-
Xu, C.; Ma, B.; Chen, X.; Ma, F.: Social tagging in the scholarly world (2013)
0.13
0.12577455 = product of:
0.20962425 = sum of:
0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022488397 = score(doc=1091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 1091, 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=1091)
0.16124073 = weight(_text_:social in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16124073 = score(doc=1091,freq=32.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.88113874 = fieldWeight in 1091, product of:
5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
32.0 = termFreq=32.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1091)
0.025895113 = product of:
0.051790226 = sum of:
0.051790226 = weight(_text_:aspects in 1091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051790226 = score(doc=1091,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20741826 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 1091, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1091)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- The number of research studies on social tagging has increased rapidly in the past years, but few of them highlight the characteristics and research trends in social tagging. A set of 862 academic documents relating to social tagging and published from 2005 to 2011 was thus examined using bibliometric analysis as well as the social network analysis technique. The results show that social tagging, as a research area, develops rapidly and attracts an increasing number of new entrants. There are no key authors, publication sources, or research groups that dominate the research domain of social tagging. Research on social tagging appears to focus mainly on the following three aspects: (a) components and functions of social tagging (e.g., tags, tagging objects, and tagging network), (b) taggers' behaviors and interface design, and (c) tags' organization and usage in social tagging. The trend suggest that more researchers turn to the latter two integrated with human computer interface and information retrieval, although the first aspect is the fundamental one in social tagging. Also, more studies relating to social tagging pay attention to multimedia tagging objects and not only text tagging. Previous research on social tagging was limited to a few subject domains such as information science and computer science. As an interdisciplinary research area, social tagging is anticipated to attract more researchers from different disciplines. More practical applications, especially in high-tech companies, is an encouraging research trend in social tagging.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.10, S.2045-2057
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Ding, Y.; Jacob, E.K.; Zhang, Z.; Foo, S.; Yan, E.; George, N.L.; Guo, L.: Perspectives on social tagging (2009)
0.11
0.11162466 = product of:
0.18604109 = sum of:
0.026986076 = weight(_text_:technology in 3290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026986076 = score(doc=3290,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 3290, 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=3290)
0.12798087 = weight(_text_:social in 3290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12798087 = score(doc=3290,freq=14.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.69938225 = fieldWeight in 3290, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3290)
0.031074135 = product of:
0.06214827 = sum of:
0.06214827 = weight(_text_:aspects in 3290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06214827 = score(doc=3290,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20741826 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.29962775 = fieldWeight in 3290, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3290)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Social tagging is one of the major phenomena transforming the World Wide Web from a static platform into an actively shared information space. This paper addresses various aspects of social tagging, including different views on the nature of social tagging, how to make use of social tags, and how to bridge social tagging with other Web functionalities; it discusses the use of facets to facilitate browsing and searching of tagging data; and it presents an analogy between bibliometrics and tagometrics, arguing that established bibliometric methodologies can be applied to analyze tagging behavior on the Web. Based on the Upper Tag Ontology (UTO), a Web crawler was built to harvest tag data from Delicious, Flickr, and YouTube in September 2007. In total, 1.8 million objects, including bookmarks, photos, and videos, 3.1 million taggers, and 12.1 million tags were collected and analyzed. Some tagging patterns and variations are identified and discussed.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.12, S.2388-2401
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Yi, K.: Harnessing collective intelligence in social tagging using Delicious (2012)
0.10
0.09537763 = product of:
0.15896271 = sum of:
0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022488397 = score(doc=515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 515, 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=515)
0.120930545 = weight(_text_:social in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.120930545 = score(doc=515,freq=18.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.66085404 = fieldWeight in 515, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=515)
0.015543767 = product of:
0.031087535 = sum of:
0.031087535 = weight(_text_:22 in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031087535 = score(doc=515,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 515, 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=515)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- A new collaborative approach in information organization and sharing has recently arisen, known as collaborative tagging or social indexing. A key element of collaborative tagging is the concept of collective intelligence (CI), which is a shared intelligence among all participants. This research investigates the phenomenon of social tagging in the context of CI with the aim to serve as a stepping-stone towards the mining of truly valuable social tags for web resources. This study focuses on assessing and evaluating the degree of CI embedded in social tagging over time in terms of two-parameter values, number of participants, and top frequency ranking window. Five different metrics were adopted and utilized for assessing the similarity between ranking lists: overlapList, overlapRank, Footrule, Fagin's measure, and the Inverse Rank measure. The result of this study demonstrates that a substantial degree of CI is most likely to be achieved when somewhere between the first 200 and 400 people have participated in tagging, and that a target degree of CI can be projected by controlling the two factors along with the selection of a similarity metric. The study also tests some experimental conditions for detecting social tags with high CI degree. The results of this study can be applicable to the study of filtering social tags based on CI; filtered social tags may be utilized for the metadata creation of tagged resources and possibly for the retrieval of tagged resources.
- Date
- 25.12.2012 15:22:37
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 63(2012) no.12, S.2488-2502
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Choi, Y.; Syn, S.Y.: Characteristics of tagging behavior in digitized humanities online collections (2016)
0.09
0.08740581 = product of:
0.14567634 = sum of:
0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022488397 = score(doc=2891,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2891, 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=2891)
0.04031018 = weight(_text_:social in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04031018 = score(doc=2891,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.22028469 = fieldWeight in 2891, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2891)
0.08287776 = sum of:
0.051790226 = weight(_text_:aspects in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051790226 = score(doc=2891,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20741826 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 2891, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2891)
0.031087535 = weight(_text_:22 in 2891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031087535 = score(doc=2891,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2891, 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=2891)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- The purpose of this study was to examine user tags that describe digitized archival collections in the field of humanities. A collection of 8,310 tags from a digital portal (Nineteenth-Century Electronic Scholarship, NINES) was analyzed to find out what attributes of primary historical resources users described with tags. Tags were categorized to identify which tags describe the content of the resource, the resource itself, and subjective aspects (e.g., usage or emotion). The study's findings revealed that over half were content-related; tags representing opinion, usage context, or self-reference, however, reflected only a small percentage. The study further found that terms related to genre or physical format of a resource were frequently used in describing primary archival resources. It was also learned that nontextual resources had lower numbers of content-related tags and higher numbers of document-related tags than textual resources and bibliographic materials; moreover, textual resources tended to have more user-context-related tags than other resources. These findings help explain users' tagging behavior and resource interpretation in primary resources in the humanities. Such information provided through tags helps information professionals decide to what extent indexing archival and cultural resources should be done for resource description and discovery, and understand users' terminology.
- Date
- 21. 4.2016 11:23:22
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.5, S.1089-1104
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Qin, C.; Liu, Y.; Mou, J.; Chen, J.: User adoption of a hybrid social tagging approach in an online knowledge community (2019)
0.09
0.08680974 = product of:
0.1446829 = sum of:
0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022488397 = score(doc=5492,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 5492, 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=5492)
0.106650725 = weight(_text_:social in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.106650725 = score(doc=5492,freq=14.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.5828185 = fieldWeight in 5492, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5492)
0.015543767 = product of:
0.031087535 = sum of:
0.031087535 = weight(_text_:22 in 5492) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031087535 = score(doc=5492,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5492, 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=5492)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.6 = coord(3/5)
- Abstract
- Purpose Online knowledge communities make great contributions to global knowledge sharing and innovation. Resource tagging approaches have been widely adopted in such communities to describe, annotate and organize knowledge resources mainly through users' participation. However, it is unclear what causes the adoption of a particular resource tagging approach. The purpose of this paper is to identify factors that drive users to use a hybrid social tagging approach. Design/methodology/approach Technology acceptance model and social cognitive theory are adopted to support an integrated model proposed in this paper. Zhihu, one of the most popular online knowledge communities in China, is taken as the survey context. A survey was conducted with a questionnaire and collected data were analyzed through structural equation model. Findings A new hybrid social resource tagging approach was refined and described. The empirical results revealed that self-efficacy, perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use exert positive effect on users' attitude. Moreover, social influence, PU and attitude impact significantly on users' intention to use a hybrid social resource tagging approach. Originality/value Theoretically, this study enriches the type of resource tagging approaches and recognizes factors influencing user adoption to use it. Regarding the practical parts, the results provide online information system providers and designers with referential strategies to improve the performance of the current tagging approaches and promote them.
- Date
- 20. 1.2015 18:30:22
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Hunter, J.: Collaborative semantic tagging and annotation systems (2009)
0.08
0.08038218 = product of:
0.20095545 = sum of:
0.07196287 = weight(_text_:technology in 7382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07196287 = score(doc=7382,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.5265094 = fieldWeight in 7382, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7382)
0.12899259 = weight(_text_:social in 7382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12899259 = score(doc=7382,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.704911 = fieldWeight in 7382, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7382)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Source
- Annual review of information science and technology. 43(2009), S.xxx-xxx
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Farkas, M.G.: Social software in libraries : building collaboration, communication, and community online (2007)
0.07
0.06999255 = product of:
0.17498137 = sum of:
0.03816408 = weight(_text_:technology in 2364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03816408 = score(doc=2364,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 2364, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2364)
0.13681729 = weight(_text_:social in 2364) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13681729 = score(doc=2364,freq=16.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.747671 = fieldWeight in 2364, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2364)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Content
- Inhalt: What is social software? -- Blogs -- Blogs in libraries : practical applications -- RSS -- Wikis -- Online communities -- Social networking -- Social bookmarking and collaborative filtering -- Tools for synchronous online reference -- The mobile revolution -- Podcasting -- Screencasting and vodcasting -- Gaming -- What will work @ your library -- Keeping up : a primer -- Future trends in social software.
- LCSH
- Libraries / Information technology
Online social networks
- Subject
- Libraries / Information technology
Online social networks
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Golub, K.; Moon, J.; Nielsen, M.L.; Tudhope, D.: EnTag: Enhanced Tagging for Discovery (2008)
0.07
0.06979532 = product of:
0.17448829 = sum of:
0.13823514 = weight(_text_:social in 2294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.13823514 = score(doc=2294,freq=12.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.75541914 = fieldWeight in 2294, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2294)
0.036253158 = product of:
0.072506316 = sum of:
0.072506316 = weight(_text_:aspects in 2294) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.072506316 = score(doc=2294,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20741826 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.3495657 = fieldWeight in 2294, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2294)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Purpose: Investigate the combination of controlled and folksonomy approaches to support resource discovery in repositories and digital collections. Aim: Investigate whether use of an established controlled vocabulary can help improve social tagging for better resource discovery. Objectives: (1) Investigate indexing aspects when using only social tagging versus when using social tagging with suggestions from a controlled vocabulary; (2) Investigate above in two different contexts: tagging by readers and tagging by authors; (3) Investigate influence of only social tagging versus social tagging with a controlled vocabulary on retrieval. - Vgl.: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/projects/enhanced-tagging/.
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Müller-Prove, M.: Modell und Anwendungsperspektive des Social Tagging (2008)
0.06
0.061545044 = product of:
0.15386261 = sum of:
0.12899259 = weight(_text_:social in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12899259 = score(doc=2882,freq=8.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.704911 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
0.024870027 = product of:
0.049740054 = sum of:
0.049740054 = weight(_text_:22 in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049740054 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2882, 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=2882)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Footnote
- Beitrag der Tagung "Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation" am 21.-22.02.2008 am Institut für Wissensmedien (IWM) in Tübingen.
- Pages
- S.15-22
- Source
- Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Wolfram, D.; Olson, H.A.; Bloom, R.: Measuring consistency for multiple taggers using vector space modeling (2009)
0.06
0.058189332 = product of:
0.14547333 = 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)
0.11848726 = weight(_text_:social in 3113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11848726 = score(doc=3113,freq=12.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.6475021 = fieldWeight in 3113, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3113)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- A longstanding area of study in indexing is the identification of factors affecting vocabulary usage and consistency. This topic has seen a recent resurgence with a focus on social tagging. Tagging data for scholarly articles made available by the social bookmarking Website CiteULike (www.citeulike.org) were used to test the use of inter-indexer/tagger consistency density values, based on a method developed by the authors by comparing calculations for highly tagged documents representing three subject areas (Science, Social Science, Social Software). The analysis revealed that the developed method is viable for a large dataset. The findings also indicated that there were no significant differences in tagging consistency among the three topic areas, demonstrating that vocabulary usage in a relatively new subject area like social software is no more inconsistent than the more established subject areas investigated. The implications of the method used and the findings are discussed.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.10, S.1995-2003
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Yi, K.: ¬A semantic similarity approach to predicting Library of Congress subject headings for social tags (2010)
0.06
0.057367574 = product of:
0.14341894 = sum of:
0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 3707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022488397 = score(doc=3707,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 3707, 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=3707)
0.120930545 = weight(_text_:social in 3707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.120930545 = score(doc=3707,freq=18.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.66085404 = fieldWeight in 3707, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3707)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Social tagging or collaborative tagging has become a new trend in the organization, management, and discovery of digital information. The rapid growth of shared information mostly controlled by social tags poses a new challenge for social tag-based information organization and retrieval. A plausible approach for this challenge is linking social tags to a controlled vocabulary. As an introductory step for this approach, this study investigates ways of predicting relevant subject headings for resources from social tags assigned to the resources. The prediction of subject headings was measured by five different similarity measures: tf-idf, cosine-based similarity (CoS), Jaccard similarity (or Jaccard coefficient; JS), Mutual information (MI), and information radius (IRad). Their results were compared to those by professionals. The results show that a CoS measure based on top five social tags was most effective. Inclusions of more social tags only aggravate the performance. The performance of JS is comparable to the performance of CoS while tf-idf is comparable with up to 70% less than the best performance. MI and IRad have inferior performance compared to the other methods. This study demonstrates the application of the similarity measuring techniques to the prediction of correct Library of Congress subject headings.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.8, S.1658-1672
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Kipp, M.E.; Beak, J.; Choi, I.: Motivations and intentions of flickr users in enriching flick records for Library of Congress photos (2017)
0.06
0.057367574 = product of:
0.14341894 = sum of:
0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 3828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022488397 = score(doc=3828,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 3828, 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=3828)
0.120930545 = weight(_text_:social in 3828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.120930545 = score(doc=3828,freq=18.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.66085404 = fieldWeight in 3828, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3828)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- The purpose of this study is to understand users' motivations and intentions in the use of institutional collections on social tagging sites. Previous social tagging studies have collected social tagging data and analyzed how tagging functions as a tool to organize and retrieve information. Many studies focused on the patterns of tagging rather than the users' perspectives. To provide a more comprehensive picture of users' social tagging activities in institutional collections, and how this compares to social tagging in a more personal context, we collected data from social tagging users by surveying 7,563 participants in the Library of Congress's Flickr Collection. We asked users to describe their motivations for activities within the LC Flickr Collection in their own words using open-ended questions. As a result, we identified 11 motivations using a bottom-up, open-coding approach: affective reactions, opinion on photo, interest in subject, contribution to description, knowledge sharing, improving findability, social network, appreciation, personal use, and personal relationship. Our study revealed that affective or emotional reactions play a critical role in the use of social tagging of institutional collections by comparing our findings to existing frameworks for tagging motivations. We also examined the relationships between participants' occupations and our 11 motivations.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.10, S.2364-2379
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Golub, K.; Lykke, M.; Tudhope, D.: Enhancing social tagging with automated keywords from the Dewey Decimal Classification (2014)
0.06
0.055963814 = product of:
0.13990954 = sum of:
0.114014424 = weight(_text_:social in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.114014424 = score(doc=2918,freq=16.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.6230592 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
0.025895113 = product of:
0.051790226 = sum of:
0.051790226 = weight(_text_:aspects in 2918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.051790226 = score(doc=2918,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20741826 = queryWeight, product of:
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 2918, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2918)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore the potential of applying the Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) as an established knowledge organization system (KOS) for enhancing social tagging, with the ultimate purpose of improving subject indexing and information retrieval. Design/methodology/approach - Over 11.000 Intute metadata records in politics were used. Totally, 28 politics students were each given four tasks, in which a total of 60 resources were tagged in two different configurations, one with uncontrolled social tags only and another with uncontrolled social tags as well as suggestions from a controlled vocabulary. The controlled vocabulary was DDC comprising also mappings from the Library of Congress Subject Headings. Findings - The results demonstrate the importance of controlled vocabulary suggestions for indexing and retrieval: to help produce ideas of which tags to use, to make it easier to find focus for the tagging, to ensure consistency and to increase the number of access points in retrieval. The value and usefulness of the suggestions proved to be dependent on the quality of the suggestions, both as to conceptual relevance to the user and as to appropriateness of the terminology. Originality/value - No research has investigated the enhancement of social tagging with suggestions from the DDC, an established KOS, in a user trial, comparing social tagging only and social tagging enhanced with the suggestions. This paper is a final reflection on all aspects of the study.
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Kruk, S.R.; Kruk, E.; Stankiewicz, K.: Evaluation of semantic and social technologies for digital libraries (2009)
0.05
0.054855913 = product of:
0.13713978 = sum of:
0.11848726 = weight(_text_:social in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11848726 = score(doc=3387,freq=12.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.6475021 = fieldWeight in 3387, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3387)
0.01865252 = product of:
0.03730504 = sum of:
0.03730504 = weight(_text_:22 in 3387) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03730504 = score(doc=3387,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3387, 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=3387)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Libraries are the tools we use to learn and to answer our questions. The quality of our work depends, among others, on the quality of the tools we use. Recent research in digital libraries is focused, on one hand on improving the infrastructure of the digital library management systems (DLMS), and on the other on improving the metadata models used to annotate collections of objects maintained by DLMS. The latter includes, among others, the semantic web and social networking technologies. Recently, the semantic web and social networking technologies are being introduced to the digital libraries domain. The expected outcome is that the overall quality of information discovery in digital libraries can be improved by employing social and semantic technologies. In this chapter we present the results of an evaluation of social and semantic end-user information discovery services for the digital libraries.
- Date
- 1. 8.2010 12:35:22
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Chae, G.; Park, J.; Park, J.; Yeo, W.S.; Shi, C.: Linking and clustering artworks using social tags : revitalizing crowd-sourced information on cultural collections (2016)
0.05
0.05460113 = product of:
0.13650282 = sum of:
0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 2852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022488397 = score(doc=2852,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 2852, 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=2852)
0.114014424 = weight(_text_:social in 2852) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.114014424 = score(doc=2852,freq=16.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.6230592 = fieldWeight in 2852, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2852)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Social tagging is one of the most popular methods for collecting crowd-sourced information in galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAMs). However, when the number of social tags grows rapidly, using them becomes problematic and, as a result, they are often left as simply big data that cannot be used for practical purposes. To revitalize the use of this crowd-sourced information, we propose using social tags to link and cluster artworks based on an experimental study using an online collection at the Gyeonggi Museum of Modern Art (GMoMA). We view social tagging as a folksonomy, where artworks are classified by keywords of the crowd's various interpretations and one artwork can belong to several different categories simultaneously. To leverage this strength of social tags, we used a clustering method called "link communities" to detect overlapping communities in a network of artworks constructed by computing similarities between all artwork pairs. We used this framework to identify semantic relationships and clusters of similar artworks. By comparing the clustering results with curators' manual classification results, we demonstrated the potential of social tagging data for automatically clustering artworks in a way that reflects the dynamic perspectives of crowds.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.4, S.885-899
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Choi, N.; Joo, S.: Booklovers' world : an examination of factors affecting continued usage of social cataloging sites (2016)
0.05
0.05460113 = product of:
0.13650282 = sum of:
0.022488397 = weight(_text_:technology in 3224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022488397 = score(doc=3224,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.16453418 = fieldWeight in 3224, 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=3224)
0.114014424 = weight(_text_:social in 3224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.114014424 = score(doc=3224,freq=16.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.6230592 = fieldWeight in 3224, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3224)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Little is known about what factors influence users' continued use of social cataloging sites. This study therefore examines the impacts of key factors from theories of information systems (IS) success and sense of community (SOC) on users' continuance intention in the social cataloging context. Data collected from an online survey of 323 social cataloging users provide empirical support for the research model. The findings indicate that both information quality (IQ) and system quality (SQ) are significant predictors of satisfaction and SOC, which in turn lead to users' intentions to continue using these sites. In addition, SOC was found to affect continuance intention not only directly, but also indirectly through satisfaction. Theoretically, this study draws attention to a largely unexplored but essential area of research in the social cataloging literature and provides a fundamental basis to understand the determinants of continued social cataloging usage. From a managerial perspective, the findings suggest that social cataloging service providers should constantly focus their efforts on the quality control of their contents and system, and the enhancement of SOC among their users.
- Source
- Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 67(2016) no.12, S.3022-3035
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Huang, S.-L.; Lin, S.-C.; Chan, Y.-C.: Investigating effectiveness and user acceptance of semantic social tagging for knowledge sharing (2012)
0.05
0.05405986 = product of:
0.13514964 = sum of:
0.026986076 = weight(_text_:technology in 2732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026986076 = score(doc=2732,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.19744103 = fieldWeight in 2732, 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=2732)
0.10816357 = weight(_text_:social in 2732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10816357 = score(doc=2732,freq=10.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.59108585 = fieldWeight in 2732, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2732)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Social tagging systems enable users to assign arbitrary tags to various digital resources. However, they face vague-meaning problems when users retrieve or present resources with the keyword-based tags. In order to solve these problems, this study takes advantage of Semantic Web technology and the topological characteristics of knowledge maps to develop a system that comprises a semantic tagging mechanism and triple-pattern and visual searching mechanisms. A field experiment was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and user acceptance of these mechanisms in a knowledge sharing context. The results show that the semantic social tagging system is more effective than a keyword-based system. The visualized knowledge map helps users capture an overview of the knowledge domain, reduce cognitive effort for the search, and obtain more enjoyment. Traditional keyword tagging with a keyword search still has the advantage of ease of use and the users had higher intention to use it. This study also proposes directions for future development of semantic social tagging systems.
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Ding, Y.; Jacob, E.K.; Fried, M.; Toma, I.; Yan, E.; Foo, S.; Milojevicacute, S.: Upper tag ontology for integrating social tagging data (2010)
0.05
0.05396341 = product of:
0.13490853 = sum of:
0.03816408 = weight(_text_:technology in 3421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03816408 = score(doc=3421,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 3421, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3421)
0.09674444 = weight(_text_:social in 3421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09674444 = score(doc=3421,freq=8.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.52868325 = fieldWeight in 3421, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3421)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Data integration and mediation have become central concerns of information technology over the past few decades. With the advent of the Web and the rapid increases in the amount of data and the number of Web documents and users, researchers have focused on enhancing the interoperability of data through the development of metadata schemes. Other researchers have looked to the wealth of metadata generated by bookmarking sites on the Social Web. While several existing ontologies have capitalized on the semantics of metadata created by tagging activities, the Upper Tag Ontology (UTO) emphasizes the structure of tagging activities to facilitate modeling of tagging data and the integration of data from different bookmarking sites as well as the alignment of tagging ontologies. UTO is described and its utility in modeling, harvesting, integrating, searching, and analyzing data is demonstrated with metadata harvested from three major social tagging systems (Delicious, Flickr, and YouTube).
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.3, S.505-521
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Raban, D.R.; Ronen, I.; Guy, I.: Acting or reacting? : Preferential attachment in a people-tagging system (2011)
0.05
0.05396341 = product of:
0.13490853 = sum of:
0.03816408 = weight(_text_:technology in 4371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03816408 = score(doc=4371,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13667917 = queryWeight, product of:
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.2792238 = fieldWeight in 4371, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.978387 = idf(docFreq=6114, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4371)
0.09674444 = weight(_text_:social in 4371) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09674444 = score(doc=4371,freq=8.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.52868325 = fieldWeight in 4371, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4371)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Social technologies tend to attract research on social structure or interaction. In this paper we analyze the individual use of a social technology, specifically an enterprise people-tagging application. We focus on active participants of the system and distinguish between users who initiate activity and those who respond to activity. This distinction is situated within the preferential attachment theory in order to examine which type of participant contributes more to the process of tagging. We analyze the usage of the people-tagging application in a snapshot representing 3 years of activity, focusing on self-tagging compared to tagging by and of others. The main findings are: (1) People who tag themselves are the most productive contributors to the system. (2) Preferential attachment saturation is reached at 12-14 tags per user. (3) The nature of participation is more significant than the number of participants for system growth. The paper concludes with theoretical and practical implications.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.4, S.738-747
- Theme
- Social tagging
-
Harrer, A.; Lohmann, S.: Potenziale von Tagging als partizipative Methode für Lehrportale und E-Learning-Kurse (2008)
0.05
0.053851914 = product of:
0.13462979 = sum of:
0.11286851 = weight(_text_:social in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11286851 = score(doc=2889,freq=8.0), product of:
0.18299131 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.6167971 = fieldWeight in 2889, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2889)
0.021761272 = product of:
0.043522544 = sum of:
0.043522544 = weight(_text_:22 in 2889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043522544 = score(doc=2889,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16070013 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.04589033 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2889, 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=2889)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.4 = coord(2/5)
- Abstract
- Als dynamische und einfache Form der Auszeichnung von Ressourcen kann sich Tagging im E-Learning positiv auf Partizipation, soziale Navigation und das Verständnis der Lernenden auswirken. Dieser Beitrag beleuchtet verschiedene Möglichkeiten des Einsatzes von Social Tagging in Lehrportalen und E-LearningKursen. Hierzu werden zunächst drei konkrete Anwendungsfälle dargestellt. Anschließend werden aus den Anwendungsfällen gewonnene Erkenntnisse für Lehr-/Lernszenarien zusammengefasst.
- Date
- 21. 6.2009 12:22:44
- Footnote
- Beitrag der Tagung "Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation" am 21.-22.02.2008 am Institut für Wissensmedien (IWM) in Tübingen.
- Source
- Good tags - bad tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation. Hrsg.: B. Gaiser, u.a
- Theme
- Social tagging
