Search (42 results, page 1 of 3)

0.03831512 = product of:
  0.1915756 = sum of:
    0.1915756 = weight(_text_:link in 4301) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1915756 = score(doc=4301,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2711644 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.7064925 = fieldWeight in 4301, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4301)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.019304762 = product of:
  0.09652381 = sum of:
    0.09652381 = weight(_text_:22 in 7585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09652381 = score(doc=7585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 1.2000 17:52:11

0.019304762 = product of:
  0.09652381 = sum of:
    0.09652381 = weight(_text_:22 in 3924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09652381 = score(doc=3924,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

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

0.016546939 = product of:
  0.08273469 = sum of:
    0.08273469 = weight(_text_:22 in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08273469 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

9. 2.2008 17:52:22

0.015964633 = product of:
  0.079823166 = sum of:
    0.079823166 = weight(_text_:link in 1236) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.079823166 = score(doc=1236,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2711644 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.29437187 = fieldWeight in 1236, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1236)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Web links have been studied by information scientists for at least six years but it is only in the past two that clear evidence has emerged to show that counts of links to scholarly Web spaces (universities and departments) can correlate significantly with research measures, giving some credence to their use for the investigation of scholarly communication. This paper reports an a study to investigate the factors that influence the creation of links to journal Web sites. An empirical approach is used: collecting data and testing for significant patterns. The specific questions addressed are whether site age and site content are inducers of links to a journal's Web site as measured by the ratio of link counts to Journal Impact Factors, two variables previously discovered to be related. A new methodology for data collection is also introduced that uses the Internet Archive to obtain an earliest known creation date for Web sites. The results show that both site age and site content are significant factors for the disciplines studied: library and information science, and law. Comparisons between the two fields also show disciplinary differences in Web site characteristics. Scholars and publishers should be particularly aware that richer content an a journal's Web site tends to generate links and thus the traffic to the site.

0.015964633 = product of:
  0.079823166 = sum of:
    0.079823166 = weight(_text_:link in 3681) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.079823166 = score(doc=3681,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2711644 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.29437187 = fieldWeight in 3681, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3681)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

We report on a study that was undertaken to better understand search and navigation behavior by exploiting the close association between the process underlying users' query submission and the navigational trails emanating from query clickthroughs. To our knowledge, there has been little research towards bridging the gap between these two important processes pertaining to users' online information searching activity. Based an log data obtained from a search and navigation documentation system called AutoDoc, we propose a model of user search sessions and provide analysis an users' link or clickthrough selection behavior, reformulation activities, and search strategy patterns. We also conducted a simple user study to gauge users' perceptions of their information seeking activity when interacting with the system. The results obtained show that analyzing both the query submissions and navigation starting from query clickthrough, reveals much more interesting patterns than analyzing these two processes independently. On average, AutoDoc users submitted only one query per search session and entered approximately two query terms. Specifically, our results show how AutoDoc users are more inclined to submit new queries or resubmit modified queries than to navigate by linkfollowing. We also show that users' behavior within this search system can be approximated by Zipf's Law distribution.

0.015964633 = product of:
  0.079823166 = sum of:
    0.079823166 = weight(_text_:link in 990) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.079823166 = score(doc=990,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2711644 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.29437187 = fieldWeight in 990, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=990)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

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.

0.015964633 = product of:
  0.079823166 = sum of:
    0.079823166 = weight(_text_:link in 3961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.079823166 = score(doc=3961,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2711644 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.29437187 = fieldWeight in 3961, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3961)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Purpose - Cognitive style has been identified to be significantly influential in deciding users' preferences of search engines. In particular, Witkin's field dependence/independence has been widely studied in the area of web searching. It has been suggested that this cognitive style has conceptual links with the holism/serialism. This study aims to investigate the differences between the field dependence/independence and holism/serialism. Design/methodology/approach - An empirical study was conducted with 120 students from a UK university. Riding's cognitive style analysis (CSA) and Ford's study preference questionnaire (SPQ) were used to identify the students' cognitive styles. A questionnaire was designed to identify users' preferences for the design of search engines. Data mining techniques were applied to analyse the data obtained from the empirical study. Findings - The results highlight three findings. First, a fundamental link is confirmed between the two cognitive styles. Second, the relationship between field dependent users and holists is suggested to be more prominent than that of field independent users and serialists. Third, the interface design preferences of field dependent and field independent users can be split more clearly than those of holists and serialists. Originality/value - The contributions of this study include a deeper understanding of the similarities and differences between field dependence/independence and holists/serialists as well as proposing a novel methodology for data analyses.

0.012771706 = product of:
  0.06385853 = sum of:
    0.06385853 = weight(_text_:link in 2639) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06385853 = score(doc=2639,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2711644 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.23549749 = fieldWeight in 2639, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2639)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

1. Introduction The title of this paper is taken from a TV show which has gained considerable popularity in North America: A Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, in which a group of gay men subject a helpless straight male to a complete fashion makeover. In facet analysis, this would probably be seen as an "operation upon" something, and the Bliss Bibliographic Classification would place it roughly two-thirds of the way along its facet order, after "types" and "materials," but before "space" and "time." But the link between gay communities and facet analysis extends beyond the facetious title. As Web-based information resources for gay and lesbian users continue to grow, Web sites that cater to, or at least refrain from discriminating against gay and lesbian users are faced with a daunting challenge when trying to organize these diverse resources in a way that facilitates congenial browsing. And principles of faceted classification, with their emphasis an clear and consistent principles of subdivision and their care in defining the order of subdivisions, offer an important opportunity to use time-honoured classification principles to serve the growing needs of these communities. If faceted organization schemes are to work, however, we need to know more about gay and lesbian users, and how they categorize themselves and their information sources. This paper presents the results of an effort to learn more.

0.012771706 = product of:
  0.06385853 = sum of:
    0.06385853 = weight(_text_:link in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06385853 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.2711644 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.23549749 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.3287 = idf(docFreq=582, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Content

1. Introduction A small study is described which investigated the vocabulary as reflected in the knowledge structures of novices. The research was conducted in order to understand how knowledge organization tools may be designed to meet the needs of novices in the GROW digital library. GROW is the Geo-technical, Rock, and Water digital library, the first step in the establishment of a National Civil Engineering Resources Library (NCERL). Digital libraries are complex entities that have many components: besides the collections of individual resources and the interface to these resources, they have organization, labelling, navigation and searching systems. Controlled vocabularies and thesauri are often the invisible components. This study is based an the premise that the controlled vocabulary influences the above mentioned related components in the digital library. We felt that it was important to understand the knowledge structures of a primary group of user, the novice - the student learner - who is new to the domain. A great deal of research has been done about how people learn and how people use information, but fewer studies link science knowledge structures, vocabulary, and language use.

0.011031292 = product of:
  0.055156462 = sum of:
    0.055156462 = weight(_text_:22 in 1628) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055156462 = score(doc=1628,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1628, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1628)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

29. 7.1998 10:57:22

0.011031292 = product of:
  0.055156462 = sum of:
    0.055156462 = weight(_text_:22 in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055156462 = score(doc=3687,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3687, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3687)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 5.1999 19:07:29

0.011031292 = product of:
  0.055156462 = sum of:
    0.055156462 = weight(_text_:22 in 5299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055156462 = score(doc=5299,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5299, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5299)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 7.2006 18:17:44

0.011031292 = product of:
  0.055156462 = sum of:
    0.055156462 = weight(_text_:22 in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055156462 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2905, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2905)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

22. 2.2009 18:50:43

0.009652381 = product of:
  0.048261903 = sum of:
    0.048261903 = weight(_text_:22 in 760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048261903 = score(doc=760,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

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.

0.009652381 = product of:
  0.048261903 = sum of:
    0.048261903 = weight(_text_:22 in 7914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048261903 = score(doc=7914,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

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

0.009652381 = product of:
  0.048261903 = sum of:
    0.048261903 = weight(_text_:22 in 1795) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048261903 = score(doc=1795,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

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

0.009652381 = product of:
  0.048261903 = sum of:
    0.048261903 = weight(_text_:22 in 6966) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048261903 = score(doc=6966,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6966, 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=6966)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Information retrieval: new systems and current research. Proceedings of the 16th Research Colloquium of the British Computer Society Information Retrieval Specialist Group, Drymen, Scotland, 22-23 Mar 94. Ed.: R. Leon

0.009652381 = product of:
  0.048261903 = sum of:
    0.048261903 = weight(_text_:22 in 883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048261903 = score(doc=883,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 883, 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=883)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

BibliotheekBlad. 1(1997) no.21, S.22-23

0.009652381 = product of:
  0.048261903 = sum of:
    0.048261903 = weight(_text_:22 in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048261903 = score(doc=3599,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17819946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05088753 = 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)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22