Search (51 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Inhaltsanalyse"
  1. Shaw, R.: Information organization and the philosophy of history (2013) 0.05 
    0.05158245 = product of:
  0.1031649 = sum of:
    0.035452522 = weight(_text_:science in 946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035452522 = score(doc=946,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.2881068 = fieldWeight in 946, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=946)
    0.067712374 = product of:
      0.13542475 = sum of:
        0.13542475 = weight(_text_:history in 946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13542475 = score(doc=946,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21731828 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0467152 = queryNorm
            0.62316316 = fieldWeight in 946, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=946)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The philosophy of history can help articulate problems relevant to information organization. One such problem is "aboutness": How do texts relate to the world? In response to this problem, philosophers of history have developed theories of colligation describing how authors bind together phenomena under organizing concepts. Drawing on these ideas, I present a theory of subject analysis that avoids the problematic illusion of an independent "landscape" of subjects. This theory points to a broad vision of the future of information organization and some specific challenges to be met.
    Series
    Advances in information science
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.6, S.1092-1103
  2. Chen, H.: ¬An analysis of image queries in the field of art history (2001) 0.04 
    0.040177822 = product of:
  0.080355644 = sum of:
    0.025068719 = weight(_text_:science in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025068719 = score(doc=5187,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.20372227 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
    0.05528692 = product of:
      0.11057384 = sum of:
        0.11057384 = weight(_text_:history in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11057384 = score(doc=5187,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21731828 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0467152 = queryNorm
            0.5088106 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Chen arranged with an Art History instructor to require 20 medieval art images in papers received from 29 students. Participants completed a self administered presearch and postsearch questionnaire, and were interviewed after questionnaire analysis, in order to collect both the keywords and phrases they planned to use, and those actually used. Three MLIS student reviewers then mapped the queries to Enser and McGregor's four categories, Jorgensen's 12 classes, and Fidel's 12 feature data and object poles providing a degree of match on a seven point scale (one not at all to 7 exact). The reviewers give highest scores to Enser and McGregor;'s categories. Modifications to both the Enser and McGregor and Jorgensen schemes are suggested
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and technology. 52(2001) no.3, S.260-273
  3. Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a classification scheme for fiction based on an analysis of actual user-librarian communication, and use of the scheme for control of librarians' search strategies (1980) 0.03 
    0.03372939 = product of:
  0.06745878 = sum of:
    0.035812456 = weight(_text_:science in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035812456 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
    0.031646326 = product of:
      0.06329265 = sum of:
        0.06329265 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06329265 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0467152 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    5. 8.2006 13:22:44
    Source
    Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u, L. Kajberg
  4. Winget, M.: Describing art : an alternative approach to subject access and interpretation (2009) 0.03 
    0.029469304 = product of:
  0.058938608 = sum of:
    0.031014498 = weight(_text_:science in 3618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031014498 = score(doc=3618,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.25204095 = fieldWeight in 3618, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3618)
    0.027924111 = product of:
      0.055848222 = sum of:
        0.055848222 = weight(_text_:history in 3618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055848222 = score(doc=3618,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21731828 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0467152 = queryNorm
            0.25698814 = fieldWeight in 3618, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3618)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the art historical antecedents of providing subject access to images. After reviewing the assumptions and limitations inherent in the most prevalent descriptive method, the paper seeks to introduce a new model that allows for more comprehensive representation of visually-based cultural materials. Design/methodology/approach - The paper presents a literature-based conceptual analysis, taking Panofsky's theory of iconography and iconology as the starting-point. Panofsky's conceptual model, while appropriate for art created in the Western academic tradition, ignores or misrepresents work from other eras or cultures. Continued dependence on Panofskian descriptive methods limits the functionality and usefulness of image representation systems. Findings - The paper recommends the development of a more precise and inclusive descriptive model for art objects, which is based on the premise that art is not another sort of text, and should not be interpreted as such. Practical implications - The paper provides suggestions for the development of representation models that will enhance the description of non-textual artifacts. Originality/value - The paper addresses issues in information science, the history of art, and computer science, and suggests that a new descriptive model would be of great value to both humanist and social science scholars.
  5. Allen, B.; Reser, D.: Content analysis in library and information science research (1990) 0.02 
    0.020258585 = product of:
  0.08103434 = sum of:
    0.08103434 = weight(_text_:science in 7510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08103434 = score(doc=7510,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.6585298 = fieldWeight in 7510, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7510)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Library and information science research. 12(1990) no.3, S.251-262
  6. White, M.D.; Marsh, E.E.: Content analysis : a flexible methodology (2006) 0.02 
    0.020237632 = product of:
  0.040475264 = sum of:
    0.021487473 = weight(_text_:science in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021487473 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 5589, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5589)
    0.018987793 = product of:
      0.037975587 = sum of:
        0.037975587 = weight(_text_:22 in 5589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037975587 = score(doc=5589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0467152 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5589, 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=5589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Content analysis is a highly flexible research method that has been widely used in library and information science (LIS) studies with varying research goals and objectives. The research method is applied in qualitative, quantitative, and sometimes mixed modes of research frameworks and employs a wide range of analytical techniques to generate findings and put them into context. This article characterizes content analysis as a systematic, rigorous approach to analyzing documents obtained or generated in the course of research. It briefly describes the steps involved in content analysis, differentiates between quantitative and qualitative content analysis, and shows that content analysis serves the purposes of both quantitative research and qualitative research. The authors draw on selected LIS studies that have used content analysis to illustrate the concepts addressed in the article. The article also serves as a gateway to methodological books and articles that provide more detail about aspects of content analysis discussed only briefly in the article.
    Source
    Library trends. 55(2006) no.1, S.22-45
  7. Raieli, R.: ¬The semantic hole : enthusiasm and caution around multimedia information retrieval (2012) 0.02 
    0.02014178 = product of:
  0.04028356 = sum of:
    0.017906228 = weight(_text_:science in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017906228 = score(doc=4888,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
    0.02237733 = product of:
      0.04475466 = sum of:
        0.04475466 = weight(_text_:22 in 4888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04475466 = score(doc=4888,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16358867 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0467152 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 4888, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4888)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    22. 1.2012 13:02:10
    Footnote
    Bezugnahme auf: Enser, P.G.B.: Visual image retrieval. In: Annual review of information science and technology. 42(2008), S.3-42.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.1, S.13-22
  8. Chubin, D.E.; Moitra, S.D.: Content analysis of references : adjunct or alternative to citation counting? (1975) 0.01 
    0.014324983 = product of:
  0.05729993 = sum of:
    0.05729993 = weight(_text_:science in 5647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05729993 = score(doc=5647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 5647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=5647)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Social studies of science. 5(1975), S.423-441
  9. Hicks, C.; Rush, J.; Strong, S.: Content analysis (1977) 0.01 
    0.014324983 = product of:
  0.05729993 = sum of:
    0.05729993 = weight(_text_:science in 7514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05729993 = score(doc=7514,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 7514, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7514)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of computer science and technology, vol.6
  10. Farrow, J.: Indexing as a cognitive process (1994) 0.01 
    0.014324983 = product of:
  0.05729993 = sum of:
    0.05729993 = weight(_text_:science in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05729993 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 1257, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1257)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.53, [=Suppl.16]
  11. Kremer-Marietti, A.: Thematic analysis (1986) 0.01 
    0.014324983 = product of:
  0.05729993 = sum of:
    0.05729993 = weight(_text_:science in 1273) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05729993 = score(doc=1273,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 1273, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1273)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information science. Vol.41, [=Suppl.6]
  12. Baxendale, P.: Content analysis, specification and control (1966) 0.01 
    0.014324983 = product of:
  0.05729993 = sum of:
    0.05729993 = weight(_text_:science in 218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05729993 = score(doc=218,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 218, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=218)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 1(1966), S.71-106
  13. Sharp, J.R.: Content analysis, specification, and control (1967) 0.01 
    0.014324983 = product of:
  0.05729993 = sum of:
    0.05729993 = weight(_text_:science in 226) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05729993 = score(doc=226,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 226, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=226)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 2(1967), S.87-122
  14. Taulbee, O.E.: Content analysis, specification, and control (1968) 0.01 
    0.014324983 = product of:
  0.05729993 = sum of:
    0.05729993 = weight(_text_:science in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05729993 = score(doc=232,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 3(1968), S.105-136
  15. Fairthorne, R.A.: Content analysis, specification, and control (1969) 0.01 
    0.014324983 = product of:
  0.05729993 = sum of:
    0.05729993 = weight(_text_:science in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05729993 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.4656509 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Annual review of information science and technology. 4(1969), S.73-110
  16. Bland, R.N.: ¬The concept of intellectual level in cataloging and classification (1983) 0.01 
    0.011169644 = product of:
  0.044678576 = sum of:
    0.044678576 = product of:
      0.08935715 = sum of:
        0.08935715 = weight(_text_:history in 321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08935715 = score(doc=321,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21731828 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0467152 = queryNorm
            0.41118103 = fieldWeight in 321, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6519823 = idf(docFreq=1146, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=321)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This paper traces the history of the concept of intellectual level in cataloging and classification in the United States. Past cataloging codes, subject-heading practice, and classification systems have provided library users with little systematic information concerning the intellectual level or intended audience of works. Reasons for this omission are discussed, and arguments are developed to show that this kind of information would be a useful addition to the catalog record of the present and the future.
  17. Pejtersen, A.M.: Design of a computer-aided user-system dialogue based on an analysis of users' search behaviour (1984) 0.01 
    0.010743736 = product of:
  0.042974945 = sum of:
    0.042974945 = weight(_text_:science in 1044) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042974945 = score(doc=1044,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 1044, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1044)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Social science information studies. 4(1984), S.167-183
  18. Belkin, N.J.: ¬The problem of 'matching' in information retrieval (1980) 0.01 
    0.010743736 = product of:
  0.042974945 = sum of:
    0.042974945 = weight(_text_:science in 1329) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042974945 = score(doc=1329,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 1329, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1329)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Theory and application of information research. Proc. of the 2nd Int. Research Forum on Information Science, 3.-6.8.1977, Copenhagen. Ed.: O. Harbo u. L. Kajberg
  19. Pejtersen, A.M.: Implications of users' value perception for the design of knowledge based bibliographic retrieval systems (1985) 0.01 
    0.010743736 = product of:
  0.042974945 = sum of:
    0.042974945 = weight(_text_:science in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042974945 = score(doc=2088,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.34923816 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    2nd Symposium on Empirical Foundations of Information and Software Science, 3.-5.10.84, Atlanta
  20. Chu, C.M.; O'Brien, A.: Subject analysis : the critical first stage in indexing (1993) 0.01 
    0.00930435 = product of:
  0.0372174 = sum of:
    0.0372174 = weight(_text_:science in 6472) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0372174 = score(doc=6472,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12305341 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0467152 = queryNorm
        0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 6472, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6472)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Studies of indexing neglect the first stage of the process, that is, subject analysis. In this study, novice indexers were asked to analyse three short, popular journal articles; to express the general subject as well as the primary and secondary topics in natural laguage statements; to state what influenced the analysis and to comment on the ease or difficulty of this process. The factors which influenced the process were: the subject discipline concerned, factual vs. subjective nature of the text, complexity of the subject, clarity of text, possible support offered by bibliographic apparatus such as title, etc. The findings showed that with the social science and science texts, the general subject could be determined with ease, while this was more difficult with the humanities text. Clear evidence emerged of the importance of bibliographical apparatus in defining the general subject. There was varying difficulty in determining the primary and secondarx topics
    Source
    Journal of information science. 19(1993), S.439-454

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 50
  • d 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 47
  • m 3
  • el 2
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Themes