Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Sydes, M."
  • × theme_ss:"Referieren"
  1. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.; Blurton, A.: Obtaining information accurately and quickly : are structured abstracts more efficient? (1996) 0.05
    0.050091933 = product of:
      0.0751379 = sum of:
        0.058109686 = weight(_text_:search in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058109686 = score(doc=7673,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.33256388 = fieldWeight in 7673, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=7673)
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 7673) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=7673,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 7673, 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=7673)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Reports results of 2 studies to determine if structured abstracts offer any advantage to users in terms of whether they are easier to search. In study 1, using a specially prepared electronic database of abstracts in either their original format or the structured format, 52 users were asked to find the answers to 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts in traditional format followed by 2 questions for each of 8 abstracts set in the structured format. Time and error data were recorded automatically. In study 2, using a printed database, 56 users were asked to to find 5 abstracts that reprted a particular kind of study and then find 5 more references that reported another kind of study. In study 1 users performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts but there were some unexplainable practice effects. In study 2, the users again performed significantly faster and made fewer errors with structured abstracts. However, there were asymmetrical transfer effects: users who responded first to the structured abstracts responded more quickly to the following traditional abstracts than did those users who responded first to the traditional abstracts. Nevertheless, the overall findings support the hypothesis that it is easier for user to search structured abstracts than it is to search traditional abstracts
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.5, S.349-356
  2. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Structured abstracts in the social sciences : presentation, readability and recall (1995) 0.01
    0.013419857 = product of:
      0.04025957 = sum of:
        0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 2383) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04025957 = score(doc=2383,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 2383, 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=2383)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Reports results of a study to explore the possibilities of extending the use of structured abstracts (which use subheadings such as background, aims, participants method, results, conclusions) of the type often found in biomedical periodicals; to test whether or not such structured abstracts are more easily searched, comprehended and recalled than abstracts set in the traditional manner; and to examine readers' preferences for different typographic settings for structured abstracts. Results indicated: that it is possible to produce structured abstracts for periodical articles in the social sciences; and that such abstracts may be easier to read, search and recall than abstracts presented in the traditional manner. Suggests that abstracts use 6 subheadings (background, aims, method, results, conclusions, and, optionally, comment) and recommends that these subheadings are conveyed in bold capital letters and, ideally, set apart from the main text by printer's rules
  3. Hartley, J.; Sydes, M.: Which layout do you prefer? : an analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layouts of structured abstracts (1996) 0.01
    0.0068112854 = product of:
      0.020433856 = sum of:
        0.020433856 = product of:
          0.040867712 = sum of:
            0.040867712 = weight(_text_:22 in 4411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.040867712 = score(doc=4411,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4411, 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=4411)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Source
    Journal of information science. 22(1996) no.1, S.27-37

Authors

Types