-
Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995)
0.07
0.07166743 = product of:
0.14333487 = sum of:
0.008788372 = weight(_text_:in in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008788372 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
0.105424024 = weight(_text_:education in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.105424024 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2025344 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.520524 = fieldWeight in 3061, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3061)
0.029122464 = product of:
0.05824493 = sum of:
0.05824493 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05824493 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3061, 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=3061)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Discusses briefly the application of hypertext in library user training with particular reference to a specific hypertext based tutorial designed to teach library school students the basics knowledge of abstracts and abstracting process
- Date
- 27. 1.1996 18:22:06
- Source
- Journal of education for library and information science. 36(1995) no.2, S.170-173
-
Bowman, J.H.: Annotation: a lost art in cataloguing (2007)
0.04
0.035446774 = product of:
0.10634032 = sum of:
0.01375598 = weight(_text_:in in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01375598 = score(doc=255,freq=10.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
0.09258434 = product of:
0.18516868 = sum of:
0.18516868 = weight(_text_:britain in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.18516868 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
0.32082173 = queryWeight, product of:
7.462781 = idf(docFreq=68, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.57717 = fieldWeight in 255, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
7.462781 = idf(docFreq=68, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=255)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Public library catalogues in early twentieth-century Britain frequently included annotations, either to clarify obscure titles or to provide further information about the subject-matter of the books they described. Two manuals giving instruction on how to do this were published at that time. Following World War I, with the decline of the printed catalogue, this kind of annotation became rarer, and was almost confined to bulletins of new books. The early issues of the British National Bibliography included some annotations in exceptional cases. Parallels are drawn with the provision of table-of-contents information in present-day OPAC's.
- Footnote
- Simultaneously published as Cataloger, Editor, and Scholar: Essays in Honor of Ruth C. Carter
-
Bakewell, K.G.B.; Rowland, G.: Indexing and abstracting (1993)
0.03
0.030456638 = product of:
0.09136991 = sum of:
0.007030698 = weight(_text_:in in 5540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007030698 = score(doc=5540,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 5540, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5540)
0.08433922 = weight(_text_:education in 5540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08433922 = score(doc=5540,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2025344 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.4164192 = fieldWeight in 5540, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5540)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- State of the art review of UK developments in indexing and abstracting druing the period 1986-1990 covering: bibliographies of indexing and abstracting; British standards (including the revised British Standard on indexing, BS 3700); Wheatley Medal and Carey Award; a list of indexes published during this period; the role of the computer and automatic indexing; hypermedia; PRECIS; POPSI, relational indexing; thesauri; education and training; the indexing process, newspaper indexing; fiction indexes; the indexing profession; and a review of abstracting and indexing services
-
Alonso, M.I.; Fernández, L.M.M.: Perspectives of studies on document abstracting : towards an integrated view of models and theoretical approaches (2010)
0.03
0.027170291 = product of:
0.08151087 = sum of:
0.006214318 = weight(_text_:in in 3959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.006214318 = score(doc=3959,freq=4.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.10626988 = fieldWeight in 3959, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3959)
0.07529655 = weight(_text_:great in 3959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07529655 = score(doc=3959,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24206476 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 3959, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3959)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The aim of this paper is to systemize and improve the scientific status of studies on document abstracting. This is a diachronic, systematic study of document abstracting studies carried out from different perspectives and models (textual, psycholinguistic, social and communicative). Design/methodology/approach - A review of the perspectives and analysis proposals which are of interest to the various theoreticians of abstracting is carried out using a variety of techniques and approaches (cognitive, linguistic, communicative-social, didactic, etc.), each with different levels of theoretical and methodological abstraction and degrees of application. The most significant contributions of each are reviewed and highlighted, along with their limitations. Findings - It is found that the great challenge in abstracting is the systemization of models and conceptual apparatus, which open up this type of research to semiotic and socio-interactional perspectives. It is necessary to carry out suitable empirical research with operative designs and ad hoc measuring instruments which can measure the efficiency of the abstracting and the efficiency of a good abstract, while at the same time feeding back into the theoretical baggage of this type of study. Such research will have to explain and provide answers to all the elements and variables, which affect the realization and the reception of a quality abstract. Originality/value - The paper provides a small map of the studies on document abstracting. This shows how the conceptual and methodological framework has extended at the same time as the Science of Documentation has been evolving. All the models analysed - the communicative and interactional approach - are integrated in a new systematic framework.
-
Monday, I.: ¬Les processus cognitifs et la redaction de résumes (1996)
0.01
0.014056536 = product of:
0.08433922 = sum of:
0.08433922 = weight(_text_:education in 6917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08433922 = score(doc=6917,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2025344 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.4164192 = fieldWeight in 6917, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6917)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- Attempts to explain the intellectual and cognitive processes which govern the understanding and structure of a text, on the one hand, and writing a summary or abstract on the other, based on the literature of information science, education, cognitive psychology and psychiatry
-
Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006)
0.01
0.011097516 = product of:
0.033292547 = sum of:
0.01581907 = weight(_text_:in in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01581907 = score(doc=2421,freq=18.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.27051896 = fieldWeight in 2421, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2421)
0.017473478 = product of:
0.034946956 = sum of:
0.034946956 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034946956 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2421, 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=2421)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Graph-based ranking algorithms have recently been proposed for single document summarizations and such algorithms evaluate the importance of a sentence by making use of the relationships between sentences in the document in a recursive way. In this paper, we investigate using other related or relevant documents to improve summarization of one single document based on the graph-based ranking algorithm. In addition to the within-document relationships between sentences in the specified document, the cross-document relationships between sentences in different documents are also taken into account in the proposed approach. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach on DUC 2002 data with the ROUGE metric and results demonstrate that the cross-document relationships between sentences in different but related documents can significantly improve the performance of single document summarization.
- Series
- Lecture notes in computer science; vol.4172
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
-
Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988)
0.01
0.010109557 = product of:
0.030328669 = sum of:
0.007030698 = weight(_text_:in in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007030698 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 2832, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2832)
0.023297971 = product of:
0.046595942 = sum of:
0.046595942 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046595942 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2832, 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=2832)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Reference librarians, who are thoroughly familiar with the purpose, scope and arrangement of abstract periodicals, are uniquely qualified for the task of writing abstracts. The procedures described here offer a relatively simple way for them to write acceptable abstracts from the outset. Although research is being conducted in the area of machine generated abstracts, there wll continue to be a role for human abstractors.
- Source
- Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
-
Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996)
0.01
0.009754773 = product of:
0.029264318 = sum of:
0.01179084 = weight(_text_:in in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01179084 = score(doc=7244,freq=10.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.20163295 = fieldWeight in 7244, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=7244)
0.017473478 = product of:
0.034946956 = sum of:
0.034946956 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034946956 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 7244, 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=7244)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Considers the principles of indexing and the intellectual skills involved in order to determine what automatic indexing systems would be required in order to supplant or complement the human indexer. Good indexing requires: considerable prior knowledge of the literature; judgement as to what to index and what depth to index; reading skills; abstracting skills; and classification skills, Illustrates these features with a detailed description of abstracting and indexing processes involved in generating entries for the mechanical engineering database POWERLINK. Briefly assesses the possibility of replacing human indexers with specialist indexing software, with particular reference to the Object Analyzer from the InTEXT automatic indexing system and using the criteria described for human indexers. At present, it is unlikely that the automatic indexer will replace the human indexer, but when more primary texts are available in electronic form, it may be a useful productivity tool for dealing with large quantities of low grade texts (should they be wanted in the database)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996)
0.01
0.009339842 = product of:
0.028019525 = sum of:
0.010546046 = weight(_text_:in in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010546046 = score(doc=4411,freq=8.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 4411, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4411)
0.017473478 = product of:
0.034946956 = sum of:
0.034946956 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034946956 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Structured abstracts are abstracts which include subheadings such as: background, aims, participants methods and results. These are rapidly replacing traditional abstracts in medical periodicals, but the number and detail of the subheadings used varies, and there is a range of different typographic settings. Reviews a number of studies designed to investigate readers' preferences for different typographic settings and layout. Over 400 readers took part in the study: students; postgraduates; research workers and academics in the social sciences. The most preferred version emerged from the last of 3 studies and 2 additional studies were then carried out to determine preferences for the overall position and layout of this most preferred version on a A4 page. The most preferred version for the setting of the subheadings are printed in bold capital letters
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996)
0.01
0.008996623 = product of:
0.026989868 = sum of:
0.012428636 = weight(_text_:in in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012428636 = score(doc=7673,freq=16.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.21253976 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
0.014561232 = product of:
0.029122464 = sum of:
0.029122464 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029122464 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, 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=7673)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Reports results of 2 studies to determine if structured abstracts offer any advantage to users in terms of whether they are easier to search. In study 1, using a specially prepared electronic database of abstracts in either their original format or the structured format, 52 users were asked to find the answers to 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts in traditional format followed by 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts set in the structured format. Time and error data were recorded automatically. In study 2, using a printed database, 56 users were asked to to find 5 abstracts that reprted a particular kind of study and then find 5 more references that reported another kind of study. In study 1 users performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts but there were some unexplainable practice effects. In study 2, the users again performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts. However, there were asymmetrical transfer effects: users who responded first to the structured abstracts responded more quickly to the following traditional abstracts than did those users who responded first to the traditional abstracts. Nevertheless, the overall findings support the hypothesis that it is easier for user to search structured abstracts than it is to search traditional abstracts
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356
-
DIN 1426: Inhaltsangaben in Information und Dokumentation (1973)
0.00
0.0029294575 = product of:
0.017576745 = sum of:
0.017576745 = weight(_text_:in in 688) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017576745 = score(doc=688,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.30057663 = fieldWeight in 688, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.15625 = fieldNorm(doc=688)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
-
Hartley, J.: Is it appropriate to use structured abstracts in non-medical science journals? (1998)
0.00
0.0026201867 = product of:
0.01572112 = sum of:
0.01572112 = weight(_text_:in in 2999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01572112 = score(doc=2999,freq=10.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.26884392 = fieldWeight in 2999, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2999)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- Reports results of a study to consider whether or not structured abstracts can be used efectively in non medical science periodicals. Reviews a selection of studies on structured abstracts from the medical and psychological literature, presents examples of structured abstracts published in non medical science periodicals and considers how original abstracts might be written in a structured form for these periodicals. Concludes that, in light of these example studies, editors of these periodicals should consider the value of adopting structured abstracts
-
Wellisch, H.H.: Indexing and abstracting 1977-1981 : an international bibliography (1984)
0.00
0.0024857274 = product of:
0.014914364 = sum of:
0.014914364 = weight(_text_:in in 1453) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014914364 = score(doc=1453,freq=4.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.25504774 = fieldWeight in 1453, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1453)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Content
- Fortsetzung einer Ausgabe von 1980, die die Literatur bis 1976 berücksichtigt. - Laufende Fortsetzung in: The indexer
- Footnote
- Rez. in: International classification 13(1986) S.103 (I. Dahlberg)
-
Lancaster, F.W.: Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice (2003)
0.00
0.0024857274 = product of:
0.014914364 = sum of:
0.014914364 = weight(_text_:in in 4913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014914364 = score(doc=4913,freq=16.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.25504774 = fieldWeight in 4913, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4913)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Content
- Covers: indexing principles and practice; precoordinate indexes; consistency and quality of indexing; types and functions of abstracts; writing an abstract; evaluation theory and practice; approaches used in indexing and abstracting services; indexing enhancement; natural language in information retrieval; indexing and abstracting of imaginative works; databases of images and sound; automatic indexing and abstracting; the future of indexing and abstracting services
- Footnote
- Rez. in: JASIST 57(2006) no.1, S.144-145 (H. Saggion): "... This volume is a very valuable source of information for not only students and professionals in library and information science but also for individuals and institutions involved in knowledge management and organization activities. Because of its broad coverage of the information science topic, teachers will find the contents of this book useful for courses in the areas of information technology, digital as well as traditional libraries, and information science in general."
-
Hartley, J.; Betts, L.: Common weaknesses in traditional abstracts in the social sciences (2009)
0.00
0.0024857274 = product of:
0.014914364 = sum of:
0.014914364 = weight(_text_:in in 3115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014914364 = score(doc=3115,freq=16.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.25504774 = fieldWeight in 3115, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3115)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- Detailed checklists and questionnaires have been used in the past to assess the quality of structured abstracts in the medical sciences. The aim of this article is to report the findings when a simpler checklist was used to evaluate the quality of 100 traditional abstracts published in 53 different social science journals. Most of these abstracts contained information about the aims, methods, and results of the studies. However, many did not report details about the sample sizes, ages, or sexes of the participants, or where the research was carried out. The correlation between the lengths of the abstracts and the amount of information present was 0.37 (p < .001), suggesting that word limits for abstracts may restrict the presence of key information to some extent. We conclude that authors can improve the quality of information in traditional abstracts in the social sciences by using the simple checklist provided in this article.
-
Hartley, J.; Betts, L.: ¬The effects of spacing and titles on judgments of the effectiveness of structured abstracts (2007)
0.00
0.002428978 = product of:
0.014573867 = sum of:
0.014573867 = weight(_text_:in in 1325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014573867 = score(doc=1325,freq=22.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.24922498 = fieldWeight in 1325, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1325)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- Previous research assessing the effectiveness of structured abstracts has been limited in two respects. First, when comparing structured abstracts with traditional ones, investigators usually have rewritten the original abstracts, and thus confounded changes in the layout with changes in both the wording and the content of the text. Second, investigators have not always included the title of the article together with the abstract when asking participants to judge the quality of the abstracts, yet titles alert readers to the meaning of the materials that follow. The aim of this research was to redress these limitations. Three studies were carried out. Four versions of each of four abstracts were prepared. These versions consisted of structured/traditional abstracts matched in content, with and without titles. In Study 1, 64 undergraduates each rated one of these abstracts on six separate rating scales. In Study 2, 225 academics and research workers rated the abstracts electronically, and in Study 3, 252 information scientists did likewise. In Studies 1 and 3, the respondents rated the structured abstracts significantly more favorably than they did the traditional ones, but the presence or absence of titles had no effect on their judgments. In Study 2, no main effects were observed for structure or for titles. The layout of the text, together with the subheadings, contributed to the higher ratings of effectiveness for structured abstracts, but the presence or absence of titles had no clear effects in these experimental studies. It is likely that this spatial organization, together with the greater amount of information normally provided in structured abstracts, explains why structured abstracts are generally judged to be superior to traditional ones.
-
Bienert, F.: Probleme der Annotation in der Öffentlichen Bibliothek (1971)
0.00
0.0023435662 = product of:
0.014061396 = sum of:
0.014061396 = weight(_text_:in in 82) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014061396 = score(doc=82,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 82, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=82)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
-
Harbeck, R.; Lutterbeck, E.: Inhaltsangaben in der Dokumentation (1968)
0.00
0.0023435662 = product of:
0.014061396 = sum of:
0.014061396 = weight(_text_:in in 690) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014061396 = score(doc=690,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.24046129 = fieldWeight in 690, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=690)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
-
Sauperl, A.; Klasinc, J.; Luzar, S.: Components of abstracts : logical structure of scholarly abstracts in pharmacology, sociology, and linguistics and literature (2008)
0.00
0.0023159399 = product of:
0.013895638 = sum of:
0.013895638 = weight(_text_:in in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013895638 = score(doc=1961,freq=20.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- The international standard ISO 214:1976 defines an abstract as "an abbreviated, accurate representation of the contents of a document" (p. 1) that should "enable readers to identify the basic content of a document quickly and accurately to determine relevance" (p. 1). It also should be useful in computerized searching. The ISO standard suggests including the following elements: purpose, methods, results, and conclusions. Researchers have often challenged this structure and found that different disciplines and cultures prefer different information content. These claims are partially supported by the findings of our research into the structure of pharmacology, sociology, and Slovenian language and literature abstracts of papers published in international and Slovenian scientific periodicals. The three disciplines have different information content. Slovenian pharmacology abstracts differ in content from those in international periodicals while the differences between international and Slovenian abstracts are small in sociology. In the field of Slovenian language and literature, only domestic abstracts were studied. The identified differences can in part be attributed to the disciplines, but also to the different role of journals and papers in the professional society and to differences in perception of the role of abstracts. The findings raise questions about the structure of abstracts required by some publishers of international journals.
-
Endres-Niggemeyer, B.; Ziegert, C.: SummIt-BMT : (Summarize It in BMT) in Diagnose und Therapie, Abschlussbericht (2002)
0.00
0.0023159399 = product of:
0.013895638 = sum of:
0.013895638 = weight(_text_:in in 4497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013895638 = score(doc=4497,freq=20.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.2376267 = fieldWeight in 4497, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4497)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- SummIt-BMT (Summarize It in Bone Marrow Transplantation) - das Zielsystem des Projektes - soll Ärzten in der Knochenmarktransplantation durch kognitiv fundiertes Zusammenfassen (Endres-Niggemeyer, 1998) aus dem WWW eine schnelle Informationsaufnahme ermöglichen. Im bmbffinanzierten Teilprojekt, über das hier zu berichten ist, liegt der Schwerpunkt auf den klinischen Fragestellungen. SummIt-BMT hat als zentrale Komponente eine KMT-Ontologie. Den Systemablauf veranschaulicht Abb. 1: Benutzer geben ihren Informationsbedarf in ein strukturiertes Szenario ein. Sie ziehen dazu Begriffe aus der Ontologie heran. Aus dem Szenario werden Fragen an Suchmaschinen abgeleitet. Die Summit-BMT-Metasuchmaschine stößt Google an und sucht in Medline, der zentralen Literaturdatenbank der Medizin. Das Suchergebnis wird aufbereitet. Dabei werden Links zu Volltexten verfolgt und die Volltexte besorgt. Die beschafften Dokumente werden mit einem Schlüsselwortretrieval auf Passagen untersucht, in denen sich Suchkonzepte aus der Frage / Ontologie häufen. Diese Passagen werden zum Zusammenfassen vorgeschlagen. In ihnen werden die Aussagen syntaktisch analysiert. Die Systemagenten untersuchen sie. Lassen Aussagen sich mit einer semantischen Relation an die Frage anbinden, tragen also zur deren Beantwortung bei, werden sie in die Zusammenfassung aufgenommen, es sei denn, andere Agenten machen Hinderungsgründe geltend, z.B. Redundanz. Das Ergebnis der Zusammenfassung wird in das Frage/Antwort-Szenario integriert. Präsentiert werden Exzerpte aus den Quelldokumenten. Mit einem Link vermitteln sie einen sofortigen Rückgriff auf die Quelle. SummIt-BMT ist zum nächsten Durchgang von Informationssuche und Zusammenfassung bereit, sobald der Benutzer dies wünscht.
