Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

0.016939184 = product of:
  0.076226324 = sum of:
    0.028884713 = weight(_text_:data in 8486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028884713 = score(doc=8486,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.24455236 = fieldWeight in 8486, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8486)
    0.047341615 = weight(_text_:processing in 8486) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047341615 = score(doc=8486,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.3130829 = fieldWeight in 8486, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8486)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Source

Emerging communities: integrating networked information into library services. Proceedings of the Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, 4-6 April 1993. Ed.: A.P. Bishop

0.014519301 = product of:
  0.06533685 = sum of:
    0.024758326 = weight(_text_:data in 386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024758326 = score(doc=386,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 386, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=386)
    0.040578526 = weight(_text_:processing in 386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040578526 = score(doc=386,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 386, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=386)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Using subject headings for Online Retrieval is an indispensable tool for online system desingners who are developing new systems or refining exicting ones. The book describes subject analysis and subject searching in online catalogs, including the limitations of retrieval, and demonstrates how such limitations can be overcome through system design and programming. The book describes the Library of Congress Subject headings system and system characteristics, shows how information is stored in machine readable files, and offers examples of and recommendations for successful methods. Tables are included to support these recommendations, and diagrams, graphs, and bar charts are used to provide results of data analyses.

Footnote

Rez. in: Information processing and management 31(1995) no.3, S.450-451 (R.R. Larson); Library resources and technical services 41(1997) no.1, S.60-67 (B.H. Weinberg)

0.011920829 = product of:
  0.05364373 = sum of:
    0.038461216 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038461216 = score(doc=1333,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 1333, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1333)
    0.015182514 = product of:
      0.030365027 = sum of:
        0.030365027 = weight(_text_:22 in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030365027 = score(doc=1333,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037353165 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1333, 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=1333)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

n this article, we report on the first large-scale study of end-user understanding of subject headings. Our objectives were to determine the extent to which children and adults understood subdivided subject headings and to suggest improvements for improving understanding of subject headings. The 1991 Library of Congress Subject Subdivisions Conference suggested standardizing the order of subject subdivisions for the purpose of simplifying subject cataloging, which served as the impetus for the study. We demonstrated that adults understood subject headings better than children; however, both adults and children assigned correct meanings to less than half of the subject headings they examined. Neither subject heading context nor subdivision order had an effect on understanding. Based on our findings, we challenge the library community to make major changes to the Library of Congress Subject Headings system that have the potential to increase end-user understanding of subject headings.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.006043597 = product of:
  0.054392375 = sum of:
    0.054392375 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054392375 = score(doc=5353,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.36948 = fieldWeight in 5353, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5353)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

The impetus for a large-scale study on subject heading understanding was a recommendation of the Library of Congress (LC) Subject Subdivisions Conference that suggested standardizing the order of subject subdivisions for the purpose of simplifying subject cataloging. This paper focuses on unexpected large-scale study findings about multiple meanings for subdivided subject headings and the effects that changes of meaning for different orders of subdivisions had on the meanings that end users and librarians provided to subdivided subject headings. Findings about changes of meaning in subdivided subject headings did not dissuade the authors regarding their recommendation that the library community adopt a standard order of subdivisions. The authors also give suggestions for additional studies of subject heading understanding that build on this one.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 28(1999) no.3, S.19-43

0.0059171617 = product of:
  0.026627228 = sum of:
    0.01650555 = weight(_text_:data in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01650555 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.1397442 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
    0.010121676 = product of:
      0.020243352 = sum of:
        0.020243352 = weight(_text_:22 in 1188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020243352 = score(doc=1188,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037353165 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 1188, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1188)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Surfing the World Wide Web used to be cool, dude, real cool. But things have gotten hot - so hot that finding something useful an the Web is no longer cool. It is suffocating Web searchers in the smoke and debris of mountain-sized lists of hits, decisions about which search engines they should use, whether they will get lost in the dizzying maze of a subject directory, use the right syntax for the search engine at hand, enter keywords that are likely to retrieve hits an the topics they have in mind, or enlist a browser that has sufficient functionality to display the most promising hits. When it comes to Web searching, in a few short years we have gone from the cool image of surfing the Web into the frying pan of searching the Web. We can turn down the heat by rethinking what Web searchers are doing and introduce some order into the chaos. Web search strategies that are tool-based-oriented to specific Web searching tools such as search en gines, subject directories, and meta search engines-have been widely promoted, and these strategies are just not working. It is time to dissect what Web searching tools expect from searchers and adjust our search strategies to these new tools. This discussion offers Web searchers help in the form of search strategies that are based an strategies that librarians have been using for a long time to search commercial information retrieval systems like Dialog, NEXIS, Wilsonline, FirstSearch, and Data-Star.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.005697958 = product of:
  0.051281624 = sum of:
    0.051281624 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5432) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051281624 = score(doc=5432,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 5432, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5432)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 32(2001) no.2, S.5-30

0.0052601793 = product of:
  0.047341615 = sum of:
    0.047341615 = weight(_text_:processing in 6930) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047341615 = score(doc=6930,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.3130829 = fieldWeight in 6930, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6930)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Source

Information processing and management. 32(1996) no.6, S.719-745

0.0042734686 = product of:
  0.038461216 = sum of:
    0.038461216 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038461216 = score(doc=543,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 543, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=543)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 15(1992) no.4, S.19-45

0.0032094126 = product of:
  0.028884713 = sum of:
    0.028884713 = weight(_text_:data in 7435) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028884713 = score(doc=7435,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.24455236 = fieldWeight in 7435, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7435)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Describes the comparative approach to system evaluation used in this research project which delegated the administartion of an online retrieval test to an experimental online catalogue to produce data for evaluating the effectiveness of a new subject access design. Describes the methods enlisted to sort out problem test administration, e.g. to identify out-of-scope queries, incomplete system administration, and suspect post-search questionnaire responses. Covers how w the researchers handled problem search administrations and what actions they would use to reduce or eliminate the occurrence of such administrations in future online retrieval tests that delegate control of retrieval tests to online systems

0.0032094126 = product of:
  0.028884713 = sum of:
    0.028884713 = weight(_text_:data in 2708) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028884713 = score(doc=2708,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.24455236 = fieldWeight in 2708, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2708)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Recognises the limitations of the existing files of Library of Congress name and subject authority records for indirect geographic subdivision. Makes recommendations for enhancements to existing authority records, which would enable online systems to assist in subject heading formulation and verify, with limited assistance by human intermediaries, whether geographic subdivision is authorized for use with a particular main heading and whether the correct form of indirect geographic subdivision is authorized for use with a particular main heading and whether the correct form of indirect geographic subdivision is given. A study of subdivided subject headings in a large bibliographic data base forms the basis of the recommendations

0.0022924377 = product of:
  0.02063194 = sum of:
    0.02063194 = weight(_text_:data in 1713) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02063194 = score(doc=1713,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 1713, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1713)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

User studies demonstrate that nondomain experts do not use the same information-seeking strategies as domain experts. Because of the transformation of integrated library systems into Information Gateways in the late 1990s, both nondomain experts and domain experts have had available to them the wide range of information-seeking strategies in a single system. This article describes the results of a study to answer three research questions: (1) do nondomain experts enlist the strategies of domain experts? (2) if they do, how did they learn about these strategies? and (3) are they successful using them? Interviews, audio recordings, screen captures, and observations were used to gather data from 14 undergraduate students who searched an academic library's Information Gateway. The few times that the undergraduates in this study enlisted search strategies that were characteristic of domain experts, it usually took perseverance, trial-and-error, serendipity, or a combination of all three for them to find useful information. Although this study's results provide no compelling reasons for systems to support features that make domain-expert strategies possible, there is need for system features that scaffold nondomain experts from their usual strategies to the strategies characteristic of domain experts.