Search (44 results, page 1 of 3)

0.11298187 = product of:
  0.28245467 = sum of:
    0.1503792 = weight(_text_:great in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1503792 = score(doc=1589,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24172091 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.62211907 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
    0.13207546 = product of:
      0.26415092 = sum of:
        0.26415092 = weight(_text_:britain in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.26415092 = score(doc=1589,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.320366 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.462781 = idf(docFreq=68, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.8245286 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.462781 = idf(docFreq=68, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This article discusses the major catalog use studies that have been conducted in the United States and Great Britain. The potential to influence the construction of new online public access catalogs is emphasized. The cumulative findings could serve as an information base which designers of OPAC systems could refer to in the course of their work

0.07908731 = product of:
  0.19771826 = sum of:
    0.10526544 = weight(_text_:great in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10526544 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24172091 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.43548337 = fieldWeight in 367, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=367)
    0.092452824 = product of:
      0.18490565 = sum of:
        0.18490565 = weight(_text_:britain in 367) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18490565 = score(doc=367,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.320366 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.462781 = idf(docFreq=68, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.57717 = fieldWeight in 367, 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=367)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

0.043070473 = product of:
  0.10767618 = sum of:
    0.09022752 = weight(_text_:great in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09022752 = score(doc=917,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24172091 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.37327147 = fieldWeight in 917, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=917)
    0.017448656 = product of:
      0.034897313 = sum of:
        0.034897313 = weight(_text_:22 in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034897313 = score(doc=917,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 917, 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=917)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

I started my professional career in library and information science because of my great interest in knowledge organization. The more experience I gained in the profession, the more I realized how crucial it is to understand which organization would be best for each group of users. This in turn requires an understanding of how users seek information. And so now my focus is an studying information seeking and searching behavior. Throughout the relatively long course of changing my focus, I followed Pauline Cochrane's writings. Now I can say that she has been among the first to have a "user-centered approach" to knowledge organization, and she has used the term three years before it became a mainstream phrase. The following is a short discussion about the usercentered approach which was presented in a workshop in 1997.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.041189786 = product of:
  0.20594893 = sum of:
    0.20594893 = weight(_text_:business in 546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.20594893 = score(doc=546,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.21714608 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.94843495 = fieldWeight in 546, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=546)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This study seeks to explore and report international business students' perceptions and expectations of electronic library services at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. A total of 143 international business students an campus volunteered to fill out a survey. The results were analyzed using descriptive statistics as weIl as inferential statistics such as t-tests and correlation. A significant portion of international business students has no prior experience with electronic library services in their home countries. Moreover, about a half of international business students go to libraries other than the Business and Economics Library, partly because they provide better environment for study. Although electronic resources are available without the constraint of location, providing reference services for those who do not use the Business and Economics Library becomes a challenge. Virtual reference is an excellent tool, but most international business students do not see it as an important library service. Based an the results, implications for information literacy and virtual reference service are discussed.

0.03589206 = product of:
  0.08973014 = sum of:
    0.0751896 = weight(_text_:great in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0751896 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24172091 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 1257, 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=1257)
    0.014540548 = product of:
      0.029081097 = sum of:
        0.029081097 = weight(_text_:22 in 1257) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029081097 = score(doc=1257,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1257, 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=1257)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

In conjunction with the American Society for Information Science and Technology's (ASIST) annual meeting in fall 2001, the Special Interest Group an Information Needs, Seeking, and Use (SIG USE) sponsored a research symposium an "Effective Methods for Studying Information Seeking and Use." The symposium was intended to address the SIG's goal of promoting studies of human information behavior by focusing an the research methods that can most effectively be used to study information needs, information seeking, information use, and other human information behaviors. The symposium included the presentation of six refereed articles, which were revised based an the discussion at the symposium and are included here. The six articles describe the application of a variety of research methods, singly or in combination. Some of the methods are most appropriate for studying individuals and their interactions with information, while others can be applied to studying group behaviors. The studies were conducted in a variety of settings, from a Web-searching laboratory to an archive, from hospitals to the great outdoors (i.e., forest and river sites). Each method or set of methods was applied to a particular user group, including young children, teenagers, and adults. Each article makes a unique contribution to our repertoire of research methods, as briefly reviewed here.

Date

20. 1.2003 9:37:22

0.03363132 = product of:
  0.16815661 = sum of:
    0.16815661 = weight(_text_:business in 671) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16815661 = score(doc=671,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.21714608 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.7743939 = fieldWeight in 671, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=671)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Investigates library use and research behaviour of business students at California State University at San Marcos. A sample of 68 graduate and 91 undergraduate students were surveyed and observed for their behaviour in 3 conceptual domains: query formulation and task assignments, prereference process expectations and post reference process responses. Participant observations confirmed many of the student attitudes revealed in the survey

Footnote

Contribution to an issue devoted to business reference services and sources: how end users and librarians work together

0.024027376 = product of:
  0.12013688 = sum of:
    0.12013688 = weight(_text_:business in 4115) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12013688 = score(doc=4115,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21714608 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.5532537 = fieldWeight in 4115, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4115)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This representative study of German search engine users (N?=?1,000) focuses on the ability of users to distinguish between organic results and advertisements on Google results pages. We combine questions about Google's business with task-based studies in which users were asked to distinguish between ads and organic results in screenshots of results pages. We find that only a small percentage of users can reliably distinguish between ads and organic results, and that user knowledge of Google's business model is very limited. We conclude that ads are insufficiently labelled as such, and that many users may click on ads assuming that they are selecting organic results.

0.018045506 = product of:
  0.09022752 = sum of:
    0.09022752 = weight(_text_:great in 1320) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09022752 = score(doc=1320,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24172091 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.37327147 = fieldWeight in 1320, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1320)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

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.

0.012135657 = product of:
  0.06067828 = sum of:
    0.06067828 = weight(_text_:business in 5175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06067828 = score(doc=5175,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21714608 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.2794353 = fieldWeight in 5175, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5175)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Griesdorf and O'Connor attempt to determine the aspects of a retrieved item that provide a questioner with evidence that the item is in fact on the topic searched independent of its relevance. To this end they collect data from 32 participants, 11 from the business community as well as 21 doctoral students at the University of North Texas each of whom were asked to state if they considered material that approaches a topic in each of 14 specific manners as " on topic" or "off topic." Chi-square indicates that the observed values are significantly different from expected values and the chi-square residuals for on topic judgements exceed plus or minus two in eight cases and plus two in five cases. The positive values which indicate a percentage of response greater than that from chance suggest that documents considered topical are only related to the problem at hand, contain terms that were in the query, and describe, explain or expand the topic of the query. The chi-square residuals for off topic judgements exceed plus or minus two in ten cases and plus two in four cases. The positive values suggest that documents considered not topical exhibit a contrasting, contrary, or confounding point of view, or merely spark curiosity. Such material might well be relevant, but is not judged topical. This suggests that topical appropriateness may best be achieved using the Bruza, et alia, left compositional monotonicity approach.

0.012135657 = product of:
  0.06067828 = sum of:
    0.06067828 = weight(_text_:business in 221) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06067828 = score(doc=221,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21714608 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.2794353 = fieldWeight in 221, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.0583196 = idf(docFreq=763, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=221)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In this article, we report results of an investigation into the effect of sponsored links on ecommerce information seeking on the Web. In this research, 56 participants each engaged in six ecommerce Web searching tasks. We extracted these tasks from the transaction log of a Web search engine, so they represent actual ecommerce searching information needs. Using 60 organic and 30 sponsored Web links, the quality of the Web search engine results was controlled by switching nonsponsored and sponsored links on half of the tasks for each participant. This allowed for investigating the bias toward sponsored links while controlling for quality of content. The study also investigated the relationship between searching self-efficacy, searching experience, types of ecommerce information needs, and the order of links on the viewing of sponsored links. Data included 2,453 interactions with links from result pages and 961 utterances evaluating these links. The results of the study indicate that there is a strong preference for nonsponsored links, with searchers viewing these results first more than 82% of the time. Searching self-efficacy and experience does not increase the likelihood of viewing sponsored links, and the order of the result listing does not appear to affect searcher evaluation of sponsored links. The implications for sponsored links as a long-term business model are discussed.

0.012030336 = product of:
  0.060151678 = sum of:
    0.060151678 = weight(_text_:great in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060151678 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.24172091 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.042928502 = queryNorm
        0.24884763 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

1. Introduction A small study is described which investigated the vocabulary as reflected in the knowledge structures of novices. The research was conducted in order to understand how knowledge organization tools may be designed to meet the needs of novices in the GROW digital library. GROW is the Geo-technical, Rock, and Water digital library, the first step in the establishment of a National Civil Engineering Resources Library (NCERL). Digital libraries are complex entities that have many components: besides the collections of individual resources and the interface to these resources, they have organization, labelling, navigation and searching systems. Controlled vocabularies and thesauri are often the invisible components. This study is based an the premise that the controlled vocabulary influences the above mentioned related components in the digital library. We felt that it was important to understand the knowledge structures of a primary group of user, the novice - the student learner - who is new to the domain. A great deal of research has been done about how people learn and how people use information, but fewer studies link science knowledge structures, vocabulary, and language use.

0.008142707 = product of:
  0.040713534 = sum of:
    0.040713534 = product of:
      0.08142707 = sum of:
        0.08142707 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08142707 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 1.2000 17:52:11

0.008142707 = product of:
  0.040713534 = sum of:
    0.040713534 = product of:
      0.08142707 = sum of:
        0.08142707 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08142707 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

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

0.0069794627 = product of:
  0.034897313 = sum of:
    0.034897313 = product of:
      0.069794625 = sum of:
        0.069794625 = weight(_text_:22 in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069794625 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

9. 2.2008 17:52:22

0.0046529756 = product of:
  0.023264877 = sum of:
    0.023264877 = product of:
      0.046529755 = sum of:
        0.046529755 = weight(_text_:22 in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046529755 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1628, 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=1628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

29. 7.1998 10:57:22

0.0046529756 = product of:
  0.023264877 = sum of:
    0.023264877 = product of:
      0.046529755 = sum of:
        0.046529755 = weight(_text_:22 in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046529755 = score(doc=3687,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3687, 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=3687)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 5.1999 19:07:29

0.0046529756 = product of:
  0.023264877 = sum of:
    0.023264877 = product of:
      0.046529755 = sum of:
        0.046529755 = weight(_text_:22 in 5299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046529755 = score(doc=5299,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5299, 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=5299)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2006 18:17:44

0.0046529756 = product of:
  0.023264877 = sum of:
    0.023264877 = product of:
      0.046529755 = sum of:
        0.046529755 = weight(_text_:22 in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046529755 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2905, 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=2905)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 2.2009 18:50:43

0.0040713535 = product of:
  0.020356767 = sum of:
    0.020356767 = product of:
      0.040713534 = sum of:
        0.040713534 = weight(_text_:22 in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040713534 = score(doc=760,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 760, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=760)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

The degree of variability in the percentage of subject searching in an online public access catalog (OPAC) among branch libraries of one university was studied. A full semester's worth of transactions was analyzed, not sampled. The time units used were hour of the day, day of the week, and week of the semester. The findings show that subject searching varies from a low of 22% to a high of 74% over the hours of a day. Variability for the days of the week ranged from 17% to 64%, and for the weeks of the semester variability ranged from 12% to 70%. Valuable management information on the utilization of the OPAC within each brach library and among all the branch libraries is provided through numerous charts and graphs.

0.0040713535 = product of:
  0.020356767 = sum of:
    0.020356767 = product of:
      0.040713534 = sum of:
        0.040713534 = weight(_text_:22 in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040713534 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1503283 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.042928502 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7914, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7914)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 22(1993) no.4, S.68-71