Search (200 results, page 2 of 10)

0.029843397 = product of:
  0.10445189 = sum of:
    0.07049395 = weight(_text_:united in 545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07049395 = score(doc=545,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.30991787 = fieldWeight in 545, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=545)
    0.033957936 = product of:
      0.06791587 = sum of:
        0.06791587 = weight(_text_:states in 545) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06791587 = score(doc=545,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.304198 = fieldWeight in 545, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=545)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

The emphasis on research evaluation has brought scrutiny to the role of self-citations in the scholarly communication process. While author self-citations have been studied at length, little is known on national-level self-references (SRs). This paper analyses the citation context of national SRs, using the full-text of 184,859 papers published in PLOS journals. It investigates the differences between national SRs and nonself-references (NSRs) in terms of their in-text mention, presence in enumerations, and location features. For all countries, national SRs exhibit a higher level of engagement than NSRs. NSRs are more often found in enumerative citances than SRs, which suggests that researchers pay more attention to domestic than foreign studies. There are more mentions of national research in the methods section, which provides evidence that methodologies developed in a nation are more likely to be used by other researchers from the same nation. Publications from the United States are cited at a higher rate in each of the sections, indicating that the country still maintains a dominant position in science. On the whole, this paper contributes to a better understanding of the role of national SRs in the scholarly communication system, and how it varies across countries and over time.

0.029843397 = product of:
  0.10445189 = sum of:
    0.07049395 = weight(_text_:united in 745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07049395 = score(doc=745,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.30991787 = fieldWeight in 745, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=745)
    0.033957936 = product of:
      0.06791587 = sum of:
        0.06791587 = weight(_text_:states in 745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06791587 = score(doc=745,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.304198 = fieldWeight in 745, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=745)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

There is vigorous debate as to whether influential social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook should censor objectionable posts by prominent individuals in the United States and elsewhere. A tentative middle ground is employing content moderation to signal to social media audiences that certain posts may contain objectionable information through the mechanism of flagging. Existing studies have mainly examined the effect of flagging regular users' content. To add to this emerging literature stream, we examine the effect of flagging when the underlying content is produced by a prominent individual. Leveraging Twitter's moderation activities on former U.S. President Donald Trump's tweets as our empirical setting, we employ three machine learning algorithms to estimate the effect of flagging Trump's tweets. We explore preliminary evidence as to whether these posts were retweeted less or more than expected. Our results indicate that the flagged tweets were retweeted at higher rates than expected. Our findings suggest that flagging content of prominent individuals on social media might be ineffective or even counterproductive in curbing the spread of content deemed objectionable by social media companies.

0.029843397 = product of:
  0.10445189 = sum of:
    0.07049395 = weight(_text_:united in 1037) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07049395 = score(doc=1037,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.30991787 = fieldWeight in 1037, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1037)
    0.033957936 = product of:
      0.06791587 = sum of:
        0.06791587 = weight(_text_:states in 1037) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06791587 = score(doc=1037,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.304198 = fieldWeight in 1037, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1037)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Recent examples of organizational wrongdoing such as those that led to the opioid crisis and the 2008 financial meltdown show that organizations can deliberately use information to deceive others, resulting in serious harm. This brief communication explores the role of information in organizational wrongdoing. We analyze a dataset consisting of 80 cases of high-penalty corporate wrongdoing in the United States in the period 2000-2020. Our analysis of documents filed by the US Department of Justice and federal regulatory agencies in those cases found that organizations use two general information strategies to deceive and mislead. First, organizations can "sow doubt" on statements by others that hurt the organization's interests. Second, organizations can "exploit trust" that others have placed in them to provide truthful information. Our analysis suggests that which strategy is adopted depends on the degree that the organization's external information use environment is "contested" or "controlled." Across the cases examined, we observe three types of information behaviors that implement the strategy of sowing doubt and exploiting trust: information obfuscation, information concealment, and information falsification.

0.029843397 = product of:
  0.10445189 = sum of:
    0.07049395 = weight(_text_:united in 1038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07049395 = score(doc=1038,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.30991787 = fieldWeight in 1038, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1038)
    0.033957936 = product of:
      0.06791587 = sum of:
        0.06791587 = weight(_text_:states in 1038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06791587 = score(doc=1038,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.304198 = fieldWeight in 1038, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1038)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

This research develops and tests a model of individual intentions to actively seek information about climate change. Our premise is that the individual's intention to actively seek information about climate change would determine their knowledge of and attitudes towards climate change, and this would in turn influence how they act or change their behaviors in response to that risk. Our model identifies key cognitive, affective, and situational variables drawn from research in human information behavior and risk communication. We conducted an online survey in which 212 participants in Canada and the United States responded. The results showed that the model was able to explain more than 40% of the variance in intention to seek climate change information. Social Norms, Affective Response, and Social Trust were the most important variables in influencing intention to seek climate change information. We conclude that climate change information seeking has a strong social dimension where social norms and expectations of relevant and respected others exert a major influence, and that the individual's emotional response towards the risk of climate change is more important than the individual's cognitive perception of how much information they need on climate change.

0.029843397 = product of:
  0.10445189 = sum of:
    0.07049395 = weight(_text_:united in 1088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07049395 = score(doc=1088,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.30991787 = fieldWeight in 1088, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1088)
    0.033957936 = product of:
      0.06791587 = sum of:
        0.06791587 = weight(_text_:states in 1088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06791587 = score(doc=1088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.304198 = fieldWeight in 1088, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1088)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Information researchers can further social justice and social equity to meet the needs of minority and underserved populations experiencing intersecting modes of cultural marginalization. Scholars of information and communication technologies for development (ICT4D) can find overlooked intersections with social justice in "community networking" research since the 1980s to overcome the digital divides between the haves and have-nots. To frame social justice initiatives within a consolidated vision of ICT4D in the field of information, this article proposes an impact-driven framework, expounded through five interrelated elements: why (motivations), with who (engaged constituencies), how (at external and internal levels to change traditional practices), and toward what (goal). It is explicated through select historical instances of "community networking" and digital divides, ICT4D, and social justice intersections. Significance of the elements is also demonstrated via this author's select information-related social justice research conducted in the United States. The urgency for critical and reflective conversations is important owing to historically abstracted human information behavior theory development within information research outdated in multiple contextualized needs of contemporary times. Historically situating impact-driven social justice research is important to further the relevance, existence, and growth of the information field as it strengthens its ties with ICT4D.

0.025665505 = product of:
  0.089829266 = sum of:
    0.07884278 = weight(_text_:management in 183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07884278 = score(doc=183,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.57692516 = fieldWeight in 183, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=183)
    0.010986483 = product of:
      0.021972965 = sum of:
        0.021972965 = weight(_text_:22 in 183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021972965 = score(doc=183,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 183, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=183)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the knowledge and attitude about research data management, the use of data management methods and the perceived need for support, in relation to participants' field of research. Design/methodology/approach This is a quantitative study. Data were collected by an email survey and sent to 792 academic researchers and doctoral students. Total response rate was 18% (N = 139). The measurement instrument consisted of six sets of questions: about data management plans, the assignment of additional information to research data, about metadata, standard file naming systems, training at data management methods and the storing of research data. Findings The main finding is that knowledge about the procedures of data management is limited, and data management is not a normal practice in the researcher's work. They were, however, in general, of the opinion that the university should take the lead by recommending and offering access to the necessary tools of data management. Taken together, the results indicate that there is an urgent need to increase the researcher's understanding of the importance of data management that is based on professional knowledge and to provide them with resources and training that enables them to make effective and productive use of data management methods. Research limitations/implications The survey was sent to all members of the population but not a sample of it. Because of the response rate, the results cannot be generalized to all researchers at the university. Nevertheless, the findings may provide an important understanding about their research data procedures, in particular what characterizes their knowledge about data management and attitude towards it. Practical implications Awareness of these issues is essential for information specialists at academic libraries, together with other units within the universities, to be able to design infrastructures and develop services that suit the needs of the research community. The findings can be used, to develop data policies and services, based on professional knowledge of best practices and recognized standards that assist the research community at data management. Originality/value The study contributes to the existing literature about research data management by examining the results by participants' field of research. Recognition of the issues is critical in order for information specialists in collaboration with universities to design relevant infrastructures and services for academics and doctoral students that can promote their research data management.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 73(2021) no.2, S.322-341

0.023874719 = product of:
  0.08356151 = sum of:
    0.056395162 = weight(_text_:united in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056395162 = score(doc=1107,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.2479343 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
    0.02716635 = product of:
      0.0543327 = sum of:
        0.0543327 = weight(_text_:states in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0543327 = score(doc=1107,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22326207 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.24335839 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

In recent years, many school librarians have been scrambling to build and expand their graphic novel collections to meet the large and growing demand for these materials. For the purposes of this study, the term graphic novels refers to volumes in which the content is provided through sequential art, including fiction, nonfiction, and biographical material. As the library field has not yet arrived at a set of best practices or guidelines for institutions working to classify and catalog graphic novels, this study seeks to record the ways in which school librarians are handling these materials as well as issues and questions at the forefront of their minds. A survey of school librarians in the United States revealed that almost all of them collect fiction and nonfiction graphic novels, while 67% collect manga. Most respondents indicated that they are partly or solely responsible for the cataloging and classification decisions made in their media centers. For classification purposes, most have elected to create separate graphic novel collections to house their fictional graphic novels. Some include nonfiction graphic novels in this section, while others create a nonfiction graphic novel collection nearby or shelve nonfiction graphic novels with other items that deal with similar subject matter. Many school librarians express uncertainty about how best to catalog and classify longer series, adapted classics, superhero stories, and the increasing number and variety of inventive titles that defy categorization. They also struggle with inconsistent vendor records and past practices and suffer from a lack of full confidence in their knowledge of how to best classify and catalog graphic novels so that they are both searchable in the library catalog and easily accessible on the shelves.

0.01738601 = product of:
  0.06085103 = sum of:
    0.04986455 = weight(_text_:management in 181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04986455 = score(doc=181,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.3648795 = fieldWeight in 181, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=181)
    0.010986483 = product of:
      0.021972965 = sum of:
        0.021972965 = weight(_text_:22 in 181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021972965 = score(doc=181,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 181, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=181)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore the information needs and information-seeking behaviours of the new generation of engineering designers. A survey study is used to approach what their information needs are, how these needs change during an engineering design project and how their information-seeking behaviours have been influenced by the newly developed information technologies (ITs). Through an in-depth analysis of the survey results, the key functions have been identified for the next-generation management systems. Design/methodology/approach The paper first proposed four hypotheses on the information needs and information-seeking behaviours of young engineers. Then, a survey study was undertaken to understand their information usage in terms of the information needs and information-seeking behaviours during a complete engineering design process. Through analysing the survey results, several findings were obtained and on this basis, further comparisons were made to discuss and evaluate the hypotheses. Findings The paper has revealed that the engineering designers' information needs will evolve throughout the engineering design project; thus, they should be assisted at several different levels. Although they intend to search information and knowledge on know-what and know-how, what they really require is the know-why knowledge in order to help them complete design tasks. Also, the paper has shown how the newly developed ITs and web-based applications have influenced the engineers' information-seeking practices. Research limitations/implications The research subjects chosen in this study are engineering students in universities who, although not as experienced as engineers in companies, do go through a complete design process with the tasks similar to industrial scenarios. In addition, the focus of this study is to understand the information-seeking behaviours of a new generation of design engineers, so that the development of next-generation information and knowledge management systems can be well informed. In this sense, the results obtained do reveal some new knowledge about the information-seeking behaviours during a general design process. Practical implications This paper first identifies the information needs and information-seeking behaviours of the new generation of engineering designers. On this basis, the varied ways to meet these needs and behaviours are discussed and elaborated. This intends to provide the key characteristics for the development of the next-generation knowledge management system for engineering design projects. Originality/value This paper proposes a novel means of exploring the future engineers' information needs and information-seeking behaviours in a collaborative working environment. It also characterises the key features and functions for the next generation of knowledge management systems for engineering design.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 72(2020) no.6, S.853-868

0.016144682 = product of:
  0.05650638 = sum of:
    0.0455199 = weight(_text_:management in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0455199 = score(doc=566,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.3330879 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
    0.010986483 = product of:
      0.021972965 = sum of:
        0.021972965 = weight(_text_:22 in 566) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021972965 = score(doc=566,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 566, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=566)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Knowledge Architectures reviews traditional approaches to managing information and explains why they need to adapt to support 21st-century information management and discovery. Exploring the rapidly changing environment in which information is being managed and accessed, the book considers how to use knowledge architectures, the basic structures and designs that underlie all of the parts of an effective information system, to best advantage. Drawing on 40 years of work with a variety of organizations, Bedford explains that failure to understand the structure behind any given system can be the difference between an effective solution and a significant and costly failure. Demonstrating that the information user environment has shifted significantly in the past 20 years, the book explains that end users now expect designs and behaviors that are much closer to the way they think, work, and act. Acknowledging how important it is that those responsible for developing an information or knowledge management system understand knowledge structures, the book goes beyond a traditional library science perspective and uses case studies to help translate the abstract and theoretical to the practical and concrete. Explaining the structures in a simple and intuitive way and providing examples that clearly illustrate the challenges faced by a range of different organizations, Knowledge Architectures is essential reading for those studying and working in library and information science, data science, systems development, database design, and search system architecture and engineering.

Content

Section 1 Context and purpose of knowledge architecture -- 1 Making the case for knowledge architecture -- 2 The landscape of knowledge assets -- 3 Knowledge architecture and design -- 4 Knowledge architecture reference model -- 5 Knowledge architecture segments -- Section 2 Designing for availability -- 6 Knowledge object modeling -- 7 Knowledge structures for encoding, formatting, and packaging -- 8 Functional architecture for identification and distinction -- 9 Functional architectures for knowledge asset disposition and destruction -- 10 Functional architecture designs for knowledge preservation and conservation -- Section 3 Designing for accessibility -- 11 Functional architectures for knowledge seeking and discovery -- 12 Functional architecture for knowledge search -- 13 Functional architecture for knowledge categorization -- 14 Functional architectures for indexing and keywording -- 15 Functional architecture for knowledge semantics -- 16 Functional architecture for knowledge abstraction and surrogation -- Section 4 Functional architectures to support knowledge consumption -- 17 Functional architecture for knowledge augmentation, derivation, and synthesis -- 18 Functional architecture to manage risk and harm -- 19 Functional architectures for knowledge authentication and provenance -- 20 Functional architectures for securing knowledge assets -- 21 Functional architectures for authorization and asset management -- Section 5 Pulling it all together - the big picture knowledge architecture -- 22 Functional architecture for knowledge metadata and metainformation -- 23 The whole knowledge architecture - pulling it all together

LCSH

Information storage and retrieval systems / Management

Subject

Information storage and retrieval systems / Management

0.015220948 = product of:
  0.106546625 = sum of:
    0.106546625 = weight(_text_:industry in 842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.106546625 = score(doc=842,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2351482 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.45310414 = fieldWeight in 842, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=842)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Academic research often draws on multiple funding sources. This paper investigates whether complementarity or substitutability emerges when different types of funding are used. Scholars have examined this phenomenon at the university and scientist levels, but not at the publication level. This gap is significant since acknowledgement sections in scientific papers indicate publications are often supported by multiple funding sources. To address this gap, we examine the extent to which different funding types are jointly used in publications, and to what extent certain combinations of funding are associated with higher academic impact (citation count). We focus on three types of funding accessed by UK-based researchers: national, international, and industry. The analysis builds on data extracted from all UK cancer-related publications in 2011, thus providing a 10-year citation window. Findings indicate that, although there is complementarity between national and international funding in terms of their co-occurrence (where these are acknowledged in the same publication), when we evaluate funding complementarity in relation to academic impact (we employ the supermodularity framework), we found no evidence of such a relationship. Rather, our results suggest substitutability between national and international funding. We also observe substitutability between international and industry funding.

0.014241929 = product of:
  0.0996935 = sum of:
    0.0996935 = weight(_text_:united in 5877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0996935 = score(doc=5877,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.43829006 = fieldWeight in 5877, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5877)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Since 2015, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) began the process of inculcating culture as part of the United Nations' (UN) post-2015 Sustainable (former Millennium) Development Goals, which member countries agreed to achieve by 2030. By conducting a thematic analysis of the 25 UN commissioned reports and policy documents, this research identifies 14 broad cultural heritage information themes that need to be practiced in order to achieve cultural sustainability, of which information platforms, information sharing, information broadcast, information quality, information usage training, information access, information collection, and contribution appear to be the significant themes. An investigation of education on cultural heritage informatics and digital humanities at iSchools (www.ischools.org) using a gap analysis framework demonstrates the core information science skills required for cultural heritage education. The research demonstrates that: (i) a thematic analysis of cultural heritage policy documents can be used to explore the key themes for cultural informatics education and research that can lead to sustainable development; and (ii) cultural heritage information education should cover a series of skills that can be categorized in five key areas, viz., information, technology, leadership, application, and people and user skills.

0.014241929 = product of:
  0.0996935 = sum of:
    0.0996935 = weight(_text_:united in 90) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0996935 = score(doc=90,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.43829006 = fieldWeight in 90, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=90)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Educational preventing violent extremism (EPVE) programs have had (to date) little if any theoretical underpinning. Given their proliferation in jurisdictions such as Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, and other European countries, such an absence is notable but not unexpected given the political sensitivities attached to them. These programs remain an emerging policy area which is still "finding its feet," around which their legitimacy and efficacy is keenly debated. This paper argues for adopting theoretical principles drawn from information science research based upon information behavior models to provide a framework for the design and development of such programs and against which their efficacy can be tested. We demonstrate how this approach can be applied through thematic analysis of the theory of change models of EPVE programs implemented in England and Wales, designed to increase awareness and understanding of radicalization among young people, their carers, and professionals. This article is ground breaking and of international significance, being the first to apply learning from information science to practice in furthering policy goals around countering radicalization and extremism in the United Kingdom and other jurisdictions.

0.014205642 = product of:
  0.049719743 = sum of:
    0.03598664 = weight(_text_:management in 5843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03598664 = score(doc=5843,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.2633291 = fieldWeight in 5843, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5843)
    0.013733104 = product of:
      0.027466208 = sum of:
        0.027466208 = weight(_text_:22 in 5843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027466208 = score(doc=5843,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5843, 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=5843)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Purpose Personal information management (PIM) is an activity in which people store information items in order to retrieve them later. The purpose of this paper is to test and quantify the effect of factors related to collection size, file properties and workload on file retrieval success and efficiency. Design/methodology/approach In the study, 289 participants retrieved 1,557 of their shared files in a naturalistic setting. The study used specially developed software designed to collect shared files' names and present them as targets for the retrieval task. The dependent variables were retrieval success, retrieval time and misstep/s. Findings Various factors compromise shared files retrieval including: collection size (large number of files), file properties (multiple versions, size of team sharing the file, time since most recent retrieval and folder depth) and workload (daily e-mails sent and received). The authors discuss theoretical reasons for these negative effects and suggest possible ways to overcome them. Originality/value Retrieval is the main reason people manage personal information. It is essential for retrieval to be successful and efficient, as information cannot be used unless it can be re-accessed. Prior PIM research has assumed that factors related to collection size, file properties and workload affect file retrieval. However, this is the first study to systematically quantify the negative effects of these factors. As each of these factors is expected to be exacerbated in the future, this study is a necessary first step toward addressing these problems.

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 72(2020) no.1, S.130-147

0.014205642 = product of:
  0.049719743 = sum of:
    0.03598664 = weight(_text_:management in 884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03598664 = score(doc=884,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.2633291 = fieldWeight in 884, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=884)
    0.013733104 = product of:
      0.027466208 = sum of:
        0.027466208 = weight(_text_:22 in 884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027466208 = score(doc=884,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 884, 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=884)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Research information management systems (RIMS) have become critical components of information technology infrastructure on university campuses. They are used not just for sharing and promoting faculty research, but also for conducting faculty evaluation and development, facilitating research collaborations, identifying mentors for student projects, and expert consultants for local businesses. This study is one of the first empirical investigations of the structure of researchers' scholarly profile maintenance activities in a nonmandatory institutional RIMS. By analyzing the RIMS's log data, we identified 11 tasks researchers performed when updating their profiles. These tasks were further grouped into three activities: (a) adding publication, (b) enhancing researcher identity, and (c) improving research discoverability. In addition, we found that junior researchers and female researchers were more engaged in maintaining their RIMS profiles than senior researchers and male researchers. The results provide insights for designing profile maintenance action templates for institutional RIMS that are tailored to researchers' characteristics and help enhance researchers' engagement in the curation of their research information. This also suggests that female and junior researchers can serve as early adopters of institutional RIMS.

Date

22. 1.2023 18:43:02

0.013432972 = product of:
  0.0470154 = sum of:
    0.030535674 = weight(_text_:management in 182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030535674 = score(doc=182,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 182, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=182)
    0.016479723 = product of:
      0.032959446 = sum of:
        0.032959446 = weight(_text_:22 in 182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032959446 = score(doc=182,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 182, 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=182)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 73(2021) no.1, S.129-143

0.013432972 = product of:
  0.0470154 = sum of:
    0.030535674 = weight(_text_:management in 184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030535674 = score(doc=184,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 184, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=184)
    0.016479723 = product of:
      0.032959446 = sum of:
        0.032959446 = weight(_text_:22 in 184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032959446 = score(doc=184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 184, 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=184)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 73(2021) no.2 S.144-159

0.012915401 = product of:
  0.0904078 = sum of:
    0.0904078 = weight(_text_:industry in 5761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0904078 = score(doc=5761,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2351482 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.3844716 = fieldWeight in 5761, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.799733 = idf(docFreq=363, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5761)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Personalization of information retrieval (PIR) is aimed at tailoring a search toward individual users and user groups by taking account of additional information about users besides their queries. In the past two decades or so, PIR has received extensive attention in both academia and industry. This article surveys the literature of personalization in text retrieval, following a framework for aspects or factors that can be used for personalization. The framework consists of additional information about users that can be explicitly obtained by asking users for their preferences, or implicitly inferred from users' search behaviors. Users' characteristics and contextual factors such as tasks, time, location, etc., can be helpful for personalization. This article also addresses various issues including when to personalize, the evaluation of PIR, privacy, usability, etc. Based on the extensive review, challenges are discussed and directions for future effort are suggested.

0.012084679 = product of:
  0.084592745 = sum of:
    0.084592745 = weight(_text_:united in 546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.084592745 = score(doc=546,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2274601 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.37190145 = fieldWeight in 546, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=546)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Information studies have identified numerous needs and barriers to the integration of asylum seekers and refugees; however, little emphasis has been placed thus far on their need to keep their own culture, values, and traditions alive. In this work, we use ethnographic constructivist grounded theory to explore the place of heritage in the information experience of people who have sought asylum in the United Kingdom. Based on our findings, we propose to conceptualize heritage as an affective and meaningful information literacy practice. Such conceptualization fosters integration by allowing people to simultaneously maintain their own ways of knowing and adapt to local ones. Our research approach provides scholars with a conceptual tool to holistically explore affective, meaningful, and cultural information practices. This study also reveals implications for policymakers, third sector organizations, and cultural institutions working toward the more sustainable integration of asylum seekers and refugees.

0.011632639 = product of:
  0.08142847 = sum of:
    0.08142847 = weight(_text_:management in 214) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08142847 = score(doc=214,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 214, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=214)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Records management in the public sector is integral for delivering public good. However, several institutional challenges inhibit the required implementation of innovative and information-centric tools to transform records management in response to the challenges of digitization and to capitalize on new opportunities in the digital economy. In this article, we make recommendations to overcome institutional and legislative barriers to transform records management in the public sector.

0.011194143 = product of:
  0.0391795 = sum of:
    0.025446396 = weight(_text_:management in 5844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025446396 = score(doc=5844,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13666032 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04054466 = queryNorm
        0.18620178 = fieldWeight in 5844, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5844)
    0.013733104 = product of:
      0.027466208 = sum of:
        0.027466208 = weight(_text_:22 in 5844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027466208 = score(doc=5844,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14198048 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04054466 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5844, 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=5844)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Date

20. 1.2015 18:30:22

Source

Aslib journal of information management. 72(2020) no.5, S.725-744