Search (76 results, page 2 of 4)

0.02260277 = product of:
  0.06780831 = sum of:
    0.06780831 = weight(_text_:electronic in 816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06780831 = score(doc=816,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.34555468 = fieldWeight in 816, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=816)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.02260277 = product of:
  0.06780831 = sum of:
    0.06780831 = weight(_text_:electronic in 3640) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06780831 = score(doc=3640,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.34555468 = fieldWeight in 3640, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3640)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Members of the reference staff of the North Carolina University at Chapel Hill, Davis Library, conducted a month-long electronic survey of users of the U-search CD-ROM service in spring 91. Evaluates the 1.135 responses to a variety of questions pertaining to public service issues, user attitudes towards CD-ROM searching, and the place of CD-ROM within the overall research strategy

0.02260277 = product of:
  0.06780831 = sum of:
    0.06780831 = weight(_text_:electronic in 4927) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06780831 = score(doc=4927,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.34555468 = fieldWeight in 4927, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4927)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.02260277 = product of:
  0.06780831 = sum of:
    0.06780831 = weight(_text_:electronic in 5710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06780831 = score(doc=5710,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.34555468 = fieldWeight in 5710, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5710)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.019978218 = product of:
  0.05993465 = sum of:
    0.05993465 = weight(_text_:electronic in 3671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05993465 = score(doc=3671,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.30543008 = fieldWeight in 3671, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3671)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The study of information needs has long be acknowlegded as one of the most important factors in the design of information services but has been hampered by the severe problem of designing user studies that will reliably measure them. Reviews the literature of previous research in this field, concluding that time and money are the chief constraints on information seeking behaviour. Describes a new observational technique for identifying the information needs of users and reports results of a small scale experiment to test the methodology. The observational technique involves the researcher being with the subject continuously throughout the day and observing their actions. The behaviour recorded was any action taken in order to answer a question. A small scale study was undertaken of 3 academics from the Psychology Department, University of Strathclyde, using the observational technique. The preferred technique of all the academics was to carry out their own research, followed by consultation with other individuals. One lecturer was a significantly heavier user of electronic media than the other two. The preferred physical locations of the information sources were personal collections and the University Library. One lecturer consistently used a wide range of sources while the other two strongly preferred to use personal contacts. Informal sources were found to be twice as popular as formal sources. A follow up questionnaire survey examined the possibility that previous training in the use of the library could explain the differences in the use of electronic information sources but results were found to be negative. Concludes that the new research tool developed for this type of study is both robust and likely to yield reliable information about user information needs

0.019978218 = product of:
  0.05993465 = sum of:
    0.05993465 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2388) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05993465 = score(doc=2388,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.30543008 = fieldWeight in 2388, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2388)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Hypothesizing that workplace significantly affects information-seeking patterns, this study compared accessibility and use of information sources among 233 Israeli computer scientists and software engineers, employed in industry and academy, using a mail questionnaire, which yielded a usable reply rate of 33%. The two groups were found to differ significantly in age, education, seniority, and type of research they performed (basic vs. applied). Printed textbooks, professional journals, and oral discussions with colleagues or experts in the organization were common to both groups, topping almost all lists of accessibility and use. For most information sources, however, the two groups differed significantly and consistently. Printed professional journals as weIl as printed and electronic conference or meeting papers were consistently more accessible and more often used by the academy group, while the industry group reported greater access to and more frequent use of electronic textbooks and trade or promotional literature. In regard to handbooks and standards, in-house technical reports (printed), government technical reports (Internet), librarians and technical specialists (Internet), and oral discussions with supervisors, no significant differences in accessibility were found, but their use by the industry group was much higher. In both groups, accessibility was only partly related to use, and more so among the academy than the industry group.

0.019777425 = product of:
  0.059332274 = sum of:
    0.059332274 = weight(_text_:electronic in 855) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059332274 = score(doc=855,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.30236036 = fieldWeight in 855, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=855)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The project explored the ways in which the online catalogue contributes, or does not contribute to the success of library users. Key issues examined included: whether students are really getting appropriate assistance when using the online catalogue; the most common searching successes and failures observed for people using the online catalogue without staff assistance; and the effectiveness of online catalogue use by librarians providing reference assistance compared to other sources (reference books, electronic and printed indexes). Reviews relevant studies of online catalogues and reference success and describes the methodology and results of 3 different online catalogue studies: the Reference Assessment Survey; the online catalogue study of unassisted users; and the document availability study; all conducted at San José State University Library; California, using the Reference Transaction Assessment Instrument. Considers the implications of the results for reference practice and study methodology

0.019777425 = product of:
  0.059332274 = sum of:
    0.059332274 = weight(_text_:electronic in 1745) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059332274 = score(doc=1745,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.30236036 = fieldWeight in 1745, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1745)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Contribution to a special issue devoted to papers read at the 1996 Electronic Access to Fiction research seminar at Copenhagen, Denmark

0.019777425 = product of:
  0.059332274 = sum of:
    0.059332274 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2070) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059332274 = score(doc=2070,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.30236036 = fieldWeight in 2070, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2070)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Part of an issue devoted to electronic resources and their use in libraries, from the viewpoint of reference services, with an emphasis on the Internet and Geographic Information Systems

0.018720087 = product of:
  0.056160256 = sum of:
    0.056160256 = product of:
      0.11232051 = sum of:
        0.11232051 = weight(_text_:publishing in 3113) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11232051 = score(doc=3113,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.45802903 = fieldWeight in 3113, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3113)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

An international survey of over 3,600 researchers examined how trustworthiness and quality are determined for making decisions on scholarly reading, citing, and publishing and how scholars perceive changes in trust with new forms of scholarly communication. Although differences in determining trustworthiness and authority of scholarly resources exist among age groups and fields of study, traditional methods and criteria remain important across the board. Peer review is considered the most important factor for determining the quality and trustworthiness of research. Researchers continue to read abstracts, check content for sound arguments and credible data, and rely on journal rankings when deciding whether to trust scholarly resources in reading, citing, or publishing. Social media outlets and open access publications are still often not trusted, although many researchers believe that open access has positive implications for research, especially if the open access journals are peer reviewed.

0.016952079 = product of:
  0.050856233 = sum of:
    0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 4873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050856233 = score(doc=4873,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.259166 = fieldWeight in 4873, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4873)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

As part of ongoing investigation of information seeking behaviour of end users in electronic environments, a comparison was made of those users having expertise in a topic area and those with expertise in online searching. Computer scientists and online search specialists conducted assigned searches in a HyperCard database on the topic of hypertext. Both groups of experts were able to conduct successful searches and outperformed a novice control group. Search specialists took slightly less time tahn the domain experts, modified queries by adding terms found in the text, and tended to focus on query formulation. Domain experts focused on the text and used their domain knowledge for further question answering

0.016952079 = product of:
  0.050856233 = sum of:
    0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 5651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050856233 = score(doc=5651,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.259166 = fieldWeight in 5651, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5651)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Reports on a study conducted at Indiana University in the summer of 1993 which observed 10 advanced graduate students in language and literature studies as they conducted literature searches using databases on CD-ROM. Presents a brief review of related literature on relevance judgements, human-computer interaction (HCI) and information seeking behaviour of humanities students. The search strategies of the graduate students under study were found to be typical of humanities scholars, who create large sets and review records quickly to select relevant items. Factors influencing relevance assessments included language, source of publication, author, and length of work. Participants especially appreciated electronic access to the Modern Language Association (MLA) International Bibliography but encountered problems with the controlled vocabulary and analytic entries for books and proceedings. The study has identified problems with database content, presentation and search interfaces which should be considered by system designers

0.016952079 = product of:
  0.050856233 = sum of:
    0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 1547) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050856233 = score(doc=1547,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.259166 = fieldWeight in 1547, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1547)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Contribution to a special issue devoted to electronic newspapers

0.016952079 = product of:
  0.050856233 = sum of:
    0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 1320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050856233 = score(doc=1320,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.259166 = fieldWeight in 1320, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1320)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

User studies provide libraries with invaluable insight into their users' information needs and behaviors, allowing them to develop services that correspond to these needs. This insight has become even more important for libraries since the advent of the Internet. The Internet has brought about a development of information technologies and electronic information sources that have had a great impact on both the ways users search for information and the ways libraries manage information. Although humanists represent an important group of users for academic libraries, research studies into their information-seeking behavior since the advent of the Internet have been quite scarce (Ellis & Oldman, 2005) in the past decade. This study presents updated research on a group of humanists, Jewish studies scholars living in Israel, as information users in the digital age based on two categories: (a) the use of formal and informal information channels, and (b) the use of information technologies and their impact on humanistic research.

0.016952079 = product of:
  0.050856233 = sum of:
    0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2263) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050856233 = score(doc=2263,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.259166 = fieldWeight in 2263, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2263)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

The objective of this research was to investigate the extent to which thesauri have the potential to support the search behaviour of nanoscience and technology researchers while interacting with an electronic book digital library. Transaction log data was obtained from a nanoscience and technology digital library to investigate the nature, type and characteristics of users' queries and search terms. The specific objectives was to assess the extent to which users' search terms matched with those found in two well-established thesauri attached o the INSPEC and Compendex databases.

0.016952079 = product of:
  0.050856233 = sum of:
    0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 4563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050856233 = score(doc=4563,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.259166 = fieldWeight in 4563, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4563)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The study reported here investigated the search behaviour patterns of nanoscience and nanotechnology searchers as revealed by transaction log analysis of the NANOnetBASE electronic book digital library. This paper examines the patterns and strategies of nano searchers' query formulation and reformulation, then explores the extent of interdisciplinarity in search queries using the INSPEC and Compendex thesauri. The results show certain query formulation patterns associated with searching in an emerging and interdisciplinary area of nanotechnology such as: the use of multiword and compound query terms, extensive use of search terms beginning with the prefix "nano," hyphenated terms, spelling variations, a large number of query reformulations, and the use of acronyms. The results also indicate that 62% of the unique top terms resulting from mapping users' query terms to the INSPEC Classification codes represented two or more disciplines, specifically terms associated with the Classification code "A" representing "physics." The results have implications for information organization and representation, user interface design and federated searching in digital libraries and multi-subject databases.

0.016952079 = product of:
  0.050856233 = sum of:
    0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 4986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050856233 = score(doc=4986,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.259166 = fieldWeight in 4986, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4986)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In an effort to understand how academic scientists seek information relevant to their research in today's environment of ubiquitous electronic access, a correlation framework is built and regression analysis is applied to the survey results from 2,063 academic researchers in natural science, engineering, and medical science at five research universities in the United States. Previous work has reported descriptive statistics about these scientists' information-seeking behavior. This study extends that work to examine relationships between scientists' information-seeking behaviors and their personal and environmental factors. Several regression models, including the Poisson model, the logit model, and the ordered logit model, are built to interpret the correlation among scientists' behaviors. In addition, exploratory factor analysis is used for data reduction. Overall, many factors were found to affect the specific information-seeking behaviors of scientists, including demographic, psychological, role-related, and environmental factors. Of the factors having an effect, academic position was the most important determinant of information behavior.

0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7585, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7585)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 1.2000 17:52:11

0.01586778 = product of:
  0.047603343 = sum of:
    0.047603343 = product of:
      0.095206685 = sum of:
        0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.095206685 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3924, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3924)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Library and information science research. 22(2000) no.4, S.371-382

0.014126732 = product of:
  0.042380195 = sum of:
    0.042380195 = weight(_text_:electronic in 8772) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042380195 = score(doc=8772,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.21597168 = fieldWeight in 8772, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=8772)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Electronic library. 12(1994) no.6, S.335-343