Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Sauperl, A."
  1. Sauperl, A.; Klasinc, J.; Luzar, S.: Components of abstracts : logical structure of scholarly abstracts in pharmacology, sociology, and linguistics and literature (2008) 0.01
    0.005260164 = product of:
      0.031560984 = sum of:
        0.031560984 = weight(_text_:searching in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031560984 = score(doc=1961,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14122958 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03491209 = queryNorm
            0.22347288 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.0452914 = idf(docFreq=2103, 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.
  2. Sauperl, A.: Pinning down a novel : characteristics of literary works as perceived by readers (2012) 0.00
    0.004715261 = product of:
      0.028291566 = sum of:
        0.028291566 = product of:
          0.056583133 = sum of:
            0.056583133 = weight(_text_:etc in 4548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.056583133 = score(doc=4548,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.18910104 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03491209 = queryNorm
                0.2992217 = fieldWeight in 4548, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4548)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - The subject description of novels in library catalogues is traditionally limited to the classification number with no description of the story. On the other hand, enthusiastic readers describe novels by tags or reviews in Web services. The purpose of this paper is to analyse readers' descriptions of novels and suggest an enhancement of the catalogue record which would be useful to the readers. Design/methodology/approach - The original research involved a content analysis of tags and reviews written by users in the online bookstore Amazon.com, the online reader advisory service LibraryThing, and the reading promotion project Primorci beremo. The results were compared to previously published results. Findings - The characteristics that most frequently elicit comments by readers are: the names of the creators and literary characters, geographic names and the titles of works, the time frame in which the story takes place, and the literary genre. Their evaluation of a novel was expressed with an opinion, an analysis, or a professional review. Awards were mentioned, and readers often also expressed their personal experience with the novel. They connected the novel with a sequel or series, with otherwise related novels, movies, etc. Often, pictures of the cover and other factual data were included. Research limitations/implications - Research was limited to readers' experiences and descriptions of literary works written in prose. Practical implications - It is suggested that the time frame, genre and awards received should be included in the functional requirements models. Originality/value - Original research was conducted over a longer period of time. The results were re-evaluated and compared to previously published results from studies by different researchers.
  3. Sauperl, A.; Rozman, D.: Subject cataloguing at the crossroads : with or without subject heading strings? (2007) 0.00
    0.0039417557 = product of:
      0.023650533 = sum of:
        0.023650533 = product of:
          0.047301065 = sum of:
            0.047301065 = weight(_text_:22 in 245) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047301065 = score(doc=245,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03491209 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 245, 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=245)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Source
    Knjiznice za prihodnost : napredek in sodelovanje : zbornik referatov [ Libraries for the future : development and collaboration: proceedings / Professional conference of Union of associations of Slovene Librarians], Portoroz, October 22-23, 2007; ed. M. Ambrozic
  4. Sauperl, A.; Saye, J.D.: Pebbles for the mosais of cataloging expertise : what do problems in expert systems for cataloging reveal about cataloging expertise? (1999) 0.00
    0.0023650532 = product of:
      0.014190319 = sum of:
        0.014190319 = product of:
          0.028380638 = sum of:
            0.028380638 = weight(_text_:22 in 103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028380638 = score(doc=103,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03491209 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 103, 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=103)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  5. Sauperl, A.: Precoordination or not? : a new view of the old question (2009) 0.00
    0.0019708779 = product of:
      0.011825266 = sum of:
        0.011825266 = product of:
          0.023650533 = sum of:
            0.023650533 = weight(_text_:22 in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023650533 = score(doc=3611,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03491209 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3611, 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=3611)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    20. 6.2010 14:22:43
  6. Sauperl, A.: Subject determination during the cataloging process : the development of a system based on theoretical principles (2002) 0.00
    0.0011825266 = product of:
      0.0070951595 = sum of:
        0.0070951595 = product of:
          0.014190319 = sum of:
            0.014190319 = weight(_text_:22 in 2293) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.014190319 = score(doc=2293,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1222562 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03491209 = queryNorm
                0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 2293, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=2293)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
    
    Date
    27. 9.2005 14:22:19