Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Zhang, X."
  1. Yang, F.; Zhang, X.: Focal fields in literature on the information divide : the USA, China, UK and India (2020) 0.08 
    0.07543648 = product of:
  0.12572746 = sum of:
    0.08463203 = weight(_text_:literacy in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08463203 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.26121095 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044537213 = queryNorm
        0.32399878 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.8650045 = idf(docFreq=340, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
    0.026009986 = weight(_text_:study in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026009986 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1448085 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044537213 = queryNorm
        0.17961644 = fieldWeight in 5835, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5835)
    0.015085445 = product of:
      0.03017089 = sum of:
        0.03017089 = weight(_text_:22 in 5835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03017089 = score(doc=5835,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15596174 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044537213 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5835, 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=5835)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6 = coord(3/5)
    Abstract
    Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify key countries and their focal research fields on the information divide. Design/methodology/approach Literature was retrieved to identify key countries and their primary focus. The literature research method was adopted to identify aspects of the primary focus in each key country. Findings The key countries with literature on the information divide are the USA, China, the UK and India. The problem of health is prominent in the USA, and solutions include providing information, distinguishing users' profiles and improving eHealth literacy. Economic and political factors led to the urban-rural information divide in China, and policy is the most powerful solution. Under the influence of humanism, research on the information divide in the UK focuses on all age groups, and solutions differ according to age. Deep-rooted patriarchal concepts and traditional marriage customs make the gender information divide prominent in India, and increasing women's information consciousness is a feasible way to reduce this divide. Originality/value This paper is an extensive review study on the information divide, which clarifies the key countries and their focal fields in research on this topic. More important, the paper innovatively analyzes and summarizes existing literature from a country perspective.
    Date
    13. 2.2020 18:22:13
  2. Zhang, X.; Wang, D.; Tang, Y.; Xiao, Q.: How question type influences knowledge withholding in social Q&A community (2023) 0.03 
    0.028865311 = product of:
  0.07216328 = sum of:
    0.054060746 = weight(_text_:study in 1067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054060746 = score(doc=1067,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1448085 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
          0.044537213 = queryNorm
        0.37332577 = fieldWeight in 1067, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2514048 = idf(docFreq=4653, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1067)
    0.018102532 = product of:
      0.036205065 = sum of:
        0.036205065 = weight(_text_:22 in 1067) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.036205065 = score(doc=1067,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15596174 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044537213 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1067, 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=1067)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Social question-and-answer (Q&A) communities are becoming increasingly important for knowledge acquisition. However, some users withhold knowledge, which can hinder the effectiveness of these platforms. Based on social exchange theory, the study investigates how different types of questions influence knowledge withholding, with question difficulty and user anonymity as boundary conditions. Two experiments were conducted to test hypotheses. Results indicate that informational questions are more likely to lead to knowledge withholding than conversational ones, as they elicit more fear of negative evaluation and fear of exploitation. The study also examines the interplay of question difficulty and user anonymity with question type. Overall, this study significantly extends the existing literature on counterproductive knowledge behavior by exploring the antecedents of knowledge withholding in social Q&A communities.
    Date
    22. 9.2023 13:51:47

Authors

Themes