Search (246 results, page 1 of 13)

0.07766238 = product of:
  0.15532476 = sum of:
    0.15532476 = sum of:
      0.05599882 = weight(_text_:library in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05599882 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 3924, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3924)
      0.09932593 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09932593 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 3924, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3924)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library and information science research. 22(2000) no.4, S.371-382

0.049079686 = product of:
  0.09815937 = sum of:
    0.09815937 = sum of:
      0.048496403 = weight(_text_:library in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048496403 = score(doc=3599,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 3599, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3599)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=3599,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3599, 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=3599)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Patron queries at a four-year comprehensive college's online public access catalog were examined via transaction logs from March 2007. Three representative days were isolated for a more detailed examination of search characteristics. The results show that library users employed an average of one to three terms in a search, did not use Boolean operators, and made use of limits one-tenth of the time. Failed queries remained problematic, as a full one-third of searches resulted in zero hits. Implications and recommendations for improvements in the online public access catalog are discussed.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 52(2008) no.4, S.230-237

0.04811638 = product of:
  0.09623276 = sum of:
    0.09623276 = sum of:
      0.0536645 = weight(_text_:library in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0536645 = score(doc=1333,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.38975742 = fieldWeight in 1333, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1333)
      0.042568255 = weight(_text_:22 in 1333) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042568255 = score(doc=1333,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = 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)

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

Source

Library resources and technical services. 43(1999) no.3, S.140-160

0.044630054 = product of:
  0.08926011 = sum of:
    0.08926011 = sum of:
      0.039597142 = weight(_text_:library in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039597142 = score(doc=760,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 760, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=760)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=760,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 760, 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=760)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The degree of variability in the percentage of subject searching in an online public access catalog (OPAC) among branch libraries of one university was studied. A full semester's worth of transactions was analyzed, not sampled. The time units used were hour of the day, day of the week, and week of the semester. The findings show that subject searching varies from a low of 22% to a high of 74% over the hours of a day. Variability for the days of the week ranged from 17% to 64%, and for the weeks of the semester variability ranged from 12% to 70%. Valuable management information on the utilization of the OPAC within each brach library and among all the branch libraries is provided through numerous charts and graphs.

0.042068303 = product of:
  0.084136605 = sum of:
    0.084136605 = sum of:
      0.041568346 = weight(_text_:library in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041568346 = score(doc=917,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 917, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=917)
      0.042568255 = weight(_text_:22 in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042568255 = score(doc=917,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 917, 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=917)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

I started my professional career in library and information science because of my great interest in knowledge organization. The more experience I gained in the profession, the more I realized how crucial it is to understand which organization would be best for each group of users. This in turn requires an understanding of how users seek information. And so now my focus is an studying information seeking and searching behavior. Throughout the relatively long course of changing my focus, I followed Pauline Cochrane's writings. Now I can say that she has been among the first to have a "user-centered approach" to knowledge organization, and she has used the term three years before it became a mainstream phrase. The following is a short discussion about the usercentered approach which was presented in a workshop in 1997.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

Imprint

Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science

Source

Saving the time of the library user through subject access innovation: Papers in honor of Pauline Atherton Cochrane. Ed.: W.J. Wheeler

0.03883119 = product of:
  0.07766238 = sum of:
    0.07766238 = sum of:
      0.02799941 = weight(_text_:library in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02799941 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 7914, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7914)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7914, 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=7914)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The library of the Cité des Sciences et de l'industrie attracts 4.000 visitors daily of whom 25% consult the GEAC system OPAC. Describes a 1992 survey consisting of online questions followed by an interview. The questionnaires were adapted from ones used in the UK and utilised OLIVE (Online Interactive Validation and Evaluation). While difficulties arose from users' inconsistency in their replies and failures to answer questions, it has become clear that subject access is unsatisfactory, sometimes because of mistyping by the searcher but also because of the vocabulary problems and lack of guidance in search strategies

Source

International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 22(1993) no.4, S.68-71

0.03883119 = product of:
  0.07766238 = sum of:
    0.07766238 = sum of:
      0.02799941 = weight(_text_:library in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02799941 = score(doc=1795,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 1795, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1795)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=1795,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1795, 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=1795)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Canadian journal of information and library science. 19(1994) no.4, S.1-22

0.037736353 = product of:
  0.075472705 = sum of:
    0.075472705 = sum of:
      0.039999157 = weight(_text_:library in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039999157 = score(doc=2339,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 2339, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2339)
      0.035473548 = weight(_text_:22 in 2339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035473548 = score(doc=2339,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2339, 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=2339)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Over the last 4 years, the Information Interaction Laboratory at Rutgers' School of communication, Information and Library Studies has performed a series of investigations concerned with various aspects of people's interactions with advanced information retrieval (IR) systems. We have benn especially concerned with understanding not just what people do, and why, and with what effect, but also with what they would like to do, and how they attempt to accomplish it, and with what difficulties. These investigations have led to some quite interesting conclusions about the nature and structure of people's interactions with information, about support for cooperative human-computer interaction in query reformulation, and about the value of visualization of search results for supporting various forms of interaction with information. In this discussion, I give an overview of the research program and its projects, present representative results from the projects, and discuss some implications of these results for support of subject searching in information retrieval systems

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

Imprint

Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science

Source

Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al

0.035354983 = product of:
  0.070709966 = sum of:
    0.070709966 = sum of:
      0.04233113 = weight(_text_:library in 286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04233113 = score(doc=286,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.3074448 = fieldWeight in 286, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=286)
      0.028378839 = weight(_text_:22 in 286) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028378839 = score(doc=286,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 286, 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=286)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper highlights some of the significant findings from author's PhD: "Factors affecting the end-use of electronic databases in public libraries." Public libraries have a wide range of different types of users who, unlike academic or special library users, are not necessarily information-trained (see Coles, 1998). Whereas the academic, special library user may have specific information needs that can be met by electronic sources, public library users do not necessarily have such specific information needs that can easily be identified and met. Most user surveys have tended to concentrate on the searching and retrieval aspect of information seeking behaviour, whereas this study's user survey focused more on how people perceived and related to Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). It was not how people searched a particular electronic source, in this case CD-ROM, that was of prime interest but rather whether or not people actually used them at all and the reasons why people did or did not use electronic media. There were several reasons the study looked at CD-ROM specifically. Firstly, CD-ROM is a well established technology, most people should be familiar with CD-ROM/multimedia. Secondly, CD-ROM was, at the start of the study, the only open access electronic media widely available in public libraries. As well as examining why public library users chose to use electronic sources, the paper looks at the types of CD-ROM databases used both in the library and in general Also examined are what sort of searches users carried out. Where appropriate some of the problems inherent in studying end-users in public libraries and the difficulty in getting reliable data, are discussed. Several methods were used to collect the data. I wished to avoid limiting research to a small sample of library sites, the aim was to be as broad in scope as possible. There were two main groups of people 1 wished to look at: non-users as well as CD-ROM users

Date

22. 3.2002 8:51:28

0.030189082 = product of:
  0.060378164 = sum of:
    0.060378164 = sum of:
      0.031999324 = weight(_text_:library in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.031999324 = score(doc=3231,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 3231, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3231)
      0.028378839 = weight(_text_:22 in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028378839 = score(doc=3231,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3231, 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=3231)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

ADEPT is a 5-year project whose goals are to develop, deploy, and evaluate inquiry learning capabilities for the Alexandria Digital Library, an extant digital library of primary sources in geography. We interviewed nine geography faculty members who teach undergraduate courses about their information seeking for research and teaching and their use of information resources in teaching. These data were supplemented by interviews with four faculty members from another ADEPT study about the nature of knowledge in geography. Among our key findings are that geography faculty are more likely to encounter useful teaching resources while seeking research resources than vice versa, although the influence goes in both directions. Their greatest information needs are for research data, maps, and images. They desire better searching by concept or theme, in addition to searching by location and place name. They make extensive use of their own research resources in their teaching. Among the implications for functionality and architecture of geographic digital libraries for educational use are that personal digital libraries are essential, because individual faculty members have personalized approaches to selecting, collecting, and organizing teaching resources. Digital library services for research and teaching should include the ability to import content from common office software and to store content in standard formats that can be exported to other applications. Digital library services can facilitate sharing among faculty but cannot overcome barriers such as intellectual property rights, access to proprietary research data, or the desire of individuals to maintain control over their own resources. Faculty use of primary and secondary resources needs to be better understood if we are to design successful digital libraries for research and teaching.

Date

3. 6.2005 20:40:22

0.024831483 = product of:
  0.049662966 = sum of:
    0.049662966 = product of:
      0.09932593 = sum of:
        0.09932593 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09932593 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7585, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7585)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 1.2000 17:52:11

0.024248201 = product of:
  0.048496403 = sum of:
    0.048496403 = product of:
      0.096992806 = sum of:
        0.096992806 = weight(_text_:library in 6825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.096992806 = score(doc=6825,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.7044446 = fieldWeight in 6825, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6825)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library and information science research. 18(1996) no.3, S.225-240

0.02262694 = product of:
  0.04525388 = sum of:
    0.04525388 = product of:
      0.09050776 = sum of:
        0.09050776 = weight(_text_:library in 7250) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09050776 = score(doc=7250,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.65734464 = fieldWeight in 7250, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=7250)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Library resources and technical services. 35(1991) no.2, S.191-201

0.021284128 = product of:
  0.042568255 = sum of:
    0.042568255 = product of:
      0.08513651 = sum of:
        0.08513651 = weight(_text_:22 in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08513651 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

9. 2.2008 17:52:22

0.019798571 = product of:
  0.039597142 = sum of:
    0.039597142 = product of:
      0.079194285 = sum of:
        0.079194285 = weight(_text_:library in 2424) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079194285 = score(doc=2424,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.57517654 = fieldWeight in 2424, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2424)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Imprint

Washington, DC : Council on Library Resources

0.019595506 = product of:
  0.03919101 = sum of:
    0.03919101 = product of:
      0.07838202 = sum of:
        0.07838202 = weight(_text_:library in 6628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07838202 = score(doc=6628,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.56927717 = fieldWeight in 6628, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6628)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Examines sex differences in library anxiety, computer anxiety and using computers for library research anxiety in 40 academically oriented high school seniors for 1 year. Finds boys to have higher library anxiety than girls. Girls have a higher anxiety in the remaining 2 categories involving computers. Both sexes improved in all 3 areas except for girls on the computers for library research. Girls may experience less anxiety when using computers in a non mathematical setting but the detrimental effect of computers may compromise girls' attitudes to computer mediated library research

Source

Library and information science research. 13(1991) no.3, S.267-279

0.019595506 = product of:
  0.03919101 = sum of:
    0.03919101 = product of:
      0.07838202 = sum of:
        0.07838202 = weight(_text_:library in 6977) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07838202 = score(doc=6977,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.56927717 = fieldWeight in 6977, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6977)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Describes an investigation of attitudes to the LION (Library Integrated Online Network) online public access catalogue at Liverpool Polytechnic Library (now Liverpool John Moores University) using observation and a questionnaire survey of 55 library users. The reaction to the automation of the library catalogue was positive and it appears to have improved service to users but more user education and guidance would result in a further improvement

Source

Library management. 14(1993) no.5, S.13-15

0.019595506 = product of:
  0.03919101 = sum of:
    0.03919101 = product of:
      0.07838202 = sum of:
        0.07838202 = weight(_text_:library in 7311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07838202 = score(doc=7311,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.56927717 = fieldWeight in 7311, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7311)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Reports the result of survey of users of the library catalogues in Cambridge University Library carried out in 1992 which aimed to discover the uses of the catalogues and the user's understanding of them. Describes the projects objectives, gives a history of the Cambridge University Library, describes the catalogues and details the conduct of the survey and results

Imprint

London : British Library Research and Development Department

0.01851987 = product of:
  0.03703974 = sum of:
    0.03703974 = product of:
      0.07407948 = sum of:
        0.07407948 = weight(_text_:library in 4168) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07407948 = score(doc=4168,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.5380284 = fieldWeight in 4168, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4168)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

LCSH

Online library catalogs / Use studies
Library catalogs / Use studies
Library surveys / United States

Subject

Online library catalogs / Use studies
Library catalogs / Use studies
Library surveys / United States

0.018027376 = product of:
  0.036054753 = sum of:
    0.036054753 = product of:
      0.072109506 = sum of:
        0.072109506 = weight(_text_:library in 1314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.072109506 = score(doc=1314,freq=26.0), product of:
            0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.5237208 = fieldWeight in 1314, product of:
              5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
                26.0 = termFreq=26.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1314)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A survey of 4,032 youth in grades 5 through 12 was conducted to determine the impact youth's use of the Internet was having on their use of the public library. Results indicated that 100% of the youth had access to the Internet from one or more locations, and that although one quarter of the youth accessed the Internet at the public library, the public library was the least frequently used source of Internet access. For youth without Internet access at home, the public library was also the least used alternate source of access. Approximately 69% of the youth reported that they had visited a public library during the school year. Having Internet access at home did not affect whether or not youth visited the library however, Internet access at home appears to have affected the frequency with which youth visit the library. Youth without Internet access at home visited the library more frequently, whereas youth with Internet access at home visited the library less frequently. Use of the Internet also appeared to have diminished youth's need to use the public library as a source of personal information however, use of the Internet appeared not to have affected their use of the public library for school work or for recreation. Among youth, use of both the Internet and the public library appear to be complementary activities.