Search (115 results, page 1 of 6)

0.17647162 = sum of:
  0.06638509 = product of:
    0.19915526 = sum of:
      0.19915526 = weight(_text_:3a in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.19915526 = score(doc=76,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.42522886 = queryWeight, product of:
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
    0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.11008652 = product of:
    0.22017305 = sum of:
      0.22017305 = weight(_text_:memory in 76) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.22017305 = score(doc=76,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.69641834 = fieldWeight in 76, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=76)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A summary of brain theory is given so far as it is contained within the framework of Localization Theory. Difficulties of this "conventional theory" are traced back to a specific deficiency: there is no way to express relations between active cells (as for instance their representing parts of the same object). A new theory is proposed to cure this deficiency. It introduces a new kind of dynamical control, termed synaptic modulation, according to which synapses switch between a conducting and a non- conducting state. The dynamics of this variable is controlled on a fast time scale by correlations in the temporal fine structure of cellular signals. Furthermore, conventional synaptic plasticity is replaced by a refined version. Synaptic modulation and plasticity form the basis for short-term and long-term memory, respectively. Signal correlations, shaped by the variable network, express structure and relationships within objects. In particular, the figure-ground problem may be solved in this way. Synaptic modulation introduces exibility into cerebral networks which is necessary to solve the invariance problem. Since momentarily useless connections are deactivated, interference between di erent memory traces can be reduced, and memory capacity increased, in comparison with conventional associative memory

Source

http%3A%2F%2Fcogprints.org%2F1380%2F1%2FvdM_correlation.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0g7DvZbQPb2U7dYb49b9v_

0.15249044 = product of:
  0.30498087 = sum of:
    0.30498087 = sum of:
      0.26420766 = weight(_text_:memory in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.26420766 = score(doc=2090,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.83570206 = fieldWeight in 2090, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2090)
      0.040773224 = weight(_text_:22 in 2090) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040773224 = score(doc=2090,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2090, 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=2090)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In order to test how associated verbal and spatial stimuli are processed in memory, undergraduates studied a reference map as either an intact unit or as a series of individual features, and read a text containing facts related to map features. In Addition, the map was presented either before or after reading the text. Seeing the intact map prior to the text led to better recall of both map information and facts from the text. These results support a dual coding modell, where stimuli such as maps possess a retrieval advantage because they allow simultaneous representation in working memory. This advantage occurs because information from the map can be used to cue retrieval of associated verbal facts, without exceeding the processing constraints of the memorial system

Date

22. 7.2000 19:18:18

0.088069215 = product of:
  0.17613843 = sum of:
    0.17613843 = product of:
      0.35227686 = sum of:
        0.35227686 = weight(_text_:memory in 1478) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.35227686 = score(doc=1478,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            1.1142694 = fieldWeight in 1478, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=1478)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.081495024 = product of:
  0.16299005 = sum of:
    0.16299005 = sum of:
      0.12454869 = weight(_text_:memory in 3012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.12454869 = score(doc=3012,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.39395374 = fieldWeight in 3012, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3012)
      0.038441364 = weight(_text_:22 in 3012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.038441364 = score(doc=3012,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.21886435 = fieldWeight in 3012, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3012)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Complexity establishes a paradox between the tasks of preserving old knowledge (memory function) and facilitate cognitive dissonance in order to challenge established knowledge claims and create new knowledge (catalyser function). Through complexity all social systems organisations, discourse communities, ideologies) face an environment (or surrounding) that is characterised through its instability and contingency. What is real, or presumable real from one point of view can appear completely different from another point of view. Different discourses of meaning and significance float, blend and separates themselves form each other the arena of communication. The library has to both keep record of what has happened, as well as take part in the ongoing battles for new discursive hegemonies. The unity of the paradox of memory and catalysing is described as managing complexity and requires a conscious and constant oscillation between order and chaos, stability and change. The role of the librarian is defined through an analysis of contemporary social semantics as well as the technical, ethical, cultural and epistemological challenges facing us as librarians and information specialists.

Date

22. 7.2009 11:23:22

0.077060565 = product of:
  0.15412113 = sum of:
    0.15412113 = product of:
      0.30824226 = sum of:
        0.30824226 = weight(_text_:memory in 2753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.30824226 = score(doc=2753,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.9749857 = fieldWeight in 2753, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2753)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Studies in long-term memory. Ed.: R.A. Kennedy u. A. Wilkes

0.05762568 = product of:
  0.11525136 = sum of:
    0.11525136 = sum of:
      0.088069215 = weight(_text_:memory in 3077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.088069215 = score(doc=3077,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.27856734 = fieldWeight in 3077, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3077)
      0.027182149 = weight(_text_:22 in 3077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027182149 = score(doc=3077,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3077, 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=3077)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The new term Representation of knowledge, applied to the framework of electronic segments of information, with comprehension of new material support for information, and a review and total conceptualisation of the terminology which is being applied, entails a review of all traditional documentary practices. Therefore, a definition of the concept of Representation of knowledge is indispensable. The term representation has been used in westere cultural and intellectual tradition to refer to the diverse ways that a subject comprehends an object. Representation is a process which requires the structure of natural language and human memory whereby it is interwoven in a subject and in conscience. However, at the present time, the term Representation of knowledge is applied to the processing of electronic information, combined with the aim of emulating the human mind in such a way that one has endeavoured to transfer, with great difficulty, the complex structurality of the conceptual representation of human knowledge to new digital information technologies. Thus, nowadays, representation of knowledge has taken an diverse meanings and it has focussed, for the moment, an certain structures and conceptual hierarchies which carry and transfer information, and has initially been based an the current representation of knowledge using artificial intelligence. The traditional languages of documentation, also referred to as languages of representation, offer a structured representation of conceptual fields, symbols and terms of natural and notational language, and they are the pillars for the necessary correspondence between the object or text and its representation. These correspondences, connections and symbolisations will be established within the electronic framework by means of different models and of the "goal" domain, which will give rise to organisations, structures, maps, networks and levels, as new electronic documents are not compact units but segments of information. Thus, the new representation of knowledge refers to data, images, figures and symbolised, treated, processed and structured ideas which replace or refer to documents within the framework of technical processing and the recuperation of electronic information.

Date

2. 1.2005 18:22:25

0.054490052 = product of:
  0.108980104 = sum of:
    0.108980104 = product of:
      0.21796021 = sum of:
        0.21796021 = weight(_text_:memory in 7216) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21796021 = score(doc=7216,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.68941903 = fieldWeight in 7216, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7216)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The history of civilisation is inextricably bound up with the development of methods of recording and transmitting individual experience to successive generations. Collective memory becomes possible because of the development firstly of writing, then of printing. Now, with new media and methods for storing and transmitting information, and new techniques for facilitating access, collective memory refers not only to the evidence of the past, but to the collective experience of individuals in the present: in electronic systems where texts are encoded and decoded by machines, the reader is not obliged to follow an apriori linear approach, but can navigate freely and evade the confines of the original structure

0.054490052 = product of:
  0.108980104 = sum of:
    0.108980104 = product of:
      0.21796021 = sum of:
        0.21796021 = weight(_text_:memory in 4530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.21796021 = score(doc=4530,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.68941903 = fieldWeight in 4530, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4530)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper investigates the problem of the labelling of the library, documentation and information field with particular emphasis on the terms 'information' and 'document'. What influences introduced the concept of 'information' into the library field in the middle of the 20th century? What kind of theoretical orientation have dominated the field, and how are these orientations linked to epistemological assumptions? What is the implication of the recent influence of socially oriented epistemologies for such basic concepts in IS as 'information' and 'document'? The article explores these problems and advocates an approach with emphasis on documents and on the concept 'memory institution' as generic term for the central object of study

0.04741589 = product of:
  0.09483178 = sum of:
    0.09483178 = sum of:
      0.077842936 = weight(_text_:memory in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.077842936 = score(doc=2748,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.2462211 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
      0.016988844 = weight(_text_:22 in 2748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.016988844 = score(doc=2748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050156675 = queryNorm
          0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 2748, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2748)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Bates (2008, p. 843) further writes about her definition of information: "This is the objectivist foundation, the rock bottom minimum of the meaning of information; it informs both articles throughout." This is exactly the focus of my disagreement. If we take a word in a language, it is understood as both being a "pattern of organization of matter and energy" (e.g., a sound) and carrying meaning. But the relation between the physical sign and its meaning is considered an arbitrary relation in linguistics. Any physical material has the potential of carrying any meaning and to inform somebody. The physical stuff in itself is not information until it is used as a sign. An important issue in this debate is whether Bates' examples demonstrate the usefulness of her own position as opposed to mine. Her example about information seeking concerning navigation and how "the very layout of the ship and the design of the bridge promoted the smooth flow of information from the exterior of the ship to the crew and among the crewmembers" (Bates, 2006, pp. 1042-1043) does not justify Bates' definition of information as an objective phenomenon. The design is made for a purpose, and this purpose determines how information should be defined in this context. Bates' view on "curatorial sciences" (2006, p. 1043) is close to Hjorland's suggestions (2000) about "memory institutions," which is based on the subjective understanding of information. However, she does not relate to this proposal, and she does not argue how the objective understanding of information is related to this example. I therefore conclude that Bates' practical examples do not support her objective definition of information, nor do they support her "having it both ways." Finally, I exemplify the consequences of my understanding of information by showing how an archaeologist and a geologist might represent the same stone differently in information systems. Bates (2008, p. 843) writes about this example: "This position is completely consistent with mine." However, this "consistency" was not recognized by Bates until I published my objections and, therefore, this is an indication that my criticism was needed. I certainly share Professor Bates (2008) advice to read her original articles: They contain much important stuff. I just recommend that the reader ignore the parts that argue about information being an objective phenomenon."
References Bates, M.J. (2005). Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science. Information Research, 10(4), paper 239. Available at http://InformationR.net/ir/10-4/paper239.html. Bates, M.J. (2006). Fundamental forms of information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8), 1033-1045. Bates, M.J. (2008). Hjorland's critique of Bates' work on defining information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(5), 842-844. Hjoerland, B. (2000). Documents, memory institutions, and information science. Journal of Documentation, 56, 27-41. Hjoerland, B. (2007). Information: Objective or subjective-situational? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(10), 1448-1456. Karpatschof, B. (2000). Human activity. Contributions to the anthropological sciences from a perspective of activity theory. Copenhagen: Dansk Psykologisk Forlag. Retrieved May 14, 2007, from http://informationr.net/ir/ 12-3/Karpatschof/Karp00.html.

Date

22. 3.2009 18:13:27

0.046705756 = product of:
  0.09341151 = sum of:
    0.09341151 = product of:
      0.18682303 = sum of:
        0.18682303 = weight(_text_:memory in 2089) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18682303 = score(doc=2089,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.5909306 = fieldWeight in 2089, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2089)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Undergraduates studied a thematic map of colonial Ceylon and read an expository text containing facts related to, or not related to, the map theme. Stimulus order (map-text vs. text-map) was varied between subjects, and half of the learners in each stimulus order group received a verbal prime related to the map theme. Subjects in the map-first condition recalled more theme related and unrelated text facts and made more correct inferences involving the theme displayed on the map. Verbal primimng had no effect on memory the theme-related facts or inferences, but reduced recall of unrelated facts. These results were interpreted within the dual coding framework, where maps are encoded as structurally coherent images. Such images are computationally efficient and can be used to retrieve associated text facts and to make the comparative judgements required for inferencing

0.04646956 = product of:
  0.09293912 = sum of:
    0.09293912 = product of:
      0.27881736 = sum of:
        0.27881736 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.27881736 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42522886 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

0.044034608 = product of:
  0.088069215 = sum of:
    0.088069215 = product of:
      0.17613843 = sum of:
        0.17613843 = weight(_text_:memory in 2091) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17613843 = score(doc=2091,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.5571347 = fieldWeight in 2091, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2091)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In 2 experiments, undergraduates studied a city map and then heard a text in which events were associated with map features. Memory for the structural properties of the map directly predicted the recall of text events. These results can be explained by a dual coding model, but not by elaboration theory

0.044034608 = product of:
  0.088069215 = sum of:
    0.088069215 = product of:
      0.17613843 = sum of:
        0.17613843 = weight(_text_:memory in 1865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17613843 = score(doc=1865,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.5571347 = fieldWeight in 1865, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1865)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

With the rapidly changing Web-enabled world, the already existing dichotomy between knowing of and knowing about, or information naïveté, widens daily. This article explores the ethical dilemmas that can result from the lack of information literacy. The article also discusses conditions and consequences of information naïveté, media bias, possessive memory, and limited contexts and abilities. To help avoid information failure, the author recommends producers, contributors, disseminators, and aggregators of information be less information naïve.

0.038530283 = product of:
  0.077060565 = sum of:
    0.077060565 = product of:
      0.15412113 = sum of:
        0.15412113 = weight(_text_:memory in 2088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15412113 = score(doc=2088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.48749286 = fieldWeight in 2088, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2088)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.038530283 = product of:
  0.077060565 = sum of:
    0.077060565 = product of:
      0.15412113 = sum of:
        0.15412113 = weight(_text_:memory in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15412113 = score(doc=2632,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.48749286 = fieldWeight in 2632, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2632)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

How is knowledge acquired and represented in memory? By what process do individuals come to change their ideas, conceptions, or knowledge? Although the first question has been central to cognitive psychologists' research agendas for many years, relatively less is known about the change process. We examine 3 research literatures to broaden our understanding of the process of knowledge change. In particular, we draw on models of conceptual change from cognitive psychology, social psychology, and science education. Each model adds a new perspective on the change process. Based on the literature from these models of change, we developed a new model that represents our reconceptualization of the change process. We describe the model and use it to point out new areas of research to be addressed. Psychology has, at its foundation, an abiding interest in understanding the construction of knowledge. How do individuals come to perceive, know, remember, and learn? How do individuals acquire new knowledge? How is knowledge represented and organized in memory? How do individuals come to change their knowledge? These questions have served as conceptual frameworks for psychological, as well as philosophical, thought for centuries (Hunt, 1993).
A major contribution of cognitive psychology has been the conceptualization of knowledge as memory representations in the form of scripts, frames, or schemata (Anderson & Pearson, 1984; Rumelhart & Ortony, 1977; Shank & Abelson, 1977; Spiro, 1980). Schemata are defined as "packets of integrated information on various topics" (Hunt, 1993 , p.530). Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, cognitive psychologists were interested in describing the nature of these packets of information. Spiro (1980 ) demonstrated the constructive and complex nature of schemata and highlighted contextual factors--including tasks, texts, and situational contexts--that influenced how knowledge is organized in memory. Recently, cognitive researchers have come to view knowledge and schemata as multidimensional (Jetton, Rupley, & Willson, 1995). For example, researchers have differentiated novice and experts' knowledge structures in subject-matter domains (Chase & Simon, 1973; Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982; Larkin, McDermott, Simon, & Simon, 1981; Voss, Greene, Post, & Penner, 1983). Researchers have examined discourse knowledge--knowledge about language and how it works (McCutchen, 1986). Another aspect of knowledge that has been extensively studied is strategic knowledge--knowledge about procedures for accomplishing a goal or task (Alexander & Judy, 1988; J. R. Anderson, 1983a; Prawat, 1989).

0.038441364 = product of:
  0.07688273 = sum of:
    0.07688273 = product of:
      0.15376545 = sum of:
        0.15376545 = weight(_text_:22 in 4042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15376545 = score(doc=4042,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.8754574 = fieldWeight in 4042, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4042)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2000 19:01:22

0.033192545 = product of:
  0.06638509 = sum of:
    0.06638509 = product of:
      0.19915526 = sum of:
        0.19915526 = weight(_text_:3a in 5895) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.19915526 = score(doc=5895,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42522886 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5895, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5895)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Politische Meinung. 381(2001) Nr.1, S.65-74 [https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dgfe.de%2Ffileadmin%2FOrdnerRedakteure%2FSektionen%2FSek02_AEW%2FKWF%2FPublikationen_Reihe_1989-2003%2FBand_17%2FBd_17_1994_355-406_A.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2KcbRsHy5UQ9QRIUyuOLNi]

0.033025958 = product of:
  0.066051915 = sum of:
    0.066051915 = product of:
      0.13210383 = sum of:
        0.13210383 = weight(_text_:memory in 3882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13210383 = score(doc=3882,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.41785103 = fieldWeight in 3882, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3882)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.033025958 = product of:
  0.066051915 = sum of:
    0.066051915 = product of:
      0.13210383 = sum of:
        0.13210383 = weight(_text_:memory in 5952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13210383 = score(doc=5952,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.31615055 = queryWeight, product of:
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.41785103 = fieldWeight in 5952, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              6.30326 = idf(docFreq=219, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5952)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Summarises of a selection of the presentations and workshops under one of the main themes at the Association of Swiss Libraries and Librarians congress held in Yverdon, Sept 1998. Sessions covered comprise: the evolution of Diderot's Encyclopedia (presentation of the confluence of oral and written traditions, in relation to the network of informal contacts underpinning this 18th century work); influence of the written work on our cultural tradition in relation to access to new means of communication (presentation on the respective roles of ideogrammatic and phonomatic representation, and the role of the book as bridge to other media); typographical ornamentation on the Internet (workshop on identifying the provenance of printed material and the Passe-Partout ornament bank, which uses new technology to create a metacatalogue); and publishing memory (workshop on a Swiss foundation seeking to promote, preserve and disseminate contemporary publishing

0.028831026 = product of:
  0.05766205 = sum of:
    0.05766205 = product of:
      0.1153241 = sum of:
        0.1153241 = weight(_text_:22 in 3952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1153241 = score(doc=3952,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17564014 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050156675 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 3952, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3952)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

17. 7.1996 9:33:22
22. 7.2000 19:05:41