Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

0.04626411 = product of:
  0.06939616 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
    0.03584652 = product of:
      0.07169304 = sum of:
        0.07169304 = weight(_text_:engines in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07169304 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.25542772 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2806784 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.080822 = idf(docFreq=746, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Purpose - This article is an edited version of a report commissioned by the British Library and JISC to identify how the specialist researchers of the future (those born after 1993) are likely to access and interact with digital resources in five to ten years' time. The purpose is to investigate the impact of digital transition on the information behaviour of the Google Generation and to guide library and information services to anticipate and react to any new or emerging behaviours in the most effective way. Design/methodology/approach - The study was virtually longitudinal and is based on a number of extensive reviews of related literature, survey data mining and a deep log analysis of a British Library and a JISC web site intended for younger people. Findings - The study shows that much of the impact of ICTs on the young has been overestimated. The study claims that although young people demonstrate an apparent ease and familiarity with computers, they rely heavily on search engines, view rather than read and do not possess the critical and analytical skills to assess the information that they find on the web. Originality/value - The paper reports on a study that overturns the common assumption that the "Google generation" is the most web-literate.

0.03371857 = product of:
  0.050577857 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=228,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 228, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=228)
    0.017028214 = product of:
      0.03405643 = sum of:
        0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03405643 = score(doc=228,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 228, 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=228)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Presents a brief, critical review of LISA PLaus: the CD-ROM database version of LISA and which includes the database of Current Research in Library and Information Science (CRLIS). The review covers the DOS version only, as it appeared in the Summer 1996 CD-ROM, noting that the Windows version was planned for the future. Points to the way LISA has found its mark, if not its fortune, in LISA Plus and notes its strengths, including: ideal suitability for current awareness in library and information science (LIS); massive and convenient consolidation of the published LIS literature; and massive increase in coverage from 7.900 abstracts in 1993 to over 12.000 currently. Criticizes certain features of LISA Plus, notably: the OPTI-Ware search interface; the combination of 2 databases (LISA and CRLIS) in a single, searchable database; and certain unexpected effects caused by the building of the Subject and Free Text indexes. Points particularly to great lack of consistency in the indexes and the indexing (faults that were fully rectified by a complete overhaul of the data in Summer 1996). Notes that LISA Plus is the first port of call for both information researchers and information science students. The Windows version of LISA Plus was launched in Spring 1997

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22

0.015656501 = product of:
  0.0469695 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Examines the searching behaviour of Guardian journalists searching FT PROFILE online system. Using transactional log analysis compares the searching styles of journalists with those of Guardian librarians. In some respects end users conform to the picture that professionals have of them - they search with a very limited range of commands - but in other respects they confound that image - they are very quick and economical searchers. Their behaviour relates to their general information seeking behaviour, and their searching styles would be seen in this regard

0.015656501 = product of:
  0.0469695 = sum of:
    0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0469695 = score(doc=696,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 696, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=696)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Nowadays, end-users have quick and direct access to massive amount of information available on the Net. However, this information is unorganized expecting users to be able to identify and evaluate it in accordance with their information needs. Subject based information Gateways SBIG, organized collections of networked information, provide users with a catalogue of authoritative Internet resources, which can be searched and/ or browsed. This paper provides an evaluation of one such gateway - the Art, Design, Architecture & Media Gateway ADAM. It provides information on who these users are, how often they use the service, what their reasons for use are, which search methods and services they prefer and what are the advantages and disadvantages of an online information service.

0.013419857 = product of:
  0.04025957 = sum of:
    0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 4440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04025957 = score(doc=4440,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.230407 = fieldWeight in 4440, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4440)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Collating data from a number of log and questionnaire studies conducted largely into the use of a range of consumer health digital information platforms, Centre for Information Behaviour and the Evaluation of Research (Ciber) researchers describe some new thoughts on characterising (and naming) information seeking behaviour in the digital environment, and in so doing, suggest a new typology of digital users. The characteristic behaviour found is one of bouncing in which users seldom penetrate a site to any depth, tend to visit a number of sites for any given information need and seldom return to sites they once visited. They tend to "feed" for information horizontally, and whether they search a site of not depends heavily on "digital visibility", which in turn creates all the conditions for "bouncing". The question whether this type of information seeking represents a form of "dumbing down or up", and what it all means for publishers, librarians and information providers, who might be working on other, possible outdated usage paradigms, is discussed.

0.013419857 = product of:
  0.04025957 = sum of:
    0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 4231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04025957 = score(doc=4231,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.230407 = fieldWeight in 4231, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4231)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Adopting an intradisciplinary perspective, this article evaluates the information-seeking behavior of academics from different subfields of physics and astronomy. It investigates the effect of interdisciplinarity (reliance on the literature of other subjects) and the scatter of literature on two aspects of the information-seeking behavior: methods used for keeping up-to-date and for identifying articles. To this end a survey of 114 PhD students and staff at the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University College London was carried out. The findings showed that the subfields that are more interdisciplinary or have a more scattered literature are more likely to use general search facilities for finding information. The study also showed that cross-disciplinary use of the literature is not necessarily an indicator of scattered literature. The study reveals intradisciplinary differences among physicists and astronomers in terms of their information-seeking behavior and highlights the risk of overlooking the characteristics of information-seeking behavior of specialized subject communities by focusing on very broad subject categories.

0.012652363 = product of:
  0.037957087 = sum of:
    0.037957087 = weight(_text_:search in 5832) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.037957087 = score(doc=5832,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.21722981 = fieldWeight in 5832, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5832)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The study set out to determine: (1) what were the searching characteristics of end-users in a non-academic environment and explain this in the light of their information needs; (2) whether these characteristics were those that were ascribed to end users in the professional literature; (3) whether they differed materially from those of information professionals working in the same fields. Searching characteristics were interpreted in their widest sense to include: command utilisation/knowledge; search success a satisfaction; volume of searching; searching style / approach; duration of searches; file selection; willingness to delegate and levels of training. These issues were explored in relation to 2 practitioner groups - journalists from he Guardian newspaper, and politicians from The House of Commons. Comparative data were also sought from information professionals in these 2 organisations. A mixture of social and statistical methods was used to monitor end-user and professional searching, though transactional log analysis was strongly featured. Altogether the searching behaviour of 170 end users was evaluated in the light of the searching behaviour of 70 librarians. The principal findings were that: in some respects end users did conform to the picture that information professionals have of them: they did seartch with a limited range of commands; more of their searches produced no results, and search statements were simplly constructed. But in other respects they confounded their image - they could be very quick and economical searchers, and they did not display meters of print-out. However, there were variations between individual end users, and it was often possible to find an end-user group that matched an information professional group on one aspect of online searching or another. The online behaviour of end users was very much related to their general information seeking behaviour; and to the fact that they were not trained

0.011352143 = product of:
  0.03405643 = sum of:
    0.03405643 = product of:
      0.06811286 = sum of:
        0.06811286 = weight(_text_:22 in 5941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06811286 = score(doc=5941,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5941, 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=5941)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

26. 2.2008 19:22:51

0.011183213 = product of:
  0.03354964 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 214) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=214,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 214, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=214)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The article presents the early findings of an exploratory deep log analysis of journal usage on OhioLINK, conducted as part of the MaxData project, funded by the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services. OhioLINK, the original Big Deal, provides a single digital platform of nearly 6,000 full-text journals for more than 600,000 people; for the purposes of the analysis, the raw logs were obtained from OhioLINK for the period June 2004 to December 2004. During this period approximately 1,215,000 items were viewed on campus in October 2004 and 1,894,000 items viewed off campus between June and December 2004. This article provides an analysis of the age of material that users consulted. From a methodological point of view OhioLINK offered an attractive platform to conduct age of publication usage studies because it is one of the oldest e-journal libraries and thus offered a relatively long archive and stable platform to conduct the studies. The project sought to determine whether the subject, the search approach adopted, and the type of journal item viewed (contents page, abstract, full-text article, etc.) was a factor in regard to the age of articles used.

0.011183213 = product of:
  0.03354964 = sum of:
    0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 990) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03354964 = score(doc=990,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05027291 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 990, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=990)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The article employs deep log analysis (DLA) techniques, a more sophisticated form of transaction log analysis, to demonstrate what usage data can disclose about information seeking behaviour of virtual scholars - academics, and researchers. DLA works with the raw server log data, not the processed, pre-defined and selective data provided by journal publishers. It can generate types of analysis that are not generally available via proprietary web logging software because the software filters out relevant data and makes unhelpful assumptions about the meaning of the data. DLA also enables usage data to be associated with search/navigational and/or user demographic data, hence the name 'deep'. In this connection the usage of two digital journal libraries, those of EmeraldInsight, and Blackwell Synergy are investigated. The information seeking behaviour of nearly three million users is analyzed in respect to the extent to which they penetrate the site, the number of visits made, as well as the type of items and content they view. The users are broken down by occupation, place of work, type of subscriber ("Big Deal", non-subscriber, etc.), geographical location, type of university (old and new), referrer link used, and number of items viewed in a session.

0.0068112854 = product of:
  0.020433856 = sum of:
    0.020433856 = product of:
      0.040867712 = sum of:
        0.040867712 = weight(_text_:22 in 2680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040867712 = score(doc=2680,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2680, 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=2680)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

23. 2.2009 17:22:41