Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Internet"
  • × author_ss:"Savolainen, R."
  1. Savolainen, R.: Embarking on the Internet : what motivates people? (2000) 0.01
    0.0142422225 = product of:
      0.05696889 = sum of:
        0.05696889 = weight(_text_:social in 719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05696889 = score(doc=719,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.30839854 = fieldWeight in 719, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=719)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Issues of becoming an Internet user primarily in non-work contexts are discussed. The author reviews individual, social and economic factors motivating network use. Main findings of an empirical study based on the interviews of 23 Finns in 1997 are analysed. In addition, comparisons are made with the findings of the Consumer Research Project (1996-98), conducted in Finland. The main motivating factors leading to network use were the requirements of work and study; also making everyday transactions easier, for example by home banking, was seen as important. The network connections were also acquired for keeping in contact with others and for hobbies, whereas entertainment purposes were not valued.
  2. Savolainen, R.: ¬The structure of argument patterns on a social Q&A site (2012) 0.01
    0.01220762 = product of:
      0.04883048 = sum of:
        0.04883048 = weight(_text_:social in 517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04883048 = score(doc=517,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1847249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9875789 = idf(docFreq=2228, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.26434162 = fieldWeight in 517, 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=517)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  3. Savolainen, R.: Judging the quality and credibility of information in Internet discussion forums (2011) 0.01
    0.0065351077 = product of:
      0.026140431 = sum of:
        0.026140431 = product of:
          0.052280862 = sum of:
            0.052280862 = weight(_text_:aspects in 4477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.052280862 = score(doc=4477,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046325076 = queryNorm
                0.2496898 = fieldWeight in 4477, 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=4477)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    This exploratory study contributes to research on relevance assessment by specifying criteria that are used in the judgment of information quality and credibility in Internet discussion forums. To this end, 4,739 messages posted to 160 Finnish discussion threads were analyzed. Of the messages, 20.5% contained explicit judgments of the quality of information and credibility in other messages. In the judgments, the forum participants employed both positive criteria such as validity of information and negative criteria such as dishonesty in argumentation. In the evaluation of the quality of the message's information content, the most frequently used criteria pertained to the usefulness, correctness, and specificity of information. In the judgment of information credibility, the main criteria included the reputation, expertise, and honesty of the author of the message. Since Internet discussion forums tend to emphasize the role of disputational discourse questioning rather than accepting the views presented by others, mainly negative criteria were used in the judgments. The generality of our claims is limited because we chose forums that focused on sensitive and value-laden topics; future work could explore credibility and quality judgment in other forums and forumlike venues such as question and answer sites as well as exploring how quality and credibility judgments interact with other aspects of forum use.