-
Alonso, M.I.; Fernández, L.M.M.: Perspectives of studies on document abstracting : towards an integrated view of models and theoretical approaches (2010)
0.04
0.043704193 = product of:
0.13111258 = sum of:
0.06007281 = weight(_text_:documentation in 3959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06007281 = score(doc=3959,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = queryNorm
0.34016466 = fieldWeight in 3959, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3959)
0.07103977 = weight(_text_:great in 3959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07103977 = score(doc=3959,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22838 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = 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.
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 66(2010) no.4, S.563-584
-
Bowman, J.H.: Annotation: a lost art in cataloguing (2007)
0.01
0.01455837 = product of:
0.08735022 = sum of:
0.08735022 = product of:
0.17470044 = sum of:
0.17470044 = weight(_text_:britain in 255) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.17470044 = score(doc=255,freq=2.0), product of:
0.30268455 = queryWeight, product of:
7.462781 = idf(docFreq=68, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = 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)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- 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.
-
Fidel, R.: Writing abstracts for free-text searching (1986)
0.01
0.011327437 = product of:
0.06796462 = sum of:
0.06796462 = weight(_text_:documentation in 684) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06796462 = score(doc=684,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = queryNorm
0.38485238 = fieldWeight in 684, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=684)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 42(1986), S.11-21
-
Monday, I.: ¬Les processus cognitifs et la redaction de résumes (1996)
0.01
0.011327437 = product of:
0.06796462 = sum of:
0.06796462 = weight(_text_:documentation in 6917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06796462 = score(doc=6917,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = queryNorm
0.38485238 = fieldWeight in 6917, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6917)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- Documentation et bibliothèques. 42(1996) no.2, S.55-63
-
Borko, H.; Chatman, S.: Criteria for acceptable abstracts : a survey of abstractors' instructions (1963)
0.01
0.009911507 = product of:
0.059469044 = sum of:
0.059469044 = weight(_text_:documentation in 687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059469044 = score(doc=687,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = queryNorm
0.33674583 = fieldWeight in 687, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=687)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- American documentation. 14(1963), S.149-160
-
Koltay, T.: Abstracting: information literacy on a professional level (2009)
0.01
0.009911507 = product of:
0.059469044 = sum of:
0.059469044 = weight(_text_:documentation in 3610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059469044 = score(doc=3610,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = queryNorm
0.33674583 = fieldWeight in 3610, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3610)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 65(2009) no.5, S.841-855
-
Pinto, M.: Abstracting/abstract adaptation to digital environments : research trends (2003)
0.01
0.008495579 = product of:
0.050973468 = sum of:
0.050973468 = weight(_text_:documentation in 4446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050973468 = score(doc=4446,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = queryNorm
0.28863928 = fieldWeight in 4446, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4446)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 59(2003) no.5, S.581-608
-
Cross, C.; Oppenheim, C.: ¬A genre analysis of scientific abstracts (2006)
0.01
0.0056637186 = product of:
0.03398231 = sum of:
0.03398231 = weight(_text_:documentation in 5603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03398231 = score(doc=5603,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1765992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = queryNorm
0.19242619 = fieldWeight in 5603, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.354108 = idf(docFreq=1544, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5603)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- Journal of documentation. 62(2006) no.4, S.428-446
-
Koltay, T.: ¬A hypertext tutorial on abstracting for library science students (1995)
0.00
0.0045793457 = product of:
0.027476072 = sum of:
0.027476072 = product of:
0.054952145 = sum of:
0.054952145 = weight(_text_:22 in 3061) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054952145 = score(doc=3061,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14203148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = 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)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Date
- 27. 1.1996 18:22:06
-
Palais, E.S.: Abstracting for reference librarians (1988)
0.00
0.0036634763 = product of:
0.021980857 = sum of:
0.021980857 = product of:
0.043961715 = sum of:
0.043961715 = weight(_text_:22 in 2832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.043961715 = score(doc=2832,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14203148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = 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)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- Reference librarian. 1988, no.22, S.297-308
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996)
0.00
0.0027476072 = product of:
0.016485643 = sum of:
0.016485643 = product of:
0.032971285 = sum of:
0.032971285 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032971285 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14203148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = 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)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37
-
Ward, M.L.: ¬The future of the human indexer (1996)
0.00
0.0027476072 = product of:
0.016485643 = sum of:
0.016485643 = product of:
0.032971285 = sum of:
0.032971285 = weight(_text_:22 in 7244) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032971285 = score(doc=7244,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14203148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = 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)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Date
- 9. 2.1997 18:44:22
-
Wan, X.; Yang, J.; Xiao, J.: Incorporating cross-document relationships between sentences for single document summarizations (2006)
0.00
0.0027476072 = product of:
0.016485643 = sum of:
0.016485643 = product of:
0.032971285 = sum of:
0.032971285 = weight(_text_:22 in 2421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032971285 = score(doc=2421,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14203148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = 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)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
-
Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996)
0.00
0.0022896728 = product of:
0.013738036 = sum of:
0.013738036 = product of:
0.027476072 = sum of:
0.027476072 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.027476072 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14203148 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.040559217 = 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)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Source
- Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356
