWeight in 3544, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3544)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Purpose Information seeking for child-rearing is an increasingly popular topic in the medical and social science literature, though a theoretical framework in which to understand this phenomenon is still missing. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach The authors present results from a qualitative research in which data were obtained from 21 interviews and the personal experience of one of the authors. Participants were all mothers supportive of attachment parenting, a parenting style inspired by attachment theory which advocates making parenting decisions on a strong basis of information. They Findings Results were analyzed using grounded theory and allowed to define five major themes: becoming a mother implies a new perception of oneself in which it is common to feel more in need for information; the need to search for information originates in situations of "conflict" or crisis, or as a consequence of conflicting information; information is judged and weighed on the basis of affect and perceptions; scientific and experiential knowledge are valued as complementary; and finally, information seeking appears as one activity of identity work. Originality/value Placing conflict, instead of uncertainty, at the beginning of the search process allows to emphasize the role of information seeking in mediating relationships and interactions at a societal level. From this point of view, the authors understand that LIS should pay more attention to information seeking as an important factor in social change.

0.028486984 = product of:
  0.056973968 = sum of:
    0.056973968 = product of:
      0.113947935 = sum of:
        0.113947935 = weight(_text_:perception in 5035) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.113947935 = score(doc=5035,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.32135084 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.35459045 = fieldWeight in 5035, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.4187727 = idf(docFreq=195, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5035)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Information need is a fundamental concept within Information Science. Robert Taylor's seminal contribution in 1968 was to propose a division of information needs into four levels: the visceral, conscious, formalized and compromised levels of information need. Taylor's contribution has provided much inspiration to Information Science research but this has largely remained at the discursive and conceptual level. In this paper, we present a novel empirical investigation of Taylor's information need classification. We analyse the linguistic differences between conscious and formalized needs using several hundred postings to four major Internet discussion groups. We show that descriptions of conscious needs are more emotional in tone, involve more sensory perception and contain different temporal dimensions than descriptions of formalized needs. We show that it is possible to differentiate levels of information need based on linguistic patterns and that the language used to express information needs can reflect an individual's understanding of their information problem. This has implications for the theory of information needs and practical implications for supporting moderators of online news groups in responding to information needs and for developing automated support for classifying information needs.

0.027132044 = product of:
  0.054264087 = sum of:
    0.054264087 = product of:
      0.108528174 = sum of:
        0.108528174 = weight(_text_:22 in 5755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108528174 = score(doc=5755,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5755, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5755)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen. 57(1940), S.16-22

0.027132044 = product of:
  0.054264087 = sum of:
    0.054264087 = product of:
      0.108528174 = sum of:
        0.108528174 = weight(_text_:22 in 5761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108528174 = score(doc=5761,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5761, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5761)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Bücherei und Bildung. 22(1970), S.63-71

0.027132044 = product of:
  0.054264087 = sum of:
    0.054264087 = product of:
      0.108528174 = sum of:
        0.108528174 = weight(_text_:22 in 5772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108528174 = score(doc=5772,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5772, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5772)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Bibliothekar. 19(1965), S.15-22

0.027132044 = product of:
  0.054264087 = sum of:
    0.054264087 = product of:
      0.108528174 = sum of:
        0.108528174 = weight(_text_:22 in 5341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108528174 = score(doc=5341,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5341, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5341)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

17.10.1996 14:22:33

0.027132044 = product of:
  0.054264087 = sum of:
    0.054264087 = product of:
      0.108528174 = sum of:
        0.108528174 = weight(_text_:22 in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108528174 = score(doc=252,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 252, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=252)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Series

Reference librarian; no.22

0.027132044 = product of:
  0.054264087 = sum of:
    0.054264087 = product of:
      0.108528174 = sum of:
        0.108528174 = weight(_text_:22 in 5649) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108528174 = score(doc=5649,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 5649, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5649)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20. 4.2002 17:30:22

0.027132044 = product of:
  0.054264087 = sum of:
    0.054264087 = product of:
      0.108528174 = sum of:
        0.108528174 = weight(_text_:22 in 2504) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.108528174 = score(doc=2504,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2504, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2504)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

27.12.2015 18:22:38

0.02374054 = product of:
  0.04748108 = sum of:
    0.04748108 = product of:
      0.09496216 = sum of:
        0.09496216 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09496216 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17531638 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05006422 = 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