Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.030143319 = product of:
  0.075358294 = sum of:
    0.026986076 = weight(_text_:technology in 3113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026986076 = score(doc=3113,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04589033 = queryNorm
        0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 3113, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3113)
    0.04837222 = weight(_text_:social in 3113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04837222 = score(doc=3113,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04589033 = queryNorm
        0.26434162 = fieldWeight in 3113, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3113)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

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.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.10, S.2344-2361

0.018938866 = product of:
  0.047347162 = sum of:
    0.031803396 = weight(_text_:technology in 2735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031803396 = score(doc=2735,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04589033 = queryNorm
        0.23268649 = fieldWeight in 2735, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2735)
    0.015543767 = product of:
      0.031087535 = sum of:
        0.031087535 = weight(_text_:22 in 2735) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031087535 = score(doc=2735,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04589033 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2735, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2735)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This exploratory study examines how design engineers and technical professionals (hereafter referred to as engineers) in innovative high-tech firms in the United States and India use information in their daily work activities including research, development, and management. The researchers used naturalistic observation to conduct a series of daylong workplace observations with 103 engineers engaged in product design and testing in four U.S.- and two India-based firms. A key finding is that engineers spend about one fourth of their day engaged in some type of information event, which was somewhat lower than the percentage identified in previous research. The explanation may be rooted in the significant change in the information environment and corporate expectations in the last 15 years, which is the time of the original study. Searching technology has improved, making searching less time consuming, and engineers are choosing the Internet as a primary source even though information may not be as focused, as timely, or as authoritative. The study extends our understanding of the engineering workplace, and the information environment in the workplace, and provides information useful for improving methods for accessing and using information, which could ultimately lead to better job performance, facilitate innovation, and encourage economic growth.

Date

22. 3.2009 12:43:37

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.3, S.443-454

0.0044976794 = product of:
  0.022488397 = sum of:
    0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 1195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022488397 = score(doc=1195,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04589033 = queryNorm
        0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 1195, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1195)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.2, S.251-262