Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.077567935 = product of:
  0.15513587 = sum of:
    0.15513587 = sum of:
      0.099512465 = weight(_text_:media in 336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.099512465 = score(doc=336,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24036849 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.6838713 = idf(docFreq=1110, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051318336 = queryNorm
          0.41399965 = fieldWeight in 336, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.6838713 = idf(docFreq=1110, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=336)
      0.05562341 = weight(_text_:22 in 336) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05562341 = score(doc=336,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17970806 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051318336 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 336, 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=336)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The growing interest in end user or direct patron access to on-line bibliographic databases is reviewed with references to online catalogues, databases, and CD-ROMs. The literature of end user searching is surveyed with notes on: user training, software search aids, end user services in libraries: characterisation of end user searches; the role of librarians; and CD-ROMs as end user media

Source

Annual review of information science and technology. 22(1987), S.227-263

0.038086683 = product of:
  0.076173365 = sum of:
    0.076173365 = product of:
      0.15234673 = sum of:
        0.15234673 = weight(_text_:media in 163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15234673 = score(doc=163,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.24036849 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6838713 = idf(docFreq=1110, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051318336 = queryNorm
            0.6338049 = fieldWeight in 163, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.6838713 = idf(docFreq=1110, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=163)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Analyzing social media has become a common way for capturing and understanding people's opinions, sentiments, interests, and reactions to ongoing events. Social media has thus become a rich and real-time source for various kinds of public opinion and sentiment studies. According to psychology and neuroscience, human emotions are known to be strongly dependent on sensory perceptions. Although sensation is the most fundamental antecedent of human emotions, prior works have not looked into their relation to emotions based on social media texts. In this paper, we report the results of our study on sensation effects that underlie human emotions as revealed in social media. We focus on the key five types of sensations: sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste. We first establish a correlation between emotion and sensation in terms of linguistic expressions. Then, in the second part of the paper, we define novel features useful for extracting sensation information from social media. Finally, we design a method to classify texts into ones associated with different types of sensations. The sensation dataset resulting from this research is opened to the public to foster further studies.

0.015548823 = product of:
  0.031097647 = sum of:
    0.031097647 = product of:
      0.062195294 = sum of:
        0.062195294 = weight(_text_:media in 5249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.062195294 = score(doc=5249,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24036849 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6838713 = idf(docFreq=1110, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051318336 = queryNorm
            0.25874978 = fieldWeight in 5249, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6838713 = idf(docFreq=1110, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5249)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study investigates motivations for self-archiving research items on academic social networking sites (ASNSs). A model of these motivations was developed based on two existing motivation models: motivation for self-archiving in academia and motivations for information sharing in social media. The proposed model is composed of 18 factors drawn from personal, social, professional, and external contexts, including enjoyment, personal/professional gain, reputation, learning, self-efficacy, altruism, reciprocity, trust, community interest, social engagement, publicity, accessibility, self-archiving culture, influence of external actors, credibility, system stability, copyright concerns, additional time, and effort. Two hundred and twenty-six ResearchGate users participated in the survey. Accessibility was the most highly rated factor, followed by altruism, reciprocity, trust, self-efficacy, reputation, publicity, and others. Personal, social, and professional factors were also highly rated, while external factors were rated relatively low. Motivations were correlated with one another, demonstrating that RG motivations for self-archiving could increase or decrease based on several factors in combination with motivations from the personal, social, professional, and external contexts. We believe the findings from this study can increase our understanding of users' motivations in sharing their research and provide useful implications for the development and improvement of ASNS services, thereby attracting more active users.

0.0121676205 = product of:
  0.024335241 = sum of:
    0.024335241 = product of:
      0.048670482 = sum of:
        0.048670482 = weight(_text_:22 in 332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048670482 = score(doc=332,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17970806 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051318336 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 332, 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=332)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Contribution to a special issue of selected papers from the Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (PAKDD'97), held Singapore, 22-23 Feb 1997